Evra accuses Suarez of racist remarks | Suarez guilty of racial abuse

What I don't understand is why Evra would claim he doesn't think Suarez is a racist, respite what he is proclaiming him to have said. "I don't speak to blacks" - If that isn't the sign of a racist man, then feck knows what is.
 
prateik said:
If he does it again.
Doubt he will
Click to expand...

Knowing what he's like as a person, I actually wouldn't be shocked if he did do something similar once this has all started to die down.
 
RAWK are still doing the old "one mans word against another" bullshit.


SUAREZ (YOUR OWN PLAYER) ADMITTED USING THE WORD "NEGRO". YOU UTTER DICKWEEDS!!!!!

Its not one mans word against another if he actually ADMITTED IT!
 
Why did he only get an 8 game ban? I'd have banned him for the season. Kicking racism out indeed.
 
Had a look at RAWK.
Someone claiming that the FA have released these now to deflect attention away from our loss tonight :lol:
The report was given to the clubs last night and was always going to be made public tonight.
They really are stupid
 
I'd love to know what the Liverpool owners make of this. Surely they are above the childish biased 'we are the victims' attitude of the fans and even the manager of Liverpool. The owners seem to have big plans for Liverpool wanting to turn them into global giants, I can't see them condoning all that is going on, and the damage that is being done to the image of LFC by all of this. I think one day soon 'King Kenny' might have an interesting meeting with the owners and maybe get a slap back down to reality from them.
 
Wayne_Rooney said:
What I don't understand is why Evra would claim he doesn't think Suarez is a racist, respite what he is proclaiming him to have said. "I don't speak to blacks" - If that isn't the sign of a racist man, then feck knows what is.
Click to expand...

Maybe Evra felt it was "just" sledging? Completely unacceptable, but not Suarez's true feelings?
 
Wayne_Rooney said:
What I don't understand is why Evra would claim he doesn't think Suarez is a racist, respite what he is proclaiming him to have said. "I don't speak to blacks" - If that isn't the sign of a racist man, then feck knows what is.
Click to expand...

Because Suarez has just done it to wind Evra up

TBH that to me is even worse than a real racist who is probably acting out of ignorance - Suarez knows exactly what he is doing and what effect it will have on Evra.
 
Well the report is very damning indeed. The 8 game suspension now appears to be too light a punishment.
 
Vidic_In_Moscow said:
I'd love to know what the Liverpool owners make of this. Surely they are above the childish biased 'we are the victims' attitude of the fans and even the manager of Liverpool. The owners seem to have big plans for Liverpool wanting to turn them into global giants, I can't see them condoning all that is going on, and the damage that is being done to the image of LFC by all of this. I think one day soon 'King Kenny' might have an interesting meeting with the owners and maybe get a slap back down to reality from them.
Click to expand...

The interesting thing would be, how would Dalglish then react to that if he was told off by the owners? He's not the sort of person who simply accepts that he's wrong, and who then would back down without a fight.
 
Ole's_toe_poke said:
RAWK are still doing the old "one mans word against another" bullshit.


SUAREZ (YOUR OWN PLAYER) ADMITTED USING THE WORD "NEGRO". YOU UTTER DICKWEEDS!!!!!

Its not one mans word against another. HE ADMITTED IT!
Click to expand...

Yeah, and this is the FA's actual response to that:

We are concerned with
whether the words or behaviour were abusive or insulting when used in a football match
played in England under the FA Rules.
Click to expand...

No linguistic nuance or cultural misunderstanding. Quite simply a word that simply isn't acceptable on the football pitches of this country.
 
Haha! Look at this!

He asked Mr Evra, as the visiting captain, to call the colour.
Mr Marriner tossed the coin, it came down yellow, and he awarded it to Steven Gerrard
who elected to stay in their current ends. Manchester United had kick off. Mr Evra
remonstrated that he had called correctly but, Mr Marriner said, he had not. Mr Evra then
spoke to Ryan Giggs about it, and Mr Marriner walked over to Mr Evra to assure him that
he (Mr Marriner) had got it right. Mr Evra's evidence was that when such a coin was
used, he always called yellow given that the alternative, blue, is a Manchester City colour,
which he would never call

fecking love you Paddy
 
cheesy said:
I'd be interested to see how Liverpool react to all of this, though.
Click to expand...

'We are deeply shocked and outraged by the panel's report; we'd be saddennened too if we knew how to spell it. Since Luis Suarez arrived on the shores of this great kingdom, we have found him to be a gentle, kind soul, utterly unlike the cheating bag of shite we thought we were signing. In truth, we were sodding desperate - I mean, who the f*ck would willingly rely on Dirk Bloody Kuyt to fire them back to the UEFA Casino League? So, basically we're standing by our man, just like Tammy Wynette only with more annoying accents. Blah blah blah Thatcher blah blah 9/11 blah blah. Love, Kenn...I mean, Liverpool FC.'
 
Sewelly The Geordie said:
If Liverpool appeal the ban should not only be extended but there should be incriminations for LFC as a whole.
Click to expand...

I was actually thinking a similar thing. It's okay appealing most things, because people can have different views, but the evidence against Suarez looks pretty substantial here. If Liverpool appeal against concrete evidence, it really does make them look like a club that supports racism.
 
cheesy said:
I was actually thinking a similar thing. It's okay appealing most things, because people can have different views, but the evidence against Suarez looks pretty substantial here. If Liverpool appeal against concrete evidence, it really does make them look like a club that supports racism.
Click to expand...

Or atleast willing to forgo all morals if it benefits them on the pitch.
 
Assuming Mr Suarez responded with "Porque tu eres negro", this would be interpreted in
Uruguay and other regions of Latin America as racially offensive. When the noun is used
in the way described by Mr Evra, it is not a friendly form of address, but is used in an
insulting way: it is given as the rationale for an act of physical aggression (the foul), as if
the person deserved such an attack since they are black.
Click to expand...

Yeah its definitely Evra's fault.
 
Can't wait till Liverpool players start training in Suarez masks.
 
Twigginater said:
Haha! Look at this!

He asked Mr Evra, as the visiting captain, to call the colour.
Mr Marriner tossed the coin, it came down yellow, and he awarded it to Steven Gerrard
who elected to stay in their current ends. Manchester United had kick off. Mr Evra
remonstrated that he had called correctly but, Mr Marriner said, he had not. Mr Evra then
spoke to Ryan Giggs about it, and Mr Marriner walked over to Mr Evra to assure him that
he (Mr Marriner) had got it right. Mr Evra's evidence was that when such a coin was
used, he always called yellow given that the alternative, blue, is a Manchester City colour,
which he would never call

fecking love you Paddy
Click to expand...
That is class :lol:
 
feck sake.

The report has evidence that Kuyt/Comolli changed key statements from straight after the match to the trial.

Suarez admits using "negro" and the FA bring in cultural experts who say it is only ok in Uruguay if used with someone who is friendly with the person using the word, and it is NEVER acceptable to use when scowling.

Suarez gets key evidence wrong, including forgetting key moments of the sequence.
 
Vidic_In_Moscow said:
Mr Suarez's account of his admitted use of the word "negro" changed several times. He
seemed unsure of when the admitted use took place and what triggered it. His account
seemed to change in an attempt to fit in with the video evidence.
Click to expand...

Slippery feck!
Click to expand...

SteveJ said:
From the Guardian's Owen Gibson:

Owen Gibson@owen_g

Independent panel found Evra to be a "credible witness" and Suarez to be "unreliable in relation to matters of critical importance".
Click to expand...

This is the crux, right here. The caught Suarez changing his story to fit the video evidence.

Thus they felt completely justified taking Evra's word as it was obvious that Suarez was LYING.

feck you Luiz Suarez, you should be banned for 2 years for what you said.
 
Sewelly The Geordie said:
Very good journalist IMO but he was way out of line with that piece.
Click to expand...

I was baffled by his reaction to it last week on the World Football Phone In, when he said that the FA's reaction should have been to release a statement acknowledging Uruguay's history of footballing equality and rejecting their previous support of the Rous FIFA administration.

Neither of those things were on trial. Or relevant.
 
This will go down well:

Mr Evra
229. Mr Evra has played for Manchester United and France for a number of years. He has
captained both. He speaks a number of languages including Senegalese, French, Spanish,
59
Italian and some Portuguese. He gave his evidence to us in English. Although an
interpreter was present to assist him in giving evidence if he required it, in the event he
did not.
230. The FA applied for Mrs Wiley, the Assistant Club Secretary of Manchester United to be
permitted to attend the hearing while Mr Evra gave evidence for the purpose of reducing
his anxiety, which we allowed.
231. We found Mr Evra to be an impressive witness. He gave his evidence to us in a calm,
composed and clear manner. Due to the circumstances in which the tape of the FA
interview of Mr Evra on 20 October came to light, which we have described in paragraphs
18-19 above, we were able to listen to him giving his account of events on that previous
occasion also. So far as we could tell from listening to the tape, he gave his evidence in a
similar way to that in which he gave it at the hearing before us.
232. Mr Evra also demonstrated a measure of balance in his evidence. For example, he was
prepared to make a number of concessions before us. Prior to 15 October 2011, Mr Evra
and Mr Suarez had played against each other when Mr Evra was playing for Manchester
United and in a France v Uruguay match. They had no relationship outside football, and
Mr Evra had experienced no problems with Mr Suarez on the pitch before this match. In
his written evidence, Mr Evra said:
"There is no need for any player to be racially abusive towards another player, it's
completely out of order. I was so surprised because Suarez has played with many
black players and I don't think he's racist but I don't know why he said that."
233. In his oral evidence, after giving his account of what Mr Suarez said when they were in
the goalmouth, Mr Evra said:
"For me it was like I think a bad dream, because I respect so much that player
because he's a really good player"
234. In giving his account of their exchanges in the goalmouth, Mr Evra described how he
started the conversation with the offensive phrase, "Concha de tu hermana". He said this
in his first interview with the FA on 20 October, and included it in his witness statement
placed before us, even though it reflected badly on him. Mr Suarez did not hear Mr Evra
60
use these words, and would not have known that he had used them unless Mr Evra had
said so.

Mr Suarez
235. Mr Suarez speaks little English. There were occasions during the hearing when he clearly
understood a question in English because he gave a response in a few words of English or
by a nod of the head. But these were few and far between.
236. Mr Suarez was present for the whole of the hearing. It was inevitably a stressful time for
Mr Suarez facing, as he was, a serious charge in unfamiliar surroundings. He sat with his
own interpreter, who translated the proceedings for him throughout. When he gave
evidence, he did so through an independent interpreter. He gave evidence in a respectful
manner. We are conscious of the difficulties for Mr Suarez in giving evidence in the
circumstances which we have described.
237. However, Mr Suarez was not as impressive a witness as Mr Evra. His answers were not
always clear or directly addressed to the question. We give one example in paragraph 246
below. Whether this was due to language difficulties or evasiveness was not entirely clear
and so, whenever we could, we gave Mr Suarez the benefit of the doubt. We were
certainly more concerned by the substance of his evidence (as explained below) than by
the manner in which he gave it.
Click to expand...

Heh. Paddy even defended Suarez then.
 
Proud of Paddy and the club as a whole after this. Firstly: for him for standing by his convictions and not being prepared to accept being abused in such a disgusting manner. Secondly: for the club backing him unreservedly, then when the backlash arrived for keeping a dignified silence - as asked - and simply presenting their evidence as coherently and honestly as possible.

Hopefully this is a huge step forward in kicking this horrible plight on the game out for good and those backward "what stays on the pitch" neanderthals finally get a wake-up call.
 
Vidic_In_Moscow said:
Every premier league team should wear Suarez t-shirts now with the words "8 games not enough" written over them.
Click to expand...

The funny thing is, if that happened, the clubs would be punished for doing so. They could then simply ask, what was different between this and what Liverpool did? The answer is, there is no difference. Liverpool should have received harsh punishment for those t-shirts.
 
What strikes me is that in comparison to Suarez' shall we say... fluid story, Evra's remarks throughout the testimony of Marriner, Giggs, Hernandez, Anderson, Nani, Valencia and SAF are very consistent. Across all of these the conversation is alleged to have gone the way the panel found.

OBVIOUSLY he made the whole thing up on the spot while playing a football match and had enough time to commit the entire thing to memory before going down the tunnel and complaining. Clearly.
 
Take your retarded player, retarded club and retarded behaviour and do one.

Monumental bellends the lot of them.
 
cheesy said:
The funny thing is, if that happened, the clubs would be punished for doing so. They could then simply ask, what was different between this and what Liverpool did? The answer is, there is no difference. Liverpool should have received harsh punishment for those t-shirts.
Click to expand...

Tell you what though, if those shirts had a Lloyds or HSBC (for example) logo on them, there'd be bans & fines galore.
 
After that, I think that anyone who has criticised Evra should really come out and take a good, long look at themselves.

It's not just Liverpool fans, as well. All over, I've seen plenty of people coming out and criticising Evra, saying that he should just let it go, and that he is playing the race card. Personally, I find that disgusting, as he's conducted himself well throughout the whole case. He could've come out and thrown non-stop accusations at Suarez, but he didn't, and he even defended him in a way.
 
The one thing I don't really understand is that Liverpool believed they could essentially 'cover it up'. If it didn't come out now it was bound to in a few years anyway. Players will leave and time will pass and somebody will eventually tell all on the Liverpool end of this mess.
 
On a sidenote, I imagine there are a few unhappy football hacks out there. Saturday night ruined now with editors demanding a report to file for tomorrow's papers. Imagine having to break all that down now :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.