Suarez found guilty of Racism by FA

by AberdeenSteve Sun 16 Oct 2011, 10:09 am

First topic message reminder :

The Football Association says it will investigate claims from Manchester United defender Patrice Evra that he was racially abused by Liverpool forward Luis Suarez.

Evra says the incident occurred in Saturday's 1-1 draw between the teams.

A Liverpool spokesman said Suarez "categorically denied" the allegation.

An FA statement read: "Referee Andre Marriner was made aware of an allegation at the end of the fixture and has reported this to the FA."

It added: "The FA will now begin making enquiries into the matter."

Evra was quoted as telling French TV station Canal Plus: "There are cameras, you can see him [Suarez] say a certain word to me at least 10 times."

Source: BBC Sport Football

by LivinginItaly Wed 21 Dec 2011, 10:32 am

I think racism is totally unacceptable, and needs to be stamped out with strict punishments for the offenders. However, I can't help but feel that the FA have seen this as an opportunity to make an example of someone. It would appear from the Liverpool statement, that the decision was based on the the word of Evra alone, with no supporting evidence. This could backfire in a big way for the FA.

by Soldier_Of_Fortune Wed 21 Dec 2011, 10:42 am

dondelero wrote:
slyadams wrote:
fernando wrote:Liverpool statement
It is also our opinion that the accusation by this particular player was not credible - certainly no more credible than his prior unfounded accusations.

Frankly, an astonishing statement from Liverpool. The sort of thing I'd expect to see on a football message board, not coming out of a club. Who's running that place?

Indeed what an embarrassing statement! Well if Evra is clever he and Utd can sue Liverpool themselves for this libelous statement. It would be interesting to see what players like Glen Johnson thinkS of his team mate.

I think its a fanastic statement clap

No way Suarez will be getting a 8 match ban!

Evra knows what he's done. FA making an example of Suarez before Terry who has actually had the police investigating!! I do hope Terry gets the same treatment, especially as evidence against him is more concrete

At least it not some fan yank draining every last resourse out of the club.

by **Kenny** Wed 21 Dec 2011, 10:43 am

Racism has no part in football full stop .
I'm a Liverpool fan and i wont excuse him for saying whatever he did say , i do find it strange how it is all on Evras say so though and will be more then interested in the outcome of John Terrys case which is caught on video so cant be denied .

I know Suarez gets under peoples skin and is not especially liked by non Liverpool fans ......... do people think if there is an unsuccessful appeal or if the sentence is upheld that it will force Suarez out of English football ? and if so would the same apply to JT ?

by **ADMIN** Wed 21 Dec 2011, 10:59 am

Is it not the case that Suarez himself has admitted the term he used (though he denies the context in which he used it).

by HERSH Wed 21 Dec 2011, 11:31 am

Suarez The Racist.

Surely that's libel?

by jro786 Wed 21 Dec 2011, 11:32 am

Diggers wrote:
jro786 wrote:
fernando wrote:Liverpool statement

Liverpool Football Club is very surprised and disappointed with the decision of the Football Association Commission to find Luis Suarez guilty of the charges against him.

We look forward to the publication of the Commission's Judgment. We will study the detailed reasons of the Commission once they become available, but reserve our right to appeal or take any other course of action we feel appropriate with regards to this situation.

We find it extraordinary that Luis can be found guilty on the word of Patrice Evra alone when no-one else on the field of play - including Evra's own Manchester United teammates and all the match officials - heard the alleged conversation between the two players in a crowded Kop goalmouth while a corner kick was about to be taken.

The Club takes extremely seriously the fight against all forms of discrimination and has a long and successful track record in work relating to anti-racist activity and social inclusion. We remain committed to this ideal and equality for all, irrespective of a person's background.

LFC considers racism in any form to be unacceptable - without compromise. It is our strong held belief, having gone over the facts of the case, that Luis Suarez did not commit any racist act. It is also our opinion that the accusation by this particular player was not credible - certainly no more credible than his prior unfounded accusations.

It is key to note that Patrice Evra himself in his written statement in this case said 'I don't think that Luis Suarez is racist'. The FA in their opening remarks accepted that Luis Suarez was not racist.

Luis himself is of a mixed race family background as his grandfather was black. He has been personally involved since the 2010 World Cup in a charitable project which uses sport to encourage solidarity amongst people of different backgrounds with the central theme that the colour of a person's skin does not matter; they can all play together as a team.

He has played with black players and mixed with their families whilst with the Uruguay national side and was Captain at Ajax Amsterdam of a team with a proud multi-cultural profile, many of whom became good friends.

It seems incredible to us that a player of mixed heritage should be accused and found guilty in the way he has based on the evidence presented. We do not recognise the way in which Luis Suarez has been characterised.

It appears to us that the FA were determined to bring charges against Luis Suarez, even before interviewing him at the beginning of November. Nothing we have heard in the course of the hearing has changed our view that Luis Suarez is innocent of the charges brought against him and we will provide Luis with whatever support he now needs to clear his name.

We would also like to know when the FA intend to charge Patrice Evra with making abusive remarks to an opponent after he admitted himself in his evidence to insulting Luis Suarez in Spanish in the most objectionable of terms. Luis, to his credit, actually told the FA he had not heard the insult.

hear hear i'm with you on this one

suarez was witch hunted, now i'm awaiting on terry if he gets the same treatment but knowing the fa, he might not get it

double standards i can see from fa

I dont think he has been witch hunted at all. He has been used as a scapegoat which is a completely different thing altogether. I dont think the FA care that it was Suarez or a Liverpool player, they simply wanted to make an exaample of someone and Suarez happened to say the wrong thing at the wrong time.

what a load of cobblers, he has been witch hunted and it is a fackt

by liverbnz Wed 21 Dec 2011, 11:43 am

slyadams wrote:
fernando wrote:Liverpool statement
It is also our opinion that the accusation by this particular player was not credible - certainly no more credible than his prior unfounded accusations.

Frankly, an astonishing statement from Liverpool. The sort of thing I'd expect to see on a football message board, not coming out of a club. Who's running that place?

Why? It's stating a FACT. Evra has previous record of "unfounded and exagerrated" accustaions. Those are quotes from the FA following the investiagtion with the Chelsea groundsman. Liverpool's statement was probably carefully worded by a top set of lawyers, so I see no reason for anyone less knowledgable than them to question their professionalism.

by jro786 Wed 21 Dec 2011, 11:47 am

liverbnz wrote:
slyadams wrote:
fernando wrote:Liverpool statement
It is also our opinion that the accusation by this particular player was not credible - certainly no more credible than his prior unfounded accusations.

Frankly, an astonishing statement from Liverpool. The sort of thing I'd expect to see on a football message board, not coming out of a club. Who's running that place?

Why? It's stating a FACT. Evra has previous record of "unfounded and exagerrated" accustaions. Those are quotes from the FA following the investiagtion with the Chelsea groundsman. Liverpool's statement was probably carefully worded by a top set of lawyers, so I see no reason for anyone less knowledgable than them to question their professionalism.

livrbnz

spot on

evra has history fackt

by Diggers Wed 21 Dec 2011, 12:04 pm

jro786 wrote:
Diggers wrote:
jro786 wrote:
fernando wrote:Liverpool statement

Liverpool Football Club is very surprised and disappointed with the decision of the Football Association Commission to find Luis Suarez guilty of the charges against him.

We look forward to the publication of the Commission's Judgment. We will study the detailed reasons of the Commission once they become available, but reserve our right to appeal or take any other course of action we feel appropriate with regards to this situation.

We find it extraordinary that Luis can be found guilty on the word of Patrice Evra alone when no-one else on the field of play - including Evra's own Manchester United teammates and all the match officials - heard the alleged conversation between the two players in a crowded Kop goalmouth while a corner kick was about to be taken.

The Club takes extremely seriously the fight against all forms of discrimination and has a long and successful track record in work relating to anti-racist activity and social inclusion. We remain committed to this ideal and equality for all, irrespective of a person's background.

LFC considers racism in any form to be unacceptable - without compromise. It is our strong held belief, having gone over the facts of the case, that Luis Suarez did not commit any racist act. It is also our opinion that the accusation by this particular player was not credible - certainly no more credible than his prior unfounded accusations.

It is key to note that Patrice Evra himself in his written statement in this case said 'I don't think that Luis Suarez is racist'. The FA in their opening remarks accepted that Luis Suarez was not racist.

Luis himself is of a mixed race family background as his grandfather was black. He has been personally involved since the 2010 World Cup in a charitable project which uses sport to encourage solidarity amongst people of different backgrounds with the central theme that the colour of a person's skin does not matter; they can all play together as a team.

He has played with black players and mixed with their families whilst with the Uruguay national side and was Captain at Ajax Amsterdam of a team with a proud multi-cultural profile, many of whom became good friends.

It seems incredible to us that a player of mixed heritage should be accused and found guilty in the way he has based on the evidence presented. We do not recognise the way in which Luis Suarez has been characterised.

It appears to us that the FA were determined to bring charges against Luis Suarez, even before interviewing him at the beginning of November. Nothing we have heard in the course of the hearing has changed our view that Luis Suarez is innocent of the charges brought against him and we will provide Luis with whatever support he now needs to clear his name.

We would also like to know when the FA intend to charge Patrice Evra with making abusive remarks to an opponent after he admitted himself in his evidence to insulting Luis Suarez in Spanish in the most objectionable of terms. Luis, to his credit, actually told the FA he had not heard the insult.

hear hear i'm with you on this one

suarez was witch hunted, now i'm awaiting on terry if he gets the same treatment but knowing the fa, he might not get it

double standards i can see from fa

I dont think he has been witch hunted at all. He has been used as a scapegoat which is a completely different thing altogether. I dont think the FA care that it was Suarez or a Liverpool player, they simply wanted to make an exaample of someone and Suarez happened to say the wrong thing at the wrong time.

what a load of cobblers, he has been witch hunted and it is a fackt

If you are witch hunted its on the basis that there is some kind of ongoing dislike/campaign against the person involved. Are you actually suggesting that the FA have it in for Suarez and therefore have simply used this particular instance to come down hard on him ? Do you also believe in the tooth fairy as the two things are just as likely.
He was used as a scapegoat in the sense that he was trated harshly but I dont think there is any real doubt that he has said things that he shouldnt have said.

by Guest Wed 21 Dec 2011, 12:27 pm

From what Mac said a bit earlier, if he admitted to using racist language then he hasn't been witch-hunted. The fact (spelt without a 'k') that this has been pointed out twice to you and you still fail to recognise the difference and the truth leads me to believe you're probably a Liverpool fan who's in a sulk because you'll be missing your best player for 8 games.

Let's not forget that the Terry judgement today isn't from the FA, that will come at a later date. You also have to know whether Suarez said the n word, or did he use another racist remark? In my opinion, using the n word is much worse than just putting the colour of someones skin infront of an expletive.

by **hampo17** Wed 21 Dec 2011, 12:40 pm

Churchill, Suarez said the word "negro" not a racial term in his homeland, meaning little black man. Everyone knows he's admitted it, the same way the Evra admitted being abusive back to Suarez in spanish (this has gone under the radar a little bit).

Whether this has got lost in translation I don't know, however imo what Terry did is alot worse, you can't go shouting what he did and expect to get away with it, I truely hope he gets the book thrown at him, if he doesn't it'll stink to high heaven, all the evidence points towards Terry being guilty and as such should get a hefty punishment and be stripped of the england captaincy.

by Soldier_Of_Fortune Wed 21 Dec 2011, 12:43 pm

Churchill wrote:....using the n word is much worse than just putting the colour of someones skin infront of an expletive.

That’s quite bad generalisation of racism. You should be ashamed

by Guest Wed 21 Dec 2011, 12:47 pm

I thought he used the word 'Negrito', which (I'm told) means the n word in Spanish? Although if he did use it in a friendly manner and tone, why did Liverpool not bring up the mistranslation first instead of focusing on everything else in the case?

Also, have Liverpool left themselves open for Evra to make a case against them by saying he is unreliable after making several unfounded accusations? I thought previous cases were when someone else had accused the opposition and Evra had just given evidence.

I'm also annoyed at the fact Liverpool mention the fact he's got a black grandfather and a mixed race heritage twice. It's almost as if they're trying to paint this perfect picture to protect him.

Soldier, can't tell whether you're serious or not. You also cut out the first bit, where I say it's just my opinion. To me, calling someone the n word is worse than calling someone a black c###.

by Soldier_Of_Fortune Wed 21 Dec 2011, 12:52 pm

As you have never been a victim of racism, your opinion is not really a valid one!

Easy saying it on the other side

by Irish Curry Wed 21 Dec 2011, 12:53 pm

Both are just as bad imo but i'm not black so I can't judge from their perspective. If someone insulted me mocking my nationality in the way Terry/Suarez did I would be offended no matter how they put it. Then they would get a box in the head.

by liverbnz Wed 21 Dec 2011, 1:04 pm

Nobody knows (on here at least) what Suarez has said. We only have some newspapers 'claiming' that he said he used a certain word. Wait until the FA have produced their written evidence before we assume anything.

However, Liverpool's stance has always been that Suarez 'categorically' denies the accusations, and their statement last night backs this up. Do you really think they would publish this if they thought Suarez said any word that could be perceived as 'abusive in reference to Evra's skin colour or ethnic origin'? That statement was probably drafted and scrutinised word for word by top lawyers, lawyers who would be working for FSG who also have a very, very strong stance against racism with their connection, of course, to the Boston Red Sox. For anyone that isn't aware, Boston has have very shady past with racism.

by Guest Wed 21 Dec 2011, 1:48 pm

So because I haven't been a victim of something, I'm not allowed to have a valid opinion?

Liverbnz, Suarez admitted on radio back in Uruguay what he said. Do you think that Liverpool will fine Suarez themselves if the verdict remains the same? It seems quite odd for a club to stick with their player even after being charged, if they were to then fine him for being found guilty after appeal.

by jro786 Wed 21 Dec 2011, 1:52 pm

Churchill wrote:So because I haven't been a victim of something, I'm not allowed to have a valid opinion?

Liverbnz, Suarez admitted on radio back in Uruguay what he said. Do you think that Liverpool will fine Suarez themselves if the verdict remains the same? It seems quite odd for a club to stick with their player even after being charged, if they were to then fine him for being found guilty after appeal.

churchill

i was racially abused before and i ignored it, in fact i laughed at the person who said it to me

why would they, he's done nothing wrong

by Fernando Wed 21 Dec 2011, 1:54 pm

Churchill wrote:I thought he used the word 'Negrito', which (I'm told) means the n word in Spanish?

It means small black man not the N word

by liverbnz Wed 21 Dec 2011, 1:59 pm

Churchill

No I don't think Suarez will see any punishment forthcoming from the club. Without the written evidence being available (which is shoddy work by the FA) it's difficult to know how this will pan out, but I strongly suspect that Liverpool will go all the way with this. A reduced ban will not be enough, they will want Suarez completely exonerated.

If they have to take it to the CAS and then the High Court, then I imagine they will. The statement has firmly planted their stance on the matter. I think if Kenny Dalglish, and probably more importantly FSG, thought that Suarez was in anyway guilty, they would not be backing him.

As for the radio interview in Uraguay, the only thing that Suarez said was, 'I called him something his teammates call him'. He never mentioned any particular word as far as I was aware. Any word you've heard has most likely been fabricated by the press. The Daily Mail says 'Negro'. The Telegraph says 'negrito'.

by liverbnz Wed 21 Dec 2011, 2:00 pm

Negrito doesn't actually have any true translation into English. "Little black man" is its crude form.

That's what I understand, although I'm no expert on languages or other cultures.

by Soldier_Of_Fortune Wed 21 Dec 2011, 2:16 pm

Churchill wrote:So because I haven't been a victim of something, I'm not allowed to have a valid opinion?

An opinion yes, a valid opinion no.

by dyrewolfe Wed 21 Dec 2011, 2:41 pm

liverbnz wrote:Negrito doesn't actually have any true translation into English. "Little black man" is its crude form.

That's what I understand, although I'm no expert on languages or other cultures.

The actual translation is immaterial. The intention was there and, according to reports, Suarez used the word several times...obviously intending to cause offence. There are any number of words you can use to insult someone, without resorting to mentioning their race or colour.

by LivinginItaly Wed 21 Dec 2011, 2:48 pm

dyrewolfe wrote:
liverbnz wrote:Negrito doesn't actually have any true translation into English. "Little black man" is its crude form.

That's what I understand, although I'm no expert on languages or other cultures.

The actual translation is immaterial. The intention was there and, according to reports, Suarez used the word several times...obviously intending to cause offence. There are any number of words you can use to insult someone, without resorting to mentioning their race or colour.

An intention to insult, or an intention to racially insult?

Given that he was found guilty of racial abusing Evra, I would think that the translation is anything but immaterial.

by liverbnz Wed 21 Dec 2011, 3:08 pm

dyrewolfe wrote:
liverbnz wrote:Negrito doesn't actually have any true translation into English. "Little black man" is its crude form.

That's what I understand, although I'm no expert on languages or other cultures.

The actual translation is immaterial. The intention was there and, according to reports, Suarez used the word several times...obviously intending to cause offence. There are any number of words you can use to insult someone, without resorting to mentioning their race or colour.

What reports? In the papers? So what! The only person that has ever stated the Suarez used the word several times is Patrice Evra, nobody else. Neither do you have any idea of Suarez's intention, so stop pretending you do. You weren't there, and if you are taking evidence from newspapers then I don't want to continue this debate.

If Suarez is actually guilty of what he has been convicted by the FA for, then fair enough, I don't think I could support the man any longer and I would hope the club would take the same stance.

by dondelero Wed 21 Dec 2011, 3:15 pm

liverbnz wrote:
slyadams wrote:
fernando wrote:Liverpool statement
It is also our opinion that the accusation by this particular player was not credible - certainly no more credible than his prior unfounded accusations.

Frankly, an astonishing statement from Liverpool. The sort of thing I'd expect to see on a football message board, not coming out of a club. Who's running that place?

Why? It's stating a FACT. Evra has previous record of "unfounded and exagerrated" accustaions. Those are quotes from the FA following the investiagtion with the Chelsea groundsman. Liverpool's statement was probably carefully worded by a top set of lawyers, so I see no reason for anyone less knowledgable than them to question their professionalism.

Sorry for letting the FACTS get in the way of this bandwagon against Evra but you will find that it was others that made those claims.

by liverbnz Wed 21 Dec 2011, 3:28 pm

dondelero wrote:
liverbnz wrote:
slyadams wrote:
fernando wrote:Liverpool statement
It is also our opinion that the accusation by this particular player was not credible - certainly no more credible than his prior unfounded accusations.

Frankly, an astonishing statement from Liverpool. The sort of thing I'd expect to see on a football message board, not coming out of a club. Who's running that place?

Why? It's stating a FACT. Evra has previous record of "unfounded and exagerrated" accustaions. Those are quotes from the FA following the investiagtion with the Chelsea groundsman. Liverpool's statement was probably carefully worded by a top set of lawyers, so I see no reason for anyone less knowledgable than them to question their professionalism.

Sorry for letting the FACTS get in the way of this bandwagon against Evra but you will find that it was others that made those claims.

With Evra's evidence being as I quoted.

by Guest Wed 21 Dec 2011, 4:20 pm

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
Churchill wrote:So because I haven't been a victim of something, I'm not allowed to have a valid opinion?

An opinion yes, a valid opinion no.

God Churchill didn't you know that, it's like unless you've been assaulted before, you can't say that it's that bad...

by Fernando Wed 21 Dec 2011, 4:31 pm

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
Churchill wrote:So because I haven't been a victim of something, I'm not allowed to have a valid opinion?

An opinion yes, a valid opinion no.

It's a forum SOF , He can have whatever opinion he likes weather you agree or not.

by braveheart101 Wed 21 Dec 2011, 4:48 pm

When Evra first made these allegations he said there were cameras that caught Suarez racially abusing him so has anyone actually seen this?

Going on Liverpool's statement the only proof is from Evra himself, apparently nobody else heard anything so if that is the case how can the FA find Suarez guilty on Evra's word alone.

Why is John Terry facing criminal charges of racism but Suarez isn't? Is it because the police/CPS have looked at this case and know they couldn't prosecute because there is no evidence only one players word against the others?

The chairman of Kick It Out has said "No-one is saying Suarez is racist - he's probably a very nice guy. He's alleged to have made abusive comments and that's the basis on which the case was considered"

The FA statement says "Evra admitted in his evidence that he used abusive and insulting language towards Suarez" so is he going to be charged as well?

It will be interesting to see what the FA do about the Terry case, apparently he will only get a £2500 fine. With video evidence how can the FA treat Terry more leniently? The fact that he is England captain shouldn't have any bearing on the FA's decision.

by Soldier_Of_Fortune Wed 21 Dec 2011, 4:49 pm

fernando wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
Churchill wrote:So because I haven't been a victim of something, I'm not allowed to have a valid opinion?

An opinion yes, a valid opinion no.

It's a forum SOF , He can have whatever opinion he likes weather you agree or not.

An a opinion yes, a valid opinion no.

I do seem to be repeating myself here

by jro786 Wed 21 Dec 2011, 4:51 pm

fernando wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
Churchill wrote:So because I haven't been a victim of something, I'm not allowed to have a valid opinion?

An opinion yes, a valid opinion no.

It's a forum SOF , He can have whatever opinion he likes weather you agree or not.

sof

fernando is right, this is a forum so his opinion counts whether we agree or disagree

by Soldier_Of_Fortune Wed 21 Dec 2011, 4:52 pm

CactusJack2k12 wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
Churchill wrote:So because I haven't been a victim of something, I'm not allowed to have a valid opinion?

An opinion yes, a valid opinion no.

God Churchill didn't you know that, it's like unless you've been assaulted before, you can't say that it's that bad...

Read his previous comments. He is comparing two diffrent types of racism

by Beer Wed 21 Dec 2011, 4:53 pm

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
fernando wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
Churchill wrote:So because I haven't been a victim of something, I'm not allowed to have a valid opinion?

An opinion yes, a valid opinion no.

It's a forum SOF , He can have whatever opinion he likes weather you agree or not.

An a opinion yes, a valid opinion no.

I do seem to be repeating myself here

Do us all a favour and shut up then?

by Fernando Wed 21 Dec 2011, 4:53 pm

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
fernando wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
Churchill wrote:So because I haven't been a victim of something, I'm not allowed to have a valid opinion?

An opinion yes, a valid opinion no.

It's a forum SOF , He can have whatever opinion he likes weather you agree or not.

An a opinion yes, a valid opinion no.

I do seem to be repeating myself here

It's because you can't get into your head that Churchill can have his opinion and you can have yours weather you like it or not he's opinion is as valid as yours and Im not repeating myself again after this, ive been racially abused before by a bunch of black guys but doesn't mean i can't have a opinion just because it's the other way round does it.

by Soldier_Of_Fortune Wed 21 Dec 2011, 4:55 pm

Get over yourself. Cant I have an opinion on his opinion?

Sorry King Bear keyboard warrior, ignore me if your not happy with my comments

by Beer Wed 21 Dec 2011, 4:57 pm

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:Get over yourself. Cant I have an opinion on his opinion?

Sorry King Bear keyboard warrior, ignore me if your not happy with my comments

It's not that i'm 'not happy', it's just that you're talking absolute dross.

by President Trump Wed 21 Dec 2011, 4:58 pm

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:Get over yourself. Cant I have an opinion on his opinion?

Sorry King Bear keyboard warrior, ignore me if your not happy with my comments

You weren't having an opinion on his opinion you were telling him his opinion doesnt count

King BEER

by Fernando Wed 21 Dec 2011, 4:59 pm

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:Get over yourself. Cant I have an opinion on his opinion?

Sorry King Bear keyboard warrior, ignore me if your not happy with my comments

Yeah you can and now im going to have my opinion on yours

This is my opinion your so blindfully idiotic that you can't see that weather uve been involved in racism before or not doesn't matter when discussing a subject about it. now you can take your liverpool shirt and shove it where the sun doesn't shine SOF.

Don't like it?

well it's my opinion get over it.

by jro786 Wed 21 Dec 2011, 4:59 pm

fernando wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
fernando wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
Churchill wrote:So because I haven't been a victim of something, I'm not allowed to have a valid opinion?

An opinion yes, a valid opinion no.

It's a forum SOF , He can have whatever opinion he likes weather you agree or not.

An a opinion yes, a valid opinion no.

I do seem to be repeating myself here

It's because you can't get into your head that Churchill can have his opinion and you can have yours weather you like it or not he's opinion is as valid as yours and Im not repeating myself again after this, ive been racially abused before by a bunch of black guys but doesn't mean i can't have a opinion just because it's the other way round does it.

fernando

i was racially abused as well but disregarding one's opinion whether we agree or disagree is unlawful

i'm with you on this matter

by President Trump Wed 21 Dec 2011, 5:00 pm

fernando wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:Get over yourself. Cant I have an opinion on his opinion?

Sorry King Bear keyboard warrior, ignore me if your not happy with my comments

Yeah you can and now im going to have my opinion on yours

This is my opinion your so blindfully idiotic that you can't see that weather uve been involved in racism before or not doesn't matter when discussing a subject about it. now you can take your liverpool shirt and shove it where the sun doesn't shine SOF.

Don't like it?

well it's my opinion get over it.

Jam it in the hole Laugh

by Guest Wed 21 Dec 2011, 5:02 pm

Nando, Nando, Nando! clap

by Soldier_Of_Fortune Wed 21 Dec 2011, 5:05 pm

fernando wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:Get over yourself. Cant I have an opinion on his opinion?

Sorry King Bear keyboard warrior, ignore me if your not happy with my comments

Yeah you can and now im going to have my opinion on yours

This is my opinion your so blindfully idiotic that you can't see that weather uve been involved in racism before or not doesn't matter when discussing a subject about it. now you can take your liverpool shirt and shove it where the sun doesn't shine SOF.

Don't like it?

well it's my opinion get over it.

Same to you an your Gunner shirt. 2-0 thumbsup

by Soldier_Of_Fortune Wed 21 Dec 2011, 5:07 pm

King Beer wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:Get over yourself. Cant I have an opinion on his opinion?

Sorry King Bear keyboard warrior, ignore me if your not happy with my comments

It's not that i'm 'not happy', it's just that you're talking absolute dross.

And what. Sorry I don't see the difference in calling someone the n word and a black c***.

That's MY opinion

by beninho Wed 21 Dec 2011, 5:08 pm

I thought it had all come out that Suarez used his defence as he did not understand that the term Negrito or Negro is more offensive then in his homeland. Which is strange as he has been in Europe for a few years. Which is a poor excuse. He used the term in a manner to wind up the opposition. The guy is clearly a cheating footballer anyway.

by Beer Wed 21 Dec 2011, 5:08 pm

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
fernando wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:Get over yourself. Cant I have an opinion on his opinion?

Sorry King Bear keyboard warrior, ignore me if your not happy with my comments

Yeah you can and now im going to have my opinion on yours

This is my opinion your so blindfully idiotic that you can't see that weather uve been involved in racism before or not doesn't matter when discussing a subject about it. now you can take your liverpool shirt and shove it where the sun doesn't shine SOF.

Don't like it?

well it's my opinion get over it.

Same to you an your Gunner shirt. 2-0

Good effort on confirming the opinion that you're an idiot.

by **ADMIN** Wed 21 Dec 2011, 5:09 pm

Does this mean that all jurors should have been past victims of the crime they are presiding over otherwise their verdict should not be considered valid?

by Soldier_Of_Fortune Wed 21 Dec 2011, 5:09 pm

Dicey Reilly wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:Get over yourself. Cant I have an opinion on his opinion?

Sorry King Bear keyboard warrior, ignore me if your not happy with my comments

You weren't having an opinion on his opinion you were telling him his opinion doesnt count

King BEER

No I said he had an opinion. Not a valid one. In my opinion

by Soldier_Of_Fortune Wed 21 Dec 2011, 5:11 pm

King Beer wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
fernando wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:Get over yourself. Cant I have an opinion on his opinion?

Sorry King Bear keyboard warrior, ignore me if your not happy with my comments

Yeah you can and now im going to have my opinion on yours

This is my opinion your so blindfully idiotic that you can't see that weather uve been involved in racism before or not doesn't matter when discussing a subject about it. now you can take your liverpool shirt and shove it where the sun doesn't shine SOF.

Don't like it?

well it's my opinion get over it.

Same to you an your Gunner shirt. 2-0

Good effort on confirming the opinion that you're an idiot.

I love you to

by Guest Wed 21 Dec 2011, 5:16 pm

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:
Dicey Reilly wrote:
Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:Get over yourself. Cant I have an opinion on his opinion?

Sorry King Bear keyboard warrior, ignore me if your not happy with my comments

You weren't having an opinion on his opinion you were telling him his opinion doesnt count

King BEER

No I said he had an opinion. Not a valid one. In my opinion

You're opinions are idiotic and ill thought out

In my opinion

by Sponsored content