Its only my opinion, but I think context is key in the case if, as reported, the use of Evra's self-labelled nickname is the 'racist name' being used. It may well be that the nickname was being used to ridicule him, not the racial aspect. Quite why Evra felt it necessary to refer to himself as the Black Gazelle is beyond me. Is there a Gazelle he was afraid of being mixed up with? Someone in French Football?
I also agree that this could get messy, and i think Suarez will probably end up with a ban for quite a few games. I can't say weather or not he's guilty as i don't have evidence to either confirm or clear him of guilt, but i just feel that combined with Terry's case and the fact that Sepp Blatter seems to have pissed everyone off with his comments regarding racism in football that the issue is currently of prevalence in the PL and that regardless of evidence i think Suarez will hung out to dry by the FA just to make a statement on how they are tough on Racism. Like i said I'm not saying Suarez is innocent just that regardless of weather it can be proved or not he will be made an example of, especially if Terry is found guilty then Suarez will definitely be punished as well.
I took a quick look on the FA website yesterday and read the punishment for charges section - if it's abusive language and/or behaviour it's a 2 match ban - I couldn't find anything regarding racist abuse. Just to add that for spitting it is a 6 match ban yet that Alcatraz (spl) fella got 3 match ban so it seems they can make it up as they go along.
Racism is special as it also features in the legal code of the country so the FA can look forward to locking up players when they forward their evidence to the Police...
I would have thought they would have struggled for evidence to even charge him to be honest- the media haven't found any what we know of. The only thing I can think of is that Suarez has shot himself in the foot with his statement to the FA - ie said he called him whatever and whilst it may not have been ment as a racist term the FA may still use that as a stick to beat him with.
I know the part of it that is the most annoying is that from the moment the allegation was made everybody seemed to decide straight away that he was guilty, mainly because of him biting the other player in Holland and the fact that he hand balled on the line in the world cup. Fair enough if they can prove he's guilty then he deserves a ban but it looks at the moment like he won't get a fair trial, i don't know what the parameters are for punishment for this issue but i expect a ban to be a lengthy one.
how do you know there is no evidence? did you conduct the investigation? you dont just get charged with something woithout anything to back it up. terry investigation is STILL on going.
Thing with racists is they dont theink they are being racist, doesnt mean they are not racist, lets see what the investigation says, suarez says he isnt evra says he is, you side with club loyalty, thats no basis to conduct if someone is innocent or guilty of something.
THEN YOU CHOSE TO READ WHAT YOU WANT TO READ An FA statement said: "It is alleged that Suarez used abusive and/or insulting words and/or behaviour towards Manchester United's Patrice Evra contrary to FA rules. *************"It is further alleged that this included a reference to the ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race of Patrice Evra."**********
Sorry I don't understand what you're getting at with 'choosing to read what you want to read' - kindly explain
I think we've got our wires crossed. I read the FA disciplinary handbook yesterday which gave punishments for abusive language and/or behavioiur but the handbook didn't mention anything regarding punishment for racial abuse. St has already answered that by saying it will fall under whatever the countries rules are regarding racism.
The problem with racism is many fold, and much to do with intent. 1. If no racial offence is meant, and no offence is taken, that regardless of the term, I'm pretty certain it isn't racism. 2. If racial offence is meant, and no offence is taken, that regardless of the term, it is racism. 3. If no racial offence is meant, but offence is taken, is this racism or ignorance?? Are we lumping ignorance in with intentional racism? This is particularly pertinent with people from different cultures and therefore having been brought up with different acceptable terminology. As with so much, its very easy to come straight in and give an opinion based on a couple of stark points, but without getting the full details of the case.
StJohn_Red_Legend, i see your point but he is in england so he resides to our law now, if what he has done is deemed racist in this country the country he now resides permanently, then it makes no difference if its acceptable in uruguay cos we are not in uruguay, we are in england and the alleged offence took place in england.
Yeah i agree there probably was little actual evidence apart from maybe someone lip reading videos of the incident and even then its often inconclusive as demonstrated by the number of different things that numerous lip reading experts came up with that Materazzi was supposed to have said to Zidane before being butted and i don't think they ever came up with a decision on what was said. But Suarez really should have just kept his mouth shut by saying he said something he's pretty much thrown the FA a rope to hang him with.
St - there are so many -isms - these days sexism, racism, ageism.... If you say 'she's good looking for a 40 year old' - that's ageist. Similarly 'she's good looking for a black girl' - that racist. Because the two statements contain references to age and race. They are hardly what we would call real ageist or racist derogotory remarks, which when you say racist, sexist etc is what you think of. Legally I think the context is looked at together with intent, but with intent you only have the perpetrators word for that. This case comes back to what was the intent? Suarez has done himself no favours by speaking to the press but if he is found guilty he deserves a harsh punishment. Just to add I don't trust the FA alone to pass judgment on this.
