Last comment from me tonight, this is what has upset me. The F.A may have well have produced the follwing statement: We do not like racism in this country, infact we will do everything we can to stop it. Suarez is a dirty greasy haired south american inbred, t*a*. We have been given the chance to ban him due to a cultural misunderstanding, if it was Rooney we would be discraced, but as it is a dirty wop and we have no morols we do not care. To all the LFC fans who pay good money to watch there best player we say fu*k you, we are rich, we care not and we pretty much do as we please, kiss my balls, Kind Regards. The FA
[QUOTEThere are currently 11 users browsing this thread. (5 members and 6 guests) anthonys eye, bazray, donga darko, Mutant Ninja Skrtel, The WUMan of your dreams.][/QUOTE] i replied to your article bud Edit: your thread is gone the site obviously hates eels as much as octopusses or octopi im not sure
That was probably the secret hotel the FA took evidence in. In fact, this was probably part of the evidence. Reliable and consistent my arse!
"We were not persuaded that he used the word again when reporting the comment to the referee for the first time during the match. Although this is an inconsistency in Mr Evra's account, it is a minor inconsistency which arose only in the course of his oral evidence about whether he used the word "again" when speaking to the referee, and it is not of any material significance to the issues we have to decide." ! Is there ANY lie or inconsistency that Evra concocted that this Witchfinder General did NOT swallow from their prized accuser?
I'm off to bed fella , goodnight and happy new year and all that p.s. ban donga for being chinese <erm> i mean a racist
My last word, as i'm going home from work now. The commision accepts that Suarez used the word negro five times, because one of our staff, apparently, told dalglish and comolli that he heard Evra and ferguson say that to Marriner when they reported it. Yet, Ferguson and Evra DENY saying that to Marriner, the inference being that Suarez knew he'd said it five times and Dalglish and Comolli were trying to get him to barter it down. Ho hum. Yet towards the end of their summing up, the Commision now says that the evidence indicates that evra and ferguson were RIGHt in their original assertion that Suarez said it five times. well, if you say Suarez said it once only you have to accept that Evra did indeed do what our solicitor suggested - he exaggerated and concocted evidence (with Ferguson's conivance) to get a fellow pro in the direst of trouble. Christ, this commision contradict themselves in almost every paragraph! A decent brief will DESTROY them. Highly respected QC and independent commission my left gonad, James ****ing Lawton!
Hello Mr Lucaas,is this ok for you at the moment? I am sorry if this is bad english,but i am 44 years of age and i didnt go to a good school.sorry. Anyway lets get the "dick heads" out the way. All i have seen today is that suarez gave "unreliable" evidence.And that the f.a has said that suarez has"damaged the image of english football around the world" Sorry but i have not got raciest bone in my body (unless against dick heads.sorry lucaas)and i am sure the f.a has got to get this sorted out. Come on, does anybody think Suarez would call a fellow pro a raciest name or insult him in anyway?
sorry didnt realise "the magic assist of luis suarez" did a thread about this. and yes i will be back but only to piss lucaas with my spelling and irish language,or was it scottish,welsh,african,o fu*k,cant remember.hmm
All this paper does is show, what a bunch of twats the FA. The underlying message being sent out is they are using Suarez to show how fantatic they are. They fact is they contradict themselves so much, throughout there argument is about as water tight as a paper bag.
This just about sums the whole thing up for me "Suarez was found guilty on the "balance of probability" - a lower standard than the criminal standard of "beyond all reasonable doubt"."
This is from the BBC website, ' Suarez was found guilty on the "balance of probability" - a lower standard than the criminal standard of "beyond all reasonable doubt".' So does that mean the panel were just guessing? I'm confused. How can you find someone guilty of something on the probability that they MIGHT be guilty.
This is the case in all legal cases that do not involve a criminal court. Divorce and acess cases, financial compensation claims, industrial tribunals, private prosecutions etc all go with "balance of probability" not beyond "all reasonable doubt". Suarez deserved his punishment for his behaviour (not for being racist which Evra did not accuse him of). The club would be ill advised to appeal. I can see the ban extended to 10 weeks quite rightly for frivolous appealing in the light of the submissions from both. Suarez has said to the commission that he recognised that what he did was wrong and would not do it again on the pitch. Let's hope that he meant it and that this is a lesson (although a v.hard one) for him and for the club. Dalglish has also come out of this whole saga in a poorer light.
Welcome back Crazy....I stuck up for you mate **** I'm hung over. Need some bacon and whiskey quickly, bye.
Crazyhorse lol quality. I've written a few pissed posts over the months but none have come out like that!!! Thought you were not coming back anyway?!!
I trust whoever deleted my comment did it by mistake because I am sure you can't be that pathetic? Please kindly put it back up.
Just don't accuse anyone at the moment or make remarks about our club or fans, if you want to debate the topic and current evidence that's fine. I just had a second look at the post and I wont be putting it back.
