Suarez found guilty of Racism by FA

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

d260005p wrote:Who did? The FA? If the FA have said it is unreliable then why punish him? That makes no sense and not once have a seen the FA come out and say "Errrr yeh, the evidence is unreliable and without reason, therefore we are banning SUAREZ for 8 games and whacking a fine on top of that"

Have you honestly heard that? If you have and i have not then i will apologize

i read the written report, and i still believe that suarez is innocent come what may

Yeh, but thats not what i said. You think he is innocent. People think he is guilty. But the FA have found him guilty. Their statement is on BBC where Suarez contradicts himself, and that HE actually gives unreliable evidence.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/16375963.stm

Like i said, its done, he IS in fact guilty whether you believe it or not, and as i stated, the quicker people get over it the better. Its not like he is gone for the rest of the season!

d260005p wrote:Yeh, but thats not what i said. You think he is innocent. People think he is guilty. But the FA have found him guilty. Their statement is on BBC where Suarez contradicts himself, and that HE actually gives unreliable evidence.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/16375963.stm

Like i said, its done, he IS in fact guilty whether you believe it or not, and as i stated, the quicker people get over it the better. Its not like he is gone for the rest of the season!

like i said

corruption is there whether you like it or not, everyone wanted blatter out after his comments but he did make some sense but it was blown up as if his words was a bomb waiting to happen

corruption is amongst us

suarez innocent

suarez innocent

i never said that corruption is neither here nor there. But like you said, whether you like it or not, its there. Therefore, whether you like it or not, Suarez is guilty. Proven. Corruption or no corruption he said what he said he did what he did and was punished. Why are people on here still talking about it.

Suarez Guilty - FACT
Suarez Innocent - FICTION

d260005p wrote:i never said that corruption is neither here nor there. But like you said, whether you like it or not, its there. Therefore, whether you like it or not, Suarez is guilty. Proven. Corruption or no corruption he said what he said he did what he did and was punished. Why are people on here still talking about it.

Suarez Guilty - FACT
Suarez Innocent - FICTION

Yes Suarez has been found guilty but only based on PROBABILITY NOT FACTS.

Will you change your mind if Suarez and Liverpool lodge an appeal and win or will your opinion still be that he is guilty?

d260005p wrote:But has he been convicted??!! YES. How is it unfairly and unjustly? It obviously isnt. And like i said, the sooner people get over it the better.

It is unjust because it isn't based on FACTS.
Alot of people have come out and said that the word "negro" is not deemed racist in South America so I don't see how it can be interpreted to be in England by a Frenchman who isn't fluent in Spanish.

What would happen if England get to the World Cup finals in Brazil and 1 or more of their players uses a word that when translated into Spanish is deemed to be racist but has a different meaning in English?
Would the FA take the same stance and ban their own players or would they defend them?
Would FIFA get involved and ban them solely based on PROBABILITY?

Its the Law and he broke it. The FA (Football Association) said so. Get over it. And off Suarez's nuts

Seeing as you can't answer a question I presume that if Suarez does appeal and win you will still say he's guilty.

Mate, lets just end this now, he is guilty whether he appeals or not. Just leave it. Why you so bothered?

d260005p wrote:Mate, lets just end this now, he is guilty whether he appeals or not. Just leave it. Why you so bothered?

Because he has been made a scapegoat by the FA.
They haven't based their decision on facts.
They were going to find him guilty no matter what whereas they let Terry off and all he will get is a £2500 fine by the courts.

How can someone who appeals and wins still be guilty?

While Suarez was silly in what he said, i think Evra(as the evidence showed) also behaved badly and started the whole thing by talking about Suarez's sister in an infantile way.......Is Suarez a racist - no.
The FA are clapping themselves on the back here when in reality, this is political correctness gone mad............................

But we dont know any of this for a fact. Whether he be a scapegoat or not, that is personal opinion.

We are not part of the FA and therefore do not know the ins and outs as to what has gone on. If he appeals and wins, then maybe the FA will need to look at themselves. But , judging by the punishment that has been issued by the FA, it will probably be unlikely that Suarez will win an appeal.

Terry should be permanently suspended from football. Period. I mean if he gets less punishment then there will be UPROAR everywhere. Should be fined A LOT by the police AND given AT LEAST a 10 match if not more ban from FA.

Will they though? Doubt it. And that is a shame for Suarez.....and all of us footy fans.

He will have been made a scapegoat if the FA don't do anything with the Terry case especially if he is found guilty in a court of law.
How can a player who is found guilty by the courts not receive at least the same punishment as a player who is found guilty by the FA especially when it is based on probability and not fact.

braveheart101 wrote:

d260005p wrote:But has he been convicted??!! YES. How is it unfairly and unjustly? It obviously isnt. And like i said, the sooner people get over it the better.

It is unjust because it isn't based on FACTS.
Alot of people have come out and said that the word "negro" is not deemed racist in South America so I don't see how it can be interpreted to be in England by a Frenchman who isn't fluent in Spanish.

What would happen if England get to the World Cup finals in Brazil and 1 or more of their players uses a word that when translated into Spanish is deemed to be racist but has a different meaning in English?
Would the FA take the same stance and ban their own players or would they defend them?
Would FIFA get involved and ban them solely based on PROBABILITY?

braveheart

spot on

if he did say any racism it would've been flashing on the news like terry

how can a verdict based on probability be counted for?

this is not hawk-eye, and clearly the fa knows that but thinking that the fa wants to kick racism but ended up flat on their face

Exactly. The FA said that they viewed 'hidden video/tv footage' but if there was any footage why hasn't it been seen by the public. There was footage of Terry and footage of Suarez after the Fulham game both on tv and on the internet within the hour but as of now nobody outside of the FA has seen Suarez abuse Evra and as Evra himself said 'the cameras caught him say a word at least 10 times' so where is this footage? If it isn't made public after the 13th or after any appeal I think it's fair to say that there isn't any tv evidence anywhere.

suraez has been found guilty and been punished, shouldnt we move on from the issue, and leave the FA to deal with it.

braveheart101 wrote:

d260005p wrote:But has he been convicted??!! YES. How is it unfairly and unjustly? It obviously isnt. And like i said, the sooner people get over it the better.

It is unjust because it isn't based on FACTS.
Alot of people have come out and said that the word "negro" is not deemed racist in South America so I don't see how it can be interpreted to be in England by a Frenchman who isn't fluent in Spanish.

What would happen if England get to the World Cup finals in Brazil and 1 or more of their players uses a word that when translated into Spanish is deemed to be racist but has a different meaning in English?
Would the FA take the same stance and ban their own players or would they defend them?
Would FIFA get involved and ban them solely based on PROBABILITY?

Come off it man. He was pinching his skin to point out to all that he was referring to Evra's skin. The man made several racist remarks and is rightfully punished for it.

ps - the speak Portugese in Uruguay.

braveheart101 wrote:Seeing as you can't answer a question I presume that if Suarez does appeal and win you will still say he's guilty.

But what about you braveheart? If Suarez loses his appeal will you accept he's guilty?

Atila wrote:

braveheart101 wrote:Seeing as you can't answer a question I presume that if Suarez does appeal and win you will still say he's guilty.

But what about you braveheart? If Suarez loses his appeal will you accept he's guilty?

will they eck, they will run around crying injustice and its all a conspriacy to prevent liverpool challenging for 6th place!!

Liverpool have said they will not appeal against the decision and Suarez's ban is now immediate.

azania wrote:

braveheart101 wrote:

d260005p wrote:But has he been convicted??!! YES. How is it unfairly and unjustly? It obviously isnt. And like i said, the sooner people get over it the better.

It is unjust because it isn't based on FACTS.
Alot of people have come out and said that the word "negro" is not deemed racist in South America so I don't see how it can be interpreted to be in England by a Frenchman who isn't fluent in Spanish.

What would happen if England get to the World Cup finals in Brazil and 1 or more of their players uses a word that when translated into Spanish is deemed to be racist but has a different meaning in English?
Would the FA take the same stance and ban their own players or would they defend them?
Would FIFA get involved and ban them solely based on PROBABILITY?

Come off it man. He was pinching his skin to point out to all that he was referring to Evra's skin. The man made several racist remarks and is rightfully punished for it.

ps - the speak Portugese in Uruguay.

This is the problem, a lot people on here are forgetting about Suarez's intent, he was not being friendly. He referred to Evra's skin colour which changes everything.The problem also is that many probably feel that what was said SHOULD be acceptable and that Evra should have just laughed it off, which is why he is being viewed as a cry baby or oversensitive. It would be interesting to see if Suarez refers to Glen Johnson in this way as it is apparently a term of endearment in Uraguay. Maybe the FA should have incorporated some education for Suarez in conjuction with his club as part of the punishement, due to his upbringing and background rather than just giving him a huge ban as this is not actually addressing the problem which could be repeated.

All of this said Black players at times will have to accept that they will be racially abused at certain times for .eg in Spain and some Eastern European lands mainly by fans, this doesnt stop them from complaining off course but it is likely that it will not be viewed as severely as it is in this country because racism is part of the fabric of their societies. There also will be players who have been brought up as racists who may come from these lands and even born here so inevitably the odd word will slip out, they will not all of a sudden change because they are playing football among other nationalities. There maybe something that needs to be in place for this type of player rather than just banning them.

Could be yet more misguided management by Dalglish.

I don't think they necessarily needed Suarez tonight, Carroll's height could really trouble City and has in the past, but Suarez' first game back will be United at Old Trafford.

What they should've done is played Suarez tonight, announced tomorrow that they won't appeal, Suarez' last game banned would've been United, and that takes the pressure off the player and stops a situation which could become extremeley volatile.

Macclads wrote:Liverpool have said they will not appeal against the decision and Suarez's ban is now immediate.

surely case closed then, ive admitted my bias being a united fan but would have objected to the behaviour of lfc whoever they were. and there not a single lfc fan on here that would have defended this case if it were say rooney. suarez was stupid and got is ban move on it wasnt the worse thing ever but the behaviour of lfc and there fans is what has made this worse by defending him. ive heard more of the suarez case than terrys, mainly due to the actions (t-shirts etc) of the club.

Macclads wrote:Liverpool have said they will not appeal against the decision and Suarez's ban is now immediate.

I take it they have received the evidence used by the FA (which the FA said would take 2 weeks or so to get to them)

Y I Man wrote:

Macclads wrote:Liverpool have said they will not appeal against the decision and Suarez's ban is now immediate.

I take it they have received the evidence used by the FA (which the FA said would take 2 weeks or so to get to them)

Yes, but they dont accept Suarez is a racist. They dont want to undermine the FA's effort to stamp out racism to are happy for Suarez to be banned for 8 games to help this.

Atila wrote:

braveheart101 wrote:Seeing as you can't answer a question I presume that if Suarez does appeal and win you will still say he's guilty.

But what about you braveheart? If Suarez loses his appeal will you accept he's guilty?

I accept he said 'negro' once and once only but not in the context that Evra claims seeing as experts have admitted as such so if that makes him guilty then so be it. Why Suarez's and Kuyt's evidence was dismissed doesn't make any sense though.Lets just hope Terry gets the same punishment if he is found guilty

johnson2 wrote:

Y I Man wrote:

Macclads wrote:Liverpool have said they will not appeal against the decision and Suarez's ban is now immediate.

I take it they have received the evidence used by the FA (which the FA said would take 2 weeks or so to get to them)

Yes, but they dont accept Suarez is a racist. They dont want to undermine the FA's effort to stamp out racism to are happy for Suarez to be banned for 8 games to help this.

That's mighty big of Liverpool.

compelling and rich wrote:

Macclads wrote:Liverpool have said they will not appeal against the decision and Suarez's ban is now immediate.

surely case closed then, ive admitted my bias being a united fan but would have objected to the behaviour of lfc whoever they were. and there not a single lfc fan on here that would have defended this case if it were say rooney. suarez was stupid and got is ban move on it wasnt the worse thing ever but the behaviour of lfc and there fans is what has made this worse by defending him. ive heard more of the suarez case than terrys, mainly due to the actions (t-shirts etc) of the club.

Probably because the FA can't do anything till after the court case which will probably end up being nothing

braveheart101 wrote:

Atila wrote:

braveheart101 wrote:Seeing as you can't answer a question I presume that if Suarez does appeal and win you will still say he's guilty.

But what about you braveheart? If Suarez loses his appeal will you accept he's guilty?

I accept he said 'negro' once and once only but not in the context that Evra claims seeing as experts have admitted as such so if that makes him guilty then so be it. Why Suarez's and Kuyt's evidence was dismissed doesn't make any sense though.Lets just hope Terry gets the same punishment if he is found guilty

He has admitted saying it more.

Experts have also said is was racist. Calling someone a negro and pinching his skin cannot be viewed as anything other than racist. Deluded if you think otherwise.

dondelero wrote:
This is the problem, a lot people on here are forgetting about Suarez's intent, he was not being friendly. He referred to Evra's skin colour which changes everything.The problem also is that many probably feel that what was said SHOULD be acceptable and that Evra should have just laughed it off, which is why he is being viewed as a cry baby or oversensitive. It would be interesting to see if Suarez refers to Glen Johnson in this way as it is apparently a term of endearment in Uraguay. Maybe the FA should have incorporated some education for Suarez in conjuction with his club as part of the punishement, due to his upbringing and background rather than just giving him a huge ban as this is not actually addressing the problem which could be repeated.

All of this said Black players at times will have to accept that they will be racially abused at certain times for .eg in Spain and some Eastern European lands mainly by fans, this doesnt stop them from complaining off course but it is likely that it will not be viewed as severely as it is in this country because racism is part of the fabric of their societies. There also will be players who have been brought up as racists who may come from these lands and even born here so inevitably the odd word will slip out, they will not all of a sudden change because they are playing football among other nationalities. There maybe something that needs to be in place for this type of player rather than just banning them.

Suarez has admitted in his evidence that says it to Johnson all the time

johnson2 wrote:

He has admitted saying it more.

Experts have also said is was racist. Calling someone a negro and pinching his skin cannot be viewed as anything other than racist. Deluded if you think otherwise.

What page does it say that on? Must be near the end cause every part of Suarez's evidence says he only used it once and he didn't admit pinching Evra and there's no proof he did. All he said was he touched his arm.

braveheart101 wrote:

johnson2 wrote:

He has admitted saying it more.

Experts have also said is was racist. Calling someone a negro and pinching his skin cannot be viewed as anything other than racist. Deluded if you think otherwise.

What page does it say that on? Must be near the end cause every part of Suarez's evidence says he only used it once and he didn't admit pinching Evra and there's no proof he did. All he said was he touched his arm.

He can be seen pinching him, the FA have stated as much.

Fair play, you are sticking to your view point. It has clearly been proven as incorrect, but fair play none the less.

braveheart101 wrote:

dondelero wrote:
This is the problem, a lot people on here are forgetting about Suarez's intent, he was not being friendly. He referred to Evra's skin colour which changes everything.The problem also is that many probably feel that what was said SHOULD be acceptable and that Evra should have just laughed it off, which is why he is being viewed as a cry baby or oversensitive. It would be interesting to see if Suarez refers to Glen Johnson in this way as it is apparently a term of endearment in Uraguay. Maybe the FA should have incorporated some education for Suarez in conjuction with his club as part of the punishement, due to his upbringing and background rather than just giving him a huge ban as this is not actually addressing the problem which could be repeated.

All of this said Black players at times will have to accept that they will be racially abused at certain times for .eg in Spain and some Eastern European lands mainly by fans, this doesnt stop them from complaining off course but it is likely that it will not be viewed as severely as it is in this country because racism is part of the fabric of their societies. There also will be players who have been brought up as racists who may come from these lands and even born here so inevitably the odd word will slip out, they will not all of a sudden change because they are playing football among other nationalities. There maybe something that needs to be in place for this type of player rather than just banning them.

Suarez has admitted in his evidence that says it to Johnson all the time

Hmm wonder if Johnson is cool about it, does the evidence confirm?

It was clear that Suarez was guilty; after reading the report LFC probabaly decided they would be no point tying to appeal it.
Evra asked Suarez why did you do that and Suarez replied with 'Because you are black' and then said 'Dale negro' many times.

So you have seen the 'hidden tv evidence' The FA haven't proved anything they admit they only used probability. If it was in a court of law Suarez's and Kuyt's evidence would have had to be taken into account not dismissed.

amritia3ee wrote:It was clear that Suarez was guilty; after reading the report LFC probabaly decided they would be no point tying to appeal it.
Evra asked Suarez why did you do that and Suarez replied with 'Because you are black' and then said 'Dale negro' many times.

That's only Evra's account of what was said, Suarez only admitted saying it once but his evidence wasn't taken into account and nobody else heard it.

Well Kuyt didn't even hear what was going on. He didn't hear Suarez say negro at all; even though Suarez admitted he said it atleast once.

It was a pretty simple decision for the FA at the end; only Liverpool fans complaining, highly unlikely they would be complaining if this was a Man U or Everton player.

braveheart101 wrote:So you have seen the 'hidden tv evidence' The FA haven't proved anything they admit they only used probability. If it was in a court of law Suarez's and Kuyt's evidence would have had to be taken into account not dismissed.

This is not a court of law, it is the balance of probability which is many cases is fairer than proving beyond any doubt.

And johnson being cool with it is besides the point. He is racist abd has admitted using the word several times as well as pinching his skin and saying he doesnt talk to blacks. Clearly a racist.

But fair play to those sticking to his side, clearly proved wrong but I respect people who stick to their guns despite the evidence.

johnson2 wrote:

braveheart101 wrote:So you have seen the 'hidden tv evidence' The FA haven't proved anything they admit they only used probability. If it was in a court of law Suarez's and Kuyt's evidence would have had to be taken into account not dismissed.

And johnson being cool with it is besides the point. He is racist abd has admitted using the word several times as well as pinching his skin and saying he doesnt talk to blacks. Clearly a racist.

This isn't true. He never admitted saying this.
However based on the evidence the FA have come to the right decision.

Read the report again. He has never admitted using the word more than once or admitted pinching Evra. Only Evra has said that.

braveheart101 wrote:Read the report again. He has never admitted using the word more than once or admitted pinching Evra. Only Evra has said that.

I have already said that.

However he did admit to touching Evra's skin.

Yes he admitted touching his arm but never admitted pinching him. If there is tv evidence that shows him doing it then it should be made public otherwise it's Evra's word against Suarez's.

If Evra was that bothered about it why hasn't he made a complaint to the police

braveheart101 wrote:Yes he admitted touching his arm but never admitted pinching him. If there is tv evidence that shows him doing it then it should be made public otherwise it's Evra's word against Suarez's.

If Evra was that bothered about it why hasn't he made a complaint to the police

The FA system is different to the criminal system. The criminal system is easier to escape punishment. If the criminal system operated the same was as the FA then all major criminals would be jailed. In this instance the FA's system has worked better because Suarez is clearly a racist.

johnson2 wrote: In this instance the FA's system has worked better because Suarez is clearly a racist.

Well we don't know whether he is a 'racist' but we're pretty sure he said racist things that were racially offensive so I'll have to agree with you that the FA's system was better suited to this case.

amritia3ee wrote:

johnson2 wrote: In this instance the FA's system has worked better because Suarez is clearly a racist.

Well we don't know whether he is a 'racist' but we're pretty sure he said racist things that were racially offensive so I'll have to agree with you that the FA's system was better suited to this case.

If I punch someone in the face without provocation then I am a violent person. Suarez is a racist plain and simple.

So the FA are wrong by saying ' SUAREZ IS NOT A RACIST'

johnson2 wrote:

amritia3ee wrote:

johnson2 wrote: In this instance the FA's system has worked better because Suarez is clearly a racist.

Well we don't know whether he is a 'racist' but we're pretty sure he said racist things that were racially offensive so I'll have to agree with you that the FA's system was better suited to this case.

If I punch someone in the face without provocation then I am a violent person. Suarez is a racist plain and simple.

If a white player had said what Evra said about Suarez's sister and threatening to punch him he could/should be charged with inciting racism but Evra can say anything to anyone and get away with it because they are white

braveheart101 wrote:So the FA are wrong by saying ' SUAREZ IS NOT A RACIST'

Exactly

braveheart101 wrote:

johnson2 wrote:

amritia3ee wrote:

johnson2 wrote: In this instance the FA's system has worked better because Suarez is clearly a racist.

Well we don't know whether he is a 'racist' but we're pretty sure he said racist things that were racially offensive so I'll have to agree with you that the FA's system was better suited to this case.

If I punch someone in the face without provocation then I am a violent person. Suarez is a racist plain and simple.

If a white player had said what Evra said about Suarez's sister and threatening to punch him he could/should be charged with inciting racism but Evra can say anything to anyone and get away with it because they are white

What a load of nonsense.

Suarez said a racist comment, ergo, he is a racist.

You cant say racist comments but claim to not be racist. It defies logic.

braveheart101 wrote:

johnson2 wrote:

amritia3ee wrote:

johnson2 wrote: In this instance the FA's system has worked better because Suarez is clearly a racist.

Well we don't know whether he is a 'racist' but we're pretty sure he said racist things that were racially offensive so I'll have to agree with you that the FA's system was better suited to this case.

If I punch someone in the face without provocation then I am a violent person. Suarez is a racist plain and simple.

If a white player had said what Evra said about Suarez's sister and threatening to punch him he could/should be charged with inciting racism but Evra can say anything to anyone and get away with it because they are white

Not quite. If Evra had referred to Suarez or his sisters race then he could be quite rightly charged with inciting racism. Suarez should have been warned that he should not speak to black people in his cultural way as although accepted in his country and bizarrely viewed as a term of endearment in some quarters, it is not the same here.