Suarez
- Thread starter the wopster
- Start date
- Status
Agreed, but only if found guilty for the right reasons. If it's one person's word against another's, that's not the right reason to find somebody guilty of such a serious offence.
Yep, because there are no other clubs who have a lot of thick fans.
Not sure what Tokyo sexwhales (what are Tokyo sexwhales?) have to do with anything. However, Evra is accusing Suarez of making a racist statement, which is a serious allegation. Liverpool are saying that there is no more evidence than Evra's word. They are accusing him of nothing, merely saying that there is reasonable doubt about the statement. If the law took everyone at its word, it would be a shambles, which is why the judicial system is in place. Frankly, I think that the fact that Suarez works with black people is irrelevant, although at the same time I would suggest that mixed race people are less likely to be racist than people who are not of mixed race. That's just speculation though.
A decision hasn't been made yet. The FA themselves say that it is subject to appeal.
Because there are massive inconsistencies across football and the way it is run. In this instance, there are other people getting away with offences of a similar magnitude to this. I don't have a persecution complex, but in this instance feel that Liverpool have fallen foul of this lack of consistency.
There's a massive difference between alleging that Suarez is racist, and that he is a nasty piece of work. There are cheats all over the Premier League, and people with disciplinary records as bad as his including, dare I say, our beloved Wayne Rooney. Unless he is shown to have offended previously in a racist manner (which he hasn't to my knowledge), the rest of his character is irrelevant.
Damn Evra for not understanding the context! There's no way that Surez would ever be offensive or behave anything less than impeccably to an opponent.
Obviously, in law, ignorance is now an excuse and a person's own countries laws and cultural intricacies completely override that of the country they are working in.
Obviously, in law, ignorance is now an excuse and a person's own countries laws and cultural intricacies completely override that of the country they are working in.
just on point 5. A decision has been made, it's possible to appeal the decision but the decision has been made.
Playing devil's advocate here, if Suarez said "negrito", that is actually meaningless in this country, so if you want to go down that route Suarez shouldn't be punished at all. It is only when taking a foreign language and culture into account (ie Spanish/South American) that "negrito" becomes meaningful. If the meaning of the word is tied into the language and culture to which it belongs, surely that culture ought to be taken into account when judging the use of the word?
Aimed at me?
If so, read my post before. I used that as a hypothetical example in relation to how players should be punished.
The question I was asking Tummy is that if a player uses a word that breaches the rule he quoted, should they receive a fixed punishment or should intentions/context be taken into account.
Last edited:
I don't think thought that any sort of defence could be used against the use of the word "negro" it certainly can't be one of Evra shouldn't of taken it offensively because where Suarez is from they say it all the time. It's just not a defence of any merit. (imho)
The FA rules state that making a derogatory remark about a players Nationality is punishable, but it *wasn't* the FA involved in this decision making, it was an independent investigation.
I used the hypothetical thing with me and Kill (sorry mate, first person I know on here that isn't English
) to help clear it up, both broke the rule, and should have faced a similar punishment. However, due to the appeal and the separate investigation it wasn't a "clear cut" decision. Unlike the Mackie one (I'm guessing) They both received 8 game bans no? (certainly don't agree with suspended bans for that with Mackie) so I think it's more to do with the use of a racist term? I'm not sure.Again, I've no allegiance either way on this, was just offering opinions and trying to help people understand and play devils advocate a little bit
(From the FA) "Mr Suarez has the right to appeal the decision of the Independent Regulatory Commission to an Appeal Board."
Yup, fair point
I checked on this before I left for my works Xmas do and there was nothing so please (liverpool supporters especially) bare this in mind
firstly the bbc's statement of what LFC said struck me about seemingly stressing "ALONE" .......very coincidental , woudnt you think? ( I havent seen the original LFC statement in fulll , so excuse me if its editorial sacriment instead of what happened)
Secondly - Saurez has to be INCREDIBLY stupid to say something as obviously stupid as that kind of word after playiung in Europe for 3 Seasons.
3 - Im sure there will be an appeal which will delay and probably reduce the ban
firstly the bbc's statement of what LFC said struck me about seemingly stressing "ALONE" .......very coincidental , woudnt you think? ( I havent seen the original LFC statement in fulll , so excuse me if its editorial sacriment instead of what happened)
Secondly - Saurez has to be INCREDIBLY stupid to say something as obviously stupid as that kind of word after playiung in Europe for 3 Seasons.
3 - Im sure there will be an appeal which will delay and probably reduce the ban
If I didn't answer it below, I'll have another go. I think that with a case as complicated as this context and intentions should be taken in to account, regardless it's hard to find context where a white guy makes a remark involving the word "negro" to a black guy and it is "okay" given the circumstances. (example, running handbags all game and verbals) In any case it's not *just* an FA decision, it's made by a independent investigation. I also (again pure guess work) guess that it could be because it was Evra making the claim agains Saurez.
stop talking sense, many round here won't like it
Okay.
Liverpool fans are all stupid, including me, and Suarez is racist because he has big teeth and looks like an angry Bugs Bunny.
Happy?
I'm probably talking more **** then usual and my responses making less sense then usual so I apologise Baz. I've been up way too many hours and I'm slowly falling asleep
Go to bed grump.
Not yet, find this interesting (aside from the people posting to get a reaction or to goad) and I've got a couple of other things to do / write up.
I don't think thought that any sort of defence could be used against the use of the word "negro" it certainly can't be one of Evra shouldn't of taken it offensively because where Suarez is from they say it all the time. It's just not a defence of any merit. (imho)
The FA rules state that making a derogatory remark about a players Nationality is punishable, but it *wasn't* the FA involved in this decision making, it was an independent investigation.
I used the hypothetical thing with me and Kill (sorry mate, first person I know on here that isn't English
Again, I've no allegiance either way on this, was just offering opinions and trying to help people understand and play devils advocate a little bit
I'm not implying there's a conspiracy against Liverpool/Suarez or anything like that in case you think I am. It's a genuine question.
If you make reference to someones colour, nationality, religion or whatever else, should there be a fixed punishment?
To say there's no defense of the word negro is subjective, especially when it concerns somebody from a different culture where that word might be acceptable. Naivety/ignorance may not be an excuse (and before Dan comes out with some sarcastic crap, I'm not saying Suarez said anything with honest intentions (if he said anything at all)) but surely the issue with certain words is that they're usually used with the intention to offend? Being ignorant isn't the same as being racist and so should it be punished the same?
If it turns out that Suarez has admitted to using the word Negrito for example, should it be punished in the same way as Mackie was given the complexities (and possibly lack of evidence) in one instance compared to the other?
Last edited:
Do some research on the recent blatter controversy...
a decision has been made, he has been found guilty, just because something is subject to appeal doesn't mean a decision hasn't been made.
Name some similar offences of the same magnitude which have been overlooked by the english FA ?
Just because they have been inconsistent with other cases doesn't make this decision wrong. He has been found guilty of racism and if anything has gotten off lightly with an 8 game ban. Any other profession and he would be sacked instantly.
Where did i say him being a nasty piece of work has anything to do with this case ? im just stating mine and many other peoples views on him.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 41,255
- Location
- Cornwall
Feel the same after reading some of your posts tonight.I've been up way too many hours and I'm slowly falling asleep
Its been said before, and ill say it again.
What else was Suarez supposed to use?
Assuming the information he gave to his native press is accurate.
He speaks about 3 words of English, in his own language (And other variants of Spanish) descriptive words are used extensively, they simply don't say "little man". Obviously its possible, type 'little man' into babel fish and see for yourself, but when the language is properly used, it will be literally translated into 'little black man', or 'little white man', but when spoken the descriptive word is 'silent' and the recipient simply hears 'little man' if that makes sense.
Im sure everyone here's been caught out with their French or German homework once upon a time, using literal translating online, and being told what you've written makes no sense.
What else was Suarez supposed to use?
Assuming the information he gave to his native press is accurate.
He speaks about 3 words of English, in his own language (And other variants of Spanish) descriptive words are used extensively, they simply don't say "little man". Obviously its possible, type 'little man' into babel fish and see for yourself, but when the language is properly used, it will be literally translated into 'little black man', or 'little white man', but when spoken the descriptive word is 'silent' and the recipient simply hears 'little man' if that makes sense.
Im sure everyone here's been caught out with their French or German homework once upon a time, using literal translating online, and being told what you've written makes no sense.
- Status