Suarez.

[Captain...]

Thought this might get brought up after watching MOTD.... http://news.bbc.co.u...ll/16301357.stm

I did wonder about this myself, I loved Lee dixon's sideways look at the camera as Hansen kept on saying coloured players, the thing is he wasn't talking about black players he was talking about non-white players, which I think is a worse description, what is the PC term for everyone who doesn't look like us?

I think the inevitable reaction and apology is part of the problem with how racism is treated in this country, anyone watching Alan Hansen use the word coloured would know he meant no offence by it, it wasn't derogatory nor offensive, but that word is naughty, we can't use that word we have to used the politically correct approved definitions. All this means is that any discourse about racism and race issues in this country will always be hampered by people having to tread on egg shells.

Babylon posting a minefield sign when people are having a fairly reasonable debate about whether Suarez was right to be found guilty is just typical of the reactions as soon as anyone starts to look at race and race issues.

[AyewJoking]

Suarez and Terry both guilty. However, you dont have to be racist to say something like "you black ****" in the heat of the moment if you know it will upset/ provoke will your opponent. Why dont they just admit it, take the slap on the wrist and move on.

[accessory]

I did wonder about this myself, I loved Lee dixon's sideways look at the camera as Hansen kept on saying coloured players, the thing is he wasn't talking about black players he was talking about non-white players, which I think is a worse description, what is the PC term for everyone who doesn't look like us?

I think the inevitable reaction and apology is part of the problem with how racism is treated in this country, anyone watching Alan Hansen use the word coloured would know he meant no offence by it, it wasn't derogatory nor offensive, but that word is naughty, we can't use that word we have to used the politically correct approved definitions. All this means is that any discourse about racism and race issues in this country will always be hampered by people having to tread on egg shells.

Babylon posting a minefield sign when people are having a fairly reasonable debate about whether Suarez was right to be found guilty is just typical of the reactions as soon as anyone starts to look at race and race issues.

The tabloid press (hardly known for their sensitivity to "political correctness") stopped using the term decades ago.

Hansen has apologised, and rightly so, but he hardly did his old pal Dalglish any favour with his intervention.

In fact Dalglish seems to be a little stressed lately, and not just because of this particular episode. He realises he's spent shedloads on a load of cack who will not take the scousers back into the Champions League.

I wouldn't be surprised to see him slip back into retirement at the end of the season.

[Salieri]

I did wonder about this myself, I loved Lee dixon's sideways look at the camera as Hansen kept on saying coloured players, the thing is he wasn't talking about black players he was talking about non-white players, which I think is a worse description, what is the PC term for everyone who doesn't look like us?

I think the inevitable reaction and apology is part of the problem with how racism is treated in this country, anyone watching Alan Hansen use the word coloured would know he meant no offence by it, it wasn't derogatory nor offensive, but that word is naughty, we can't use that word we have to used the politically correct approved definitions. All this means is that any discourse about racism and race issues in this country will always be hampered by people having to tread on egg shells.

Babylon posting a minefield sign when people are having a fairly reasonable debate about whether Suarez was right to be found guilty is just typical of the reactions as soon as anyone starts to look at race and race issues.

I did wonder about this myself, I loved Lee dixon's sideways look at the camera as Hansen kept on saying coloured players, the thing is he wasn't talking about black players he was talking about non-white players, which I think is a worse description, what is the PC term for everyone who doesn't look like us?

I think the inevitable reaction and apology is part of the problem with how racism is treated in this country, anyone watching Alan Hansen use the word coloured would know he meant no offence by it, it wasn't derogatory nor offensive, but that word is naughty, we can't use that word we have to used the politically correct approved definitions. All this means is that any discourse about racism and race issues in this country will always be hampered by people having to tread on egg shells.

Babylon posting a minefield sign when people are having a fairly reasonable debate about whether Suarez was right to be found guilty is just typical of the reactions as soon as anyone starts to look at race and race issues.

Exactly. Ridiculous amount of fuss over nothing.

[davieG]

BBC

Former Liverpool and England footballer John Barnes has attacked a "witch hunt" against Luis Suarez after he was banned for racially abusing another player.

The Liverpool striker was banned by the FA for eight games for using "insulting words" in reference to Manchester United defender Patrice Evra's colour.

Barnes defended Suarez, saying: "As much as we will say ignorance is no excuse, ignorance is an excuse."

He said that "cultural differences have to be taken into consideration".

'Zero tolerance'

Barnes, who played for Liverpool from 1987 to 1997, endured racial abuse throughout his playing career.

Speaking on BBC Radio Merseyside, he said: "From a cultural point of view, [suarez] has been backed by people from Uruguay saying the word he used is not deemed as a racist term."

He continued: "As much as we will say that ignorance is no excuse, ignorance is an excuse."

"Twenty years ago in England, the same people in England now condemning him were ignorant as to what racism is. Why don't they condemn themselves?"

Barnes, who received 79 England caps, continued: "When Manchester United play Liverpool and 10,000 United fans are saying 'you Scouse thieves', I'd like them all to be banned."

The allegations against Suarez stemmed from a Premier League match in October

"And Liverpool fans too, when they say 'you Manc or whatever'. So where are we going to draw the line? Racism has to be zero tolerance but this is now a witch hunt."

Suarez intends to appeal against the ruling, which stemmed from allegations made following a Premier League match between Liverpool and Manchester United on 15 October.

Barnes said: "By admitting [what he said], he obviously didn't feel that what he said was that significant.

"Because he could easily have gotten away with it by saying 'I never said a word'."

[Samilktray]

[HEGGSY]

[The Year Of The Fox]

Don't condone racism but why has it taken over 2 months for 3 idiots to come to their conclusion? If they had 'evidence' then why couldn't they have got their decision as soon as they received it, load of shit. The FA have banned Suarez for 8 games, done nothing about Terry but leave it in the Polices hands and appealed for that fat twat Man Utd player Wayne Rooney for his wild kicking out because he was under stress because his Dad had been arrested? Jesus Christ they are pricks.

Chill out! The FA can't do anything until the law has first dealt with him!

[The Year Of The Fox]

I'm not even sure this is all that racist?

[potter3]

http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/Disciplinary/NewsAndFeatures/2011/~/media/Files/PDF/TheFA/Disciplinary/Written%20reasons/FA%20v%20Suarez%20Written%20Reasons%20of%20Regulatory%20Commission.ashx

[Mack]

The FA are a laughing stock... again.

[accessory]

As are Liverpool..

Wouldn't be surprised to see the ban increased on appeal..

[Corky]

I'm not Evra's biggest admirer but the stick he's been given during this process has been completely unfair.

[accessory]

Having read the transcript, I have to conclude that Liverpool (and Dalglish in particular) have let themselves down very badly.

[Guest ttfn]

So, having read the last 20 pages or so,Suarez is a massive liar

[Guest MattP]

I ignored the report as soon as it called Evra a "credible witness".

[Guest ttfn]

I ignored the report as soon as it called Evra a "credible witness".

For goodness sake. It explains over about 3 pages why Evra is a credible witness.

There is conclusive proof that Suarez called Evra "Negro" at least twice, despite Suarez' insistence that it was once and only once.

There's a 115 page report here - it's not like they've released something saying "Evra is well cool nd Swarez is racist cos man u rule 4 Eva". There's over 100 Pages Of evidence.

At least skim-read it before saying it has no credibility.

Dalglish once again shows himself to be s nasty, slimy weasel of a man.

[Jimmy]

so a panel of 3 people, 2 of which have connections to either MUFC or Alex Ferguson calls Evra, previously described by the F.A. as unreliable and exaggeratory interesting.

Suarez should of got 4 games as what he said was wrong but he mean no malice, with mandatory classes about race relations in the UK to prevent this happening again

[Samilktray]

If you think there was no malice you should probably go read what he said.

[sdb]

Not sure how Suarez can be defended reading that.

[Guest ttfn]

so a panel of 3 people, 2 of which have connections to either MUFC or Alex Ferguson calls Evra, previously described by the F.A. as unreliable and exaggeratory interesting.

Suarez should of got 4 games as what he said was wrong but he mean no malice, with mandatory classes about race relations in the UK to prevent this happening again

Forget the (imagined) bias. Read the evidence.

[Jimmy]

If you think there was no malice you should probably go read what he said.

Suarez admitted saying it ONCE everything else is hear say as no one else heard anything

[AdamN]

Suarez admitted saying it ONCE everything else is hear say as no one else heard anything

379. We accepted Mr Evra's account of these exchanges. The principal reasons for doing so

were the following. First, Mr Evra was a credible witness whose evidence was not

seriously undermined in any material respect, as explained above. Secondly, we found Mr

Suarez, in contrast, to be an unreliable witness on critical parts of his evidence. His

evidence was inconsistent with contemporaneous evidence in the form of video footage,

especially with regard to his claims of pinching as an attempt to defuse the situation, and

using the word "negro" in a conciliatory and friendly way. He changed his account over

time in a number of respects. This all combined to cast grave doubt on the reliability of the

remainder of his evidence on the main factual disputes.

[Jimmy]

and yet not so long ago the F.A. were saying Evra was unreliable over the thing with the Chelsea grounds staff, frankly I don't trust the F.A. or their panel(s) over things like this, if it were in the hands of the CPS like the John Terry case then I down Suarez would get convicted off the word of Evra alone, which he has been

[AdamN]

and yet not so long ago the F.A. were saying Evra was unreliable over the thing with the Chelsea grounds staff

Totally irrelevant. It's a completely different case, and if anything, that shows that it has been treated as such. Whether or not Evra has been reliable in other cases doesn't alter the fact that the testimony he has given is consistent with the evidence, unlike that of Suarez's.