Utter Fergie

Depends where, to who and what language doesn't it?

 

Are you suggesting that the black guy is the injured party? Even after calling someone a "****"?

 

we have something in common then, we're both a shower of ****e and play in red

 

You can talk! Your avatar should be purple, but you've gone and blacked-it-up! Too far, Tony! For shame!

PS Kidding, mara!

 

Good point.
Is shouting over at an Irishman ''Come over here Paddy'' instead of calling them by their name racist? Irish people for years have been called ''Paddy'' by the English. On occasions their name may in fact be Patrick, Paddy, Pat or Padraig.

 

don't diss the championship, you'll be there soon carrying on your hilarious downfall

 

Coming from the avatar stereotype of can only see the eyes....



An old Eddie Griffin joke from "Dysfunctional family"--- " Are there aliens out there? **** ya there are! Why do they not down and show themselves you ask? You see what happened to people of color right? THey up there like ' let's go down and show ourselves' " **** that are you crazy? You see what they did to the black people, we ****ing green tha **** you think they will do to us? "

 

[video=youtube;4j2kilQTieY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4j2kilQTieY[/video]

 

In your dreams ****head.

 

True, but you could be a black Irishman named Patrick Black.

 

Brendan Rodgers level is the championship, so you wouldn't have any problem going up

 

Bluff: it's night in my avatar, and the Cheshire Cat is renowned disappearing and its smile to go last. Nothing remotely racist about that ... I don't think so, anyway?

 

Just wouldnt count unless there was a bitter thread from the drunk

 

Irrelevant. The Suarez case has set the standard, which now is "If a black man says a white man abused him, the white man must prove his innocence". The fact that the assistants heard nothing does not prove innocence. The absence of evidence should not be taken as an absence of guilt. The FA have chaged the presumption of innocence to a presumption of guilt.

I do expect, however, that things will be different for Clattenburg as they're not as desperate for a convenient head-on-a-stick as they were last December with the media and a myriad of single-issue, "look-at-me-in-the-papers" race-mafia groups to appease. And it looks like Ferguson (and thus Gill) are on his side on this one, and that'll swing it even if Clattenburg had wore a Klan outfit and put a burning cross on Mikel's lawn.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HHT_V294Co

 

Well if Clattenburg acrtually did call Mikel a ''monkey'' then he is racist. It is a derogatory term and is as bad as ''Coon'' which is American slang for N****r. Suarez was done for racism, which is hard to determine, I doubt it if the FA actually know the difference between racism and discrimination. If Suarez used the word ''because'' he wasn't being racist, he was discriminating. However John Terry was being racist when he uttered the words ''****ing black ****''. However if Suarez used the word ''Why'' the entire statement doesn't make any sense. It must be checked again in translation whether Suarez said ''Because'' or ''Why''.

 

misheard his accent? thats a good one! perhaps evra did too..

 

Says who NOF? If you're referring to 'hate crimes' and the law of the land, there has to be intent. If you're not, it's simply a question of interpretation; but notice, if the mention of skin colour is your standard (as opposed to the FA's own rule that states nationality, creed, race, religion, ethnicity AND skin colour) then you have no ridiculous argument that Rio wasn't being racist when he talked about choc-ices. And thus, when people talk of charters whereby offenders are sacked for racist offences from their clubs, when we talk equality we mean equality and it must apply to everyone.