Yeah, you're right about the language difficulty. But I wonder how the panel & FA accept that Evra complained to the ref during the match and yet (we were assured) the ref supposedly didn't take note of Evra's complaints. I've no axe to grind with the referee - it's just that I wonder if he failed in his duty & this failure is being covered-up.
Evra accuses Suarez of racist remarks | Suarez guilty of racial abuse
- Thread starter Feeky Magee
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Yeah, you're right about the language difficulty. But I wonder how the panel & FA accept that Evra complained to the ref during the match and yet (we were assured) the ref supposedly didn't take note of Evra's complaints. I've no axe to grind with the referee - it's just that I wonder if he failed in his duty & this failure is being covered-up.
Someone tweeted:
From day 1 Liverpool knew they were in trouble and have been on a mission to lie, create a false sense of persecution and discredit Evra in hopes of saving Suarez.
They've tried to cover it all up and in doing so have deluded their own fans and sided with racism.
Well done.
There is some force in Mr McCormick's submission but it faces two difficulties. The first is
that there is an important difference between the situation of the interpreter and that of Mr
Comolli. In the interview on 2 November, the interpreter was seeking to translate the
Spanish phrase "Por que, negro?" into English. However, when Mr Comolli spoke to the
referee he told him the Spanish words that Mr Comolli understood from his conversation
in Spanish with Mr Suarez that Mr Suarez had used. It would be surprising if, in asking
Mr Suarez about a serious allegation and wanting to take care how the matter was dealt
with, Mr Comolli did not carefully note the exact Spanish words that Mr Suarez used. It
would also be surprising if Mr Suarez told Mr Comolli that he had said "Por que, negro?"
and Mr Comolli told the referee that Mr Suarez had said "Porque tu es negro". It is, of
course, possible, that Mr Comolli heard what Mr Suarez said in Spanish, and interpreted it
to mean something else, or translated it into another language (whether French or English)
and back again into Spanish before telling the referee. But, this was not suggested to us
and we doubt that Mr Comolli, as a Spanish speaker, would have gone about things in
that way. In addition, Mr Comolli told Mr Dalglish the Spanish words that Mr Suarez said
he had used, which Mr Dalglish said were "Tu es negro". Mr Suarez was still in the room
when Mr Comolli reported his words in Spanish to Mr Dalglish, and it is perhaps
surprising that Mr Suarez did not correct Mr Comolli if he got it wrong.
It seems like a massive cover up which went wrong to me.
that there is an important difference between the situation of the interpreter and that of Mr
Comolli. In the interview on 2 November, the interpreter was seeking to translate the
Spanish phrase "Por que, negro?" into English. However, when Mr Comolli spoke to the
referee he told him the Spanish words that Mr Comolli understood from his conversation
in Spanish with Mr Suarez that Mr Suarez had used. It would be surprising if, in asking
Mr Suarez about a serious allegation and wanting to take care how the matter was dealt
with, Mr Comolli did not carefully note the exact Spanish words that Mr Suarez used. It
would also be surprising if Mr Suarez told Mr Comolli that he had said "Por que, negro?"
and Mr Comolli told the referee that Mr Suarez had said "Porque tu es negro". It is, of
course, possible, that Mr Comolli heard what Mr Suarez said in Spanish, and interpreted it
to mean something else, or translated it into another language (whether French or English)
and back again into Spanish before telling the referee. But, this was not suggested to us
and we doubt that Mr Comolli, as a Spanish speaker, would have gone about things in
that way. In addition, Mr Comolli told Mr Dalglish the Spanish words that Mr Suarez said
he had used, which Mr Dalglish said were "Tu es negro". Mr Suarez was still in the room
when Mr Comolli reported his words in Spanish to Mr Dalglish, and it is perhaps
surprising that Mr Suarez did not correct Mr Comolli if he got it wrong.
It seems like a massive cover up which went wrong to me.
As with all lies, holes will be found somewhere in such an exhaustive and thorough investigation.
So he used the word negro the first time to mean South American.
Then the next time, don't touch me because you're South American.
Remind me, where is Suarez from? South America. That's it.
What a lying cnut.
Oops.
The position, therefore, is as follows. Mr Suarez spoke in Spanish to Mr Comolli soon after
the game about this serious allegation. Mr Suarez also spoke in Dutch to Mr Kuyt. Both
Mr Comolli and Mr Kuyt understood Mr Suarez to have told them that when he spoke to
Mr Evra he said words which translate into English as, "Because you are black". According
to Mr Suarez, Mr Comolli misheard what Mr Suarez said in Spanish, and Mr Kuyt
misheard what Mr Suarez said in Dutch.
So basically Suarez admitted it to Comolli and Kuyt, both then give evidence, and then had to change evidence when Suarez's account changed. Incredible. Absolutely incredible.
the game about this serious allegation. Mr Suarez also spoke in Dutch to Mr Kuyt. Both
Mr Comolli and Mr Kuyt understood Mr Suarez to have told them that when he spoke to
Mr Evra he said words which translate into English as, "Because you are black". According
to Mr Suarez, Mr Comolli misheard what Mr Suarez said in Spanish, and Mr Kuyt
misheard what Mr Suarez said in Dutch.
So basically Suarez admitted it to Comolli and Kuyt, both then give evidence, and then had to change evidence when Suarez's account changed. Incredible. Absolutely incredible.
Just have a quick question, not a WUM. I'm waiting for conclusivity on this and until then I have seen in other Liverpool forums that the three man panel consisted of an ex-horse trainer of Ferguson(?), a man who managed Ferguson's son(?) and an ex-pal of Ferguson(?). Can someone tell me if these are misguided?
Doesn't surprise me. Kenny would have been pissed out of his mind in the back of the room, slumped against a wall sitting on a fallen stool, slurring to himself while dribbling hard liquor, "Et Tu, Negrito?", despite many attempts from Mr Comolli and Mr Suarez to correct him.
They approved the INDEPENDENT panel members. The FA had nothing to do with the verdict.
Whoever writes Liverpool's statements is a fecking moron.
In the next 15 minutes we will see Phil Thompson's views on Sky Sports News - unmissable.
to be fair, their 'support' was in the form of covering it up for him.
No matter what the other evidence is like, this looks absolutely damning:
'"The second exchange alleged by Mr Evra was that he said "say it to me again, I'm going to
punch you", to which Mr Suarez replied "I don't speak to blacks". Mr Evra told his four
team-mates and the referee straight after the match that Mr Suarez had said this. Their
evidence was accepted in full by Mr Suarez."'
'"The second exchange alleged by Mr Evra was that he said "say it to me again, I'm going to
punch you", to which Mr Suarez replied "I don't speak to blacks". Mr Evra told his four
team-mates and the referee straight after the match that Mr Suarez had said this. Their
evidence was accepted in full by Mr Suarez."'
It's very damning Steve. Since when did United field just 5 players on a team? That's really taking the piss out of the opposition.
It was an ex-window cleaner not horse trainer.
I actually expected it to be one mans word against another and the ban to be based on Suarez's admission with ignorance not being an excuse.
It looks like there is more to it and some video evidence too.
Genuinely shocked that Liverpool defended him the way they did after knowing all this
It looks like there is more to it and some video evidence too.
Genuinely shocked that Liverpool defended him the way they did after knowing all this
Devil's advocate: Might Suarez just be accepting that Evra told them that? Ie he's accepting they are telling the truth about what Evra said, but Evra lied to them initially?
That's what I'm getting from 'one side', however outrageous. Thought I'd get the other side here.
Mr Dalglish told the referee that Mr Suarez responded with "you are black" having first
been taunted with "you are South American". Mr Comolli is not recorded as using the
word "taunted", but said that Mr Evra said "you are South American" to Mr Suarez who
responded with "Tues negro" which translates "you are Black". There is no suggestion here
that Mr Evra had said "Don't touch me", yet this seems now to be an essential part of Mr
Suarez's evidence. We were not given any explanation as to why the referee was not told
that Mr Evra had said "Don't touch me, South American", as opposed to "you are South
American".
It honestly looks like a massive cover up. I honestly can't believe Liverpool put out the statement they did!
been taunted with "you are South American". Mr Comolli is not recorded as using the
word "taunted", but said that Mr Evra said "you are South American" to Mr Suarez who
responded with "Tues negro" which translates "you are Black". There is no suggestion here
that Mr Evra had said "Don't touch me", yet this seems now to be an essential part of Mr
Suarez's evidence. We were not given any explanation as to why the referee was not told
that Mr Evra had said "Don't touch me, South American", as opposed to "you are South
American".
It honestly looks like a massive cover up. I honestly can't believe Liverpool put out the statement they did!
And finally I get to this bit, the findings of the panel
8 games isn't enough for that scumbag
8 games isn't enough for that scumbag
Did that side tell you Liverpool agreed the panel?
Gus Poyet is hemorrhaging uncontrollably.
Liverpool.. what the feck?
5. These unanswered questions may all be explained by the fact that events moved quickly,
and Mr Dalglish and Mr Comolli did not fully understand what Mr Suarez said to them
before speaking to the referee. Mr Kuyt's initial evidence to the FA might also be
attributable to his own misunderstanding of what Mr Suarez said to him.
306. An alternative explanation is that Mr Suarez was aware that he had said to Mr Evra
"Porque tu eres negro", and that this might have been overheard or caught on camera. 78
When he was questioned about it in the aftermath of the game, he did say that he had said
"Porque tu es/eres negro", as both Mr Comolli and Mr Kuyt understood at the time but he
sought to cast it in a different and better light. Subsequently, he changed that account to
explain that he used the word in a friendly and conciliatory way that was common in
Uruguay.
307. The discrepancies between what Mr Dalglish and Mr Comolli reported to the referee on
the one hand, and Mr Suarez's evidence as to what he said on the other hand, have not
been satisfactorily explained. At the very least, they demonstrate a confusion in Mr
Suarez's initial account of what he said, and an apparent inconsistency between that
account and the case that he advanced before u
Just read that. Read that and then the statement Liverpool put out.
What the hell were they thinking?
5. These unanswered questions may all be explained by the fact that events moved quickly,
and Mr Dalglish and Mr Comolli did not fully understand what Mr Suarez said to them
before speaking to the referee. Mr Kuyt's initial evidence to the FA might also be
attributable to his own misunderstanding of what Mr Suarez said to him.
306. An alternative explanation is that Mr Suarez was aware that he had said to Mr Evra
"Porque tu eres negro", and that this might have been overheard or caught on camera. 78
When he was questioned about it in the aftermath of the game, he did say that he had said
"Porque tu es/eres negro", as both Mr Comolli and Mr Kuyt understood at the time but he
sought to cast it in a different and better light. Subsequently, he changed that account to
explain that he used the word in a friendly and conciliatory way that was common in
Uruguay.
307. The discrepancies between what Mr Dalglish and Mr Comolli reported to the referee on
the one hand, and Mr Suarez's evidence as to what he said on the other hand, have not
been satisfactorily explained. At the very least, they demonstrate a confusion in Mr
Suarez's initial account of what he said, and an apparent inconsistency between that
account and the case that he advanced before u
Just read that. Read that and then the statement Liverpool put out.
What the hell were they thinking?
From the BBC
It added that any further offence "will give rise to consideration of a permanent suspension".
It added that any further offence "will give rise to consideration of a permanent suspension".
Look people. Suarez is a victim here. He had to play an entire match with Evra on the field. 
LFC putting club interests before racism. Well done.
LFC putting club interests before racism. Well done.
It's still Evra's fault at RAWK
They're a racist club!!!!!!!
They're a racist club!!!!!!!
Liverpool Football Club putting in a last ditch entry for the Fail of the Year award.
Nah, that's ridiculous. In fact, the panel members were as follows:
Sir Alan 'Frogie' Ferguson, QC
Mr Alexander Ferguson, Chairman of the Manchester United Fanclub
Mrs Patricia Evra, a moustachioed woman
115 pages of evidence. In all fairness to the FA, they've gone into great depth on this one.
Glen Johnson is the cnut.........he backs him!!!
cnut
Unbelievable. And he only got 8 games for that?
Nice to know that "Concha de tu hermana" is the spanish equivalent of fecking Hell and literally translates as "your sister's pussy".
Ooooh, now this would be interesting.
From Daniel Taylor of the Guardian:
This might be key line in FA findings: Suarez's explanation for calling Evra a negro "was unsustainable and simply incredible"
This might be key line in FA findings: Suarez's explanation for calling Evra a negro "was unsustainable and simply incredible"
I'd be interested to see how Liverpool react to all of this, though. They've already dug themselves into a very deep hole with their support of Suarez. Unless they don't stop now, their reputation as a club is only going to be damaged more and more as times goes on.
If he does it again.
Doubt he will