Evra started it by insulting Suarez sister, Suarez should of just bit him. Still we might get a new centre forward in January due to his ban, so evra one is happy!
Suarez *Evidence*
- Thread starter Magic Ted
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
To be honest, still can't believe that the F.A took Evra's word because he was composed and credible, the guy has history. And to use Giggs as a witness beggers believe, the guy was (still is?) having intimate relations with his own brothers wife, clearly familiar with telling cover up lies. It's beyond believe, it really is an embarresment to be English sometimes......
Also think on that this is a set up from Fergie, trying to destabalise Liverpool when they are up. Fergie propaganda. I really do smell a rat in all of this.
Wow, this will never hold up in court.
I had a quick skim and it seems people were just invited to give their own BS opinions and then punish Suarez for them, such as;
"414. Finally, the FA invited the Commission to consider Mr Suarez's motivation. The FA confirmed that it has not contended that Mr Suarez acted as he did out of deep-seated racial prejudice, ie because he is a racist. The FA submitted that the likelihood was that Mr Suarez was seeking to provoke Mr Evra, so as to cause him to be sent off, thereby gaining a competitive advantage in the game. It was submitted that such behaviour is to be deplored."
So "likelihood" is enough to convict
That's not what the words you've quoted mean. By using the word "likelihood" they're saying that it's more likely he used the words to provoke Evra rather than because he's racist. The charge and subsequent ban was for using racist language on a football field, if you read the decision properly you'll see that as the rule makes no reference to intent they had no choice but to "convict" on the basis that the rule makes no allowances for lack of intent and Suarez admits to using the offending word. They didn't ban him on any "likelihood" only on certainties.
Mr Evra said to the referee "ref, ref, he, just called me a ****ing black".
So from his own statement of what was said, Evra told the referee an exagerated version of events, so how is his evidence more reliable?
So from his own statement of what was said, Evra told the referee an exagerated version of events, so how is his evidence more reliable?
The F.A lost all credibillity when they decided to appeal Rooneys ban. This has clearly been a witch hunt by Fergie's puppets at the F.A
No doubt they will f*ck up the Terry case too.
This was a classic from the F.A and I literally quote Suarez has "damaged the image of English football around the world". How the F*ck does the comments of a bloke from Uraguay damage the reputation of English football, if someone could explain that to me, I would be very grateful...
“If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.” Sir Alex Ferguson
Evra has used a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/16375963.stm
Suarez was caught up in his own lies and contradicted himself.
Commoli's and Kuyts evidence also contradicted Suarez's.
Suarez admitted to using Negro and Negrito.
2 Language experts (a Dr and a Prof) thought his "its okay in Spanish" excuse was bull****.
Oh and there was video footage:
Looks like I was dead on about that rascist piece of filth. Looks like you boys won't be appealing either. Banged well to rights.
Suarez was caught up in his own lies and contradicted himself.
Commoli's and Kuyts evidence also contradicted Suarez's.
Suarez admitted to using Negro and Negrito.
2 Language experts (a Dr and a Prof) thought his "its okay in Spanish" excuse was bull****.
Oh and there was video footage:
Looks like I was dead on about that rascist piece of filth. Looks like you boys won't be appealing either. Banged well to rights.
Yep, how dare some bloke from Uraguay possibly have the audacity to disrespect the captain of the great Manchester United. South American Bastard.
"Mr Evra said to the referee "ref, ref, he, just called me a ****ing black".
So from his own statement of what was said, Evra told the referee an exagerated version of events, so how is his evidence more reliable?"
Read on, Got to page 45 and, shortly after Martin Luther Ferguson and Evra have told the referee that Evra was called a '******' five times, he then goes onto french television and says it was ten times. But, and this is the best bit, that's okay by the FA as it's a 'Figure of speech' in his native France! Don't try that one if you're Uragyan or not a Man U player, evidently. And Suarez is the inconsistent one...
And that legal argument where the FA concede McCormick's argument that there is no provable INTENT in any of Suarez's actions or words, but in a civil court there doesn't have to be. FFS! Two things 1) Liverpool would be better off handing the whole file over to the DPP and taking their chances in a criminal court. 2) Evra's words and actions - including reference to Suarez's ethnicity and his sister - is unarguably more of an offence under the FA's own rules and involves enough intent for at least a charge of racially agrivated insulting behaviour in a criminal court too.
This whole farago is riddled with inconsistencies, assumptions and partizanship towards the FA, and ultimately, of course, towards United. The FA have wanted a head-on-a-stick to placate Ferguson from day one, especially now they can't use this kangaroo court against Terry. Leading commentators and pundits have all jumped on this bandwagon now, falling over themselves to portray Liverpool as some sort of chapel of the KKK - it's payback time for making them (and the FA) look such fools over the initial stories they eagerly lapped up over us breaking down the gates at Hillsborough, and all the self-serving lies they conspired in thereafter. And just like that, we MUST stand firm = appeal and appeal again, no matter what vindictive spite the FA/United have at their disposal.
The alternative is clear - henceforth a black skinned United player can (and will, given the low-cunning of Ferguson) accuse any opposition player of reference to their skin colour (regardless of their own words or deeds, or intent of the player thus damned) and be given favourable and biased treatment by a compliant and corrupt FA.
We fight on because we are Liverpool. An innocent man needs our support.
So from his own statement of what was said, Evra told the referee an exagerated version of events, so how is his evidence more reliable?"
Read on, Got to page 45 and, shortly after Martin Luther Ferguson and Evra have told the referee that Evra was called a '******' five times, he then goes onto french television and says it was ten times. But, and this is the best bit, that's okay by the FA as it's a 'Figure of speech' in his native France! Don't try that one if you're Uragyan or not a Man U player, evidently. And Suarez is the inconsistent one...
And that legal argument where the FA concede McCormick's argument that there is no provable INTENT in any of Suarez's actions or words, but in a civil court there doesn't have to be. FFS! Two things 1) Liverpool would be better off handing the whole file over to the DPP and taking their chances in a criminal court. 2) Evra's words and actions - including reference to Suarez's ethnicity and his sister - is unarguably more of an offence under the FA's own rules and involves enough intent for at least a charge of racially agrivated insulting behaviour in a criminal court too.
This whole farago is riddled with inconsistencies, assumptions and partizanship towards the FA, and ultimately, of course, towards United. The FA have wanted a head-on-a-stick to placate Ferguson from day one, especially now they can't use this kangaroo court against Terry. Leading commentators and pundits have all jumped on this bandwagon now, falling over themselves to portray Liverpool as some sort of chapel of the KKK - it's payback time for making them (and the FA) look such fools over the initial stories they eagerly lapped up over us breaking down the gates at Hillsborough, and all the self-serving lies they conspired in thereafter. And just like that, we MUST stand firm = appeal and appeal again, no matter what vindictive spite the FA/United have at their disposal.
The alternative is clear - henceforth a black skinned United player can (and will, given the low-cunning of Ferguson) accuse any opposition player of reference to their skin colour (regardless of their own words or deeds, or intent of the player thus damned) and be given favourable and biased treatment by a compliant and corrupt FA.
We fight on because we are Liverpool. An innocent man needs our support.
Ferguson will steep to any low, the fact that the man was knighted makes me ashamed to be English.
Liverpool won't appeal.
Don't stand a chance. Suarez Lied, got contradicted by his own witnesses/Video footage and was all round unreliable while admitting calling him negro.
Expect a strongly worded statement from LFC in Suarez's defence and several pathetic digs at the FA while you bend over and accept the inevitable.
Hope Suarez gets boo'd out of the country.
Great timing in the release as well. Cheered me well up today.
Don't stand a chance. Suarez Lied, got contradicted by his own witnesses/Video footage and was all round unreliable while admitting calling him negro.
Expect a strongly worded statement from LFC in Suarez's defence and several pathetic digs at the FA while you bend over and accept the inevitable.
Hope Suarez gets boo'd out of the country.
Great timing in the release as well. Cheered me well up today.
Yea, bring out Giggs to testify, been banging his sister in law far seven years, must be good at lyeing by now...
"2 Language experts (a Dr and a Prof) thought his "its okay in Spanish" excuse was bull****.!"
So you haven't read page 51 where they say the exact opposite? The FA's whole argument is to sidestep the whole issue of intent (as they bloody well know there isn't any) and say that, in a civil proceding, there doesn't need to be intent, as the 'offence' is totally in the effect it has in the perception of the recipient. And, if you don't have the insidious power and influence of United or the four Mafia families of New York, that is petrifying.
So you haven't read page 51 where they say the exact opposite? The FA's whole argument is to sidestep the whole issue of intent (as they bloody well know there isn't any) and say that, in a civil proceding, there doesn't need to be intent, as the 'offence' is totally in the effect it has in the perception of the recipient. And, if you don't have the insidious power and influence of United or the four Mafia families of New York, that is petrifying.
My favorite is the F.A saying Suarez (the Uraguayian) has destroyed the reputation of the English game.