Suarez reopens race row

[Swarles Barkley]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2175011/Luis-Suarez-reopens-race-row-Patrice-Evra.html

Just wanted to see what people think on this matter. Suarez has spoken out of how Manchester united control media etc and how he is not entirely to blame for the racism row. I'm a Leicester fan but have a soft spot for liverpool and I do sympathise with the guy to an extent. It seems man u do get a large say with many decisions eg referees,media. Now I'm not saying what Suarez did was not wrong (evra) but it was so widely blown out of context by the media it was unbelievable. I also believe that "handshakegate" was evras fault after looking over the video footage. Never at one point does he put his hand out for the shake.

Just want to see what fellow Leicester fans think as I want to know if I'm being biased or that this is a general idea

[Mark_w]

The twat got off pretty lightly, he should really shut his mouth and not be raking it back up in the papers.

[purpleronnie]

He and liverpool didnt come off well, so I'm sure liverpool are really happy he's made further comments.

[Libertine Dream]

Cant have had that much control over the media otherwise theyd have made sure he'd ended up in a court of law. I, however do feel sorry for Suarez in the fact he's been labelled a racist despite not getting a criminal conviction, yet Mr Terry is seen as a non-racist because he didn't get convicted despite the fact it was down to insufficient evidence.

[purpleronnie]

Cant have had that much control over the media otherwise theyd have made sure he'd ended up in a court of law. I, however do feel sorry for Suarez in the fact he's been labelled a racist despite not getting a criminal conviction, yet Mr Terry is seen as a non-racist because he didn't get convicted despite the fact it was down to insufficient evidence.

well did they proove terry said any racist words? (i havent followed it) but suarez did....so not sure how you can feel sorry for him?

[Fox92]

Just fed up with it all now. Suarez/Evra and more recently Ferdinand/Terry.

[Captain...]

http://www.dailymail...trice-Evra.html

Just wanted to see what people think on this matter. Suarez has spoken out of how Manchester united control media etc and how he is not entirely to blame for the racism row. I'm a Leicester fan but have a soft spot for liverpool and I do sympathise with the guy to an extent. It seems man u do get a large say with many decisions eg referees,media. Now I'm not saying what Suarez did was not wrong (evra) but it was so widely blown out of context by the media it was unbelievable. I also believe that "handshakegate" was evras fault after looking over the video footage. Never at one point does he put his hand out for the shake.

Just want to see what fellow Leicester fans think as I want to know if I'm being biased or that this is a general idea

Completely agree about the handshake thing, it was manipulated by Evra, Suarez had his head down and was just shaking every hand that was out there for him, Evra withdrew his hand, Suarez didn't want to make anything of so carried on, Evra then reacted like a the tw*t he is, then Ferdinand got involved, who has recently proven what a great ambassador he is for race relations.

The twat got off pretty lightly, he should really shut his mouth and not be raking it back up in the papers.

He got a much harsher punishment then Terry would have done had he been found guilty, he didn't use any racist language, he used perfectly acceptable words in Spanish. The only thing he said that could have been racist was that he kicked him because he was black, but that has been denied. Evra also used a derogatory term for South Americans, but that wasn't punished either.

Cant have had that much control over the media otherwise theyd have made sure he'd ended up in a court of law. I, however do feel sorry for Suarez in the fact he's been labelled a racist despite not getting a criminal conviction, yet Mr Terry is seen as a non-racist because he didn't get convicted despite the fact it was down to insufficient evidence.

Why would they want it in a court of law, they would never have got a prosecution, there was no actual evidence, just Evra's word against Suarez's no other witnesses, and he was only punished on the balance of probabilities, which no court of law would convict on.

well did they proove terry said any racist words? (i havent followed it) but suarez did....so not sure how you can feel sorry for him?

Yes there was video evidence of Terry saying the words "black cvnt", and they didn't prove that Suarez did, there was no video evidence, no witnesses, as I said it was on the balance of probabilities, only because there were some inconsistencies with Suarez's statement, not on what he said but on other things. It really was a huge joke, but Liverpool were made to look like the bad guys, and everything they did to support Suarez was shot down in the media to the point where they were forced to stop digging and just accept an unjust punishment and it arguably cost Kenny his job.

They were done up good and proper, and whilst Suarez was foolish for saying what he did (cultural differences), Evra said early on in the whole incident that he didn't think Suarez was a racist.

[Fox92]

I fully agree with Captain Shrapnel on this one.

[Corky]

The twat got off pretty lightly, he should really shut his mouth and not be raking it back up in the papers.

This.

[Guest ttfn]

Astonishing re-writing of history from Captain Shrapnel.

Suarez' defence was a joke from the start. Ironically there'd likely have been a far higher chance of him being convicted in court than Terry (although prosecuting either was/would have been a colossal waste of time and money).

[Out Foxed]

"Captain Revisionist"

suarez is a willy puller and he helped damage Liverpools image almost irreparably.

[Bert]

Poor sod. Had to be in a taxi at 7am and wasnt getting home til 9.

Feel sorry for the guy.

[Corky]

People at the club are sure that it was a way that Manchester United used to put me out of the team and stop Liverpool

He must be joking.

Liverpool were average before your ban, during your ban and after your ban, Mr Suarez.

Your club was never a threat to them.

[Captain...]

Astonishing re-writing of history from Captain Shrapnel.

Suarez' defence was a joke from the start. Ironically there'd likely have been a far higher chance of him being convicted in court than Terry (although prosecuting either was/would have been a colossal waste of time and money).

Provide some evidence that proves me wrong and I will take it all back.

[Guest ttfn]

Provide some evidence that proves me wrong and I will take it all back.

Well...

1) Suarez apologized two days after the handshake incident, accepting responsibility for it.

2) In a heated argument, and seeing that Evra was being wound up by (and taking offence to it) he repeatedly called him "Negro". This much was confirmed by Suarez and Damien Comolli in the referees' room immediately after the game.

3) The "culture" defence is bullshit. If a German came and did 150mph on the motorway would he be let off because it's ok in Germany? "Negro" and derivatives thereof are words which are particularly sensitive in the UK and western Europe as a whole.

4) Comparing the Terry and Suarez cases is absurd. Terry should be brought before the FA and ought to be punished heavily but as you have mentioned, so far they have been tried under different standards.

Interesting that Manchester United didn't use their "political clout" in 2003 when Ferdinand was banned for 9 (?) months for missing a drugs test, and instead used it to organize a Machiavellian conspiracy against a mid-table side.

What a load of crap.

[ADK]

I'm not suggesting theres a bias towards Man U but Suarez was unlucky to be punished with a lengthy suspension when Terry appears to have got away with it.

[Guest ttfn]

I'm not suggesting theres a bias towards Man U but Suarez was unlucky to be punished with a lengthy suspension when Terry appears to have got away with it.

There's a good chance Terry will still face disciplinary action. Evra did not report Suarez to the police, but rather the match referee.

[Captain...]

Well...

1) Suarez apologized two days after the handshake incident, accepting responsibility for it.

2) In a heated argument, and seeing that Evra was being wound up by (and taking offence to it) he repeatedly called him "Negro". This much was confirmed by Suarez and Damien Comolli in the referees' room immediately after the game.

3) The "culture" defence is bullshit. If a German came and did 150mph on the motorway would he be let off because it's ok in Germany? "Negro" and derivatives thereof are words which are particularly sensitive in the UK and western Europe as a whole.

4) Comparing the Terry and Suarez cases is absurd. Terry should be brought before the FA and ought to be punished heavily but as you have mentioned, so far they have been tried under different standards.

Interesting that Manchester United didn't use their "political clout" in 2003 when Ferdinand was banned for 9 (?) months for missing a drugs test, and instead used it to organize a Machiavellian conspiracy against a mid-table side.

What a load of crap.

1) He was told to apologise and bury it by the owners, read the article in the first post and you will see he thinks Evra pulled his hand away, or watch it for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOSOHoooZ88

Watch how Evra drops his hand for Suarez, Suarez's hand which is there to be shook, and compare it to how De Gea shakes Suarez's hand and how Evra's hand is for everyone else to shake.

2) This was not confirmed by Suarez or Comoli, Suarez referred to him as black (negro) once after Evra called him South American, if you read the language experts report they say that the way Suarez claims to have said it is not offensive, the way Evra claims it was said would be offensive, but it is also unlikely for someone from the river plate region of South America to say "Porque eres negro" (because you are black), and it is more likely for someone of that region to say.

181. The experts noted that the use of the verb form "porque tu eres negro" is not the most usual

form for Montevidean Spanish, since the form of the verb "ser" most commonly used

would be the "vos" form, that is "porque (vos) sos negro". Nevertheless, a small percentage

of people from Montevideo do use the "tu" form (in contrast to Buenos Aires, where it is

rarely used) or even a mixture of both. In the interview with Mr Suarez the transcription

indicated to the experts that he uses the "tu" form of the verb, though there are other

filmed interviews published on the internet in which he uses the "vos" form of the verb.

Given that he has spent some considerable time in Europe it is possible that his use of

Spanish alters between Uruguayan and European contexts. It is also possible that Mr Evra,

who may have learned his Spanish in Spain, where the "vos" form is not used, may, when

recalling the incident in interview, have rendered Mr Suarez’s usage as the "tu" form, even

if Mr Suarez used the "vos" form.

182. The experts considered it worth noting that the phrase "porque tu eres negro" struck both

of them as slightly unusual. In this instance, a direct racial slur would more likely have

been something like "porque eres un negro de mierda" [because you are a shitty black].

191. The question "Por qué, negro?" as transcribed in Mr Suarez's interview sounded right

linguistically and culturally and is in line with the use set out by Mr Suarez when

referring to Glen Johnson; Mr Suarez was also correct in highlighting that "negro de

mierda" would be a clear racial slur.

The experts concluded their observations on Mr Suarez's account as follows. If Mr Suarez

used the word "negro" as described by Mr Suarez, this would not be interpreted as either

offensive or offensive in racial terms in Uruguay and Spanish-speaking America more

generally;

3) Referring to someone as black is not against the law, unlike driving at 150mph, see above for the cultural and linguistic differences.

Or read the full case report here:

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

One thing it centres open is Suarez not being a reliable witness, and not consistent with his evidence, specifically over a pinching incident in which Suarez tried to claim he was defusing the situation and not trying to antagonise Evra which was clearly bollox and a very stupid thing to say, he was also evasive with his answers, (which were translated) as opposed to Evra who was a very good witness gave all his evidence calmly and consistently.

That may not look good, but there was no video evidence of Suarez saying any of this, there were no witnesses who heard him say it, it was Suarez's word against Evra's and Evra was more convincing.

That would have been thrown out of a criminal court, but it swayed the FA on the balance of probabilities that Suarez said something racist, but they all agree he is not a racist, do you not think that a bit odd, surely with such a sever sentence they should have something more than just the balance of probabilties

[Guest ttfn]

1) He was told to apologise and bury it by the owners, read the article in the first post and you will see he thinks Evra pulled his hand away, or watch it for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOSOHoooZ88

Watch how Evra drops his hand for Suarez, Suarez's hand which is there to be shook, and compare it to how De Gea shakes Suarez's hand and how Evra's hand is for everyone else to shake.

2) This was not confirmed by Suarez or Comoli, Suarez referred to him as black (negro) once after Evra called him South American, if you read the language experts report they say that the way Suarez claims to have said it is not offensive, the way Evra claims it was said would be offensive, but it is also unlikely for someone from the river plate region of South America to say "Porque eres negro" (because you are black), and it is more likely for someone of that region to say.

3) Referring to someone as black is not against the law, unlike driving at 150mph, see above for the cultural and linguistic differences.

Or read the full case report here:

http://www.thefa.com...Commission.ashx

One thing it centres open is Suarez not being a reliable witness, and not consistent with his evidence, specifically over a pinching incident in which Suarez tried to claim he was defusing the situation and not trying to antagonise Evra which was clearly bollox and a very stupid thing to say, he was also evasive with his answers, (which were translated) as opposed to Evra who was a very good witness gave all his evidence calmly and consistently.

That may not look good, but there was no video evidence of Suarez saying any of this, there were no witnesses who heard him say it, it was Suarez's word against Evra's and Evra was more convincing.

That would have been thrown out of a criminal court, but it swayed the FA on the balance of probabilities that Suarez said something racist, but they all agree he is not a racist, do you not think that a bit odd, surely with such a sever sentence they should have something more than just the balance of probabilties

1) I have just watched that video 3 times and still have absolutely no idea what you are on about. So, you are happy to accept that Suarez' apology was forced on him by the club after careful consideration and really an outright lie, but you are completely happy to believe him when he says that there was just a big cultural mis-understanding?

2) So, Evra is offended by somebody referring to him exclusively by the colour of his skin and you seem to think that's strange? Suarez confirmed that he said "Por que, negro", or to translate, "Why, black?". Do you think that is acceptable under UK law, let alone appropriate conduct towards a fellow professional?

Comolli confirms in paragraph 138 of the report that Suarez had used the word "negro" in the context of the phrase "why, because you are black". I was wrong to say it was "repeatedly" - this has not been confirmed, but is probably the case.

3) Making racially aggravated comments is an offence under the Crime and Disorder Act.

Don't disagree with any of the last chunk of what you've written though. Terry should be dealt with by the FA in the same manner as Suarez, and if found guilty he should face a similar fine.

[RonnieTodger]

Suarez should use every opportunity he has to keep his mouth shut. He's ugly enough without his Stone-Henge teggies on sight every time he says something

[Captain...]

1) I have just watched that video 3 times and still have absolutely no idea what you are on about. So, you are happy to accept that Suarez' apology was forced on him by the club after careful consideration and really an outright lie, but you are completely happy to believe him when he says that there was just a big cultural mis-understanding?

2) So, Evra is offended by somebody referring to him exclusively by the colour of his skin and you seem to think that's strange? Suarez confirmed that he said "Por que, negro", or to translate, "Why, black?". Do you think that is acceptable under UK law, let alone appropriate conduct towards a fellow professional?

Comolli confirms in paragraph 138 of the report that Suarez had used the word "negro" in the context of the phrase "why, because you are black". I was wrong to say it was "repeatedly" - this has not been confirmed, but is probably the case.

3) Making racially aggravated comments is an offence under the Crime and Disorder Act.

Don't disagree with any of the last chunk of what you've written though. Terry should be dealt with by the FA in the same manner as Suarez, and if found guilty he should face a similar fine.

1) Re; the video

When I watch it, I see Evra shaking hands normally with his hand in the same position the whole time, as soon as Suarez comes along he drops his hand down,

You can't see the difference in hand position?:

2) Re: Paragraph 138, I read that and thought it odd, but then Comoli is reported to have told the referee that Suarez said "Tues Negro", in paragraph 150 which was directly after the incident, and presumably before he made a written statement, in which paragraph 138 refers.

3) What Suarez claims to have said is no worse and in reaction to Evra calling him South American.

What it comes down to is, who do you believe, Evra was considered a more credible witness, which I don't know why, considering his past history of fake racist claims, and the fact he claims to be able to understand Spanish and yet he thinks "negro" in Spanish means nigger. He also is supposed to have been racially abused 5 or ten times, and yet he acts all surprised the only time Suarez admits he used the word negro and that is part of the defence.

He is supposed to have told the ref that he was called black, and then it changes to he was called a nigger.

Basically neither of them come off looking good in this, Evra used an offensive term about Suarez's sister, "Your sister's cvnt" which may mean in Spanish, the same as "fvcking hell", but that it is pretty high level slang spanish to be used by someone who doesn't know negro doesn't mean nigger. He also referred to him as a South American, which he is, in the same way Evra is black.

Like I say it depends on who you believe, but the evidence seems so flimsy/non existent, that I just don't understand how it could be such a severe punishment.

[Danno]

Racist player at a racist club in a city built on racism and a club who's fans have been responsible for 135 deaths.

[Captain...]

Racist player at a racist club in a city built on racism and a club who's fans have been responsible for 135 deaths.

Twat

[Mark_w]

Twat

That's the first sensible thing you've said in this thread.

Suarez is still a racist though.

[Captain...]

That's the first sensible thing you've said in this thread.

Suarez is still a racist though.

Really, because Evra and the FA disagree with you:

There was no apology and it soon became apparent why as Liverpool turned the focus back on to the man who made the allegation. "It is key to note that Patrice Evra himself in his written statement in this case said: 'I don't think that Luis Suárez is racist'. The FA in their opening remarks accepted that Luis Suárez was not racist," their statement said.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/dec/20/liverpool-luis-suarez-patrice-evra