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

115 pages. fecking hell, not reading that. Suarez tried to provoke Evra. I don't think he is a racist. Just a horrible person that is all.
 
championo said:
115 pages. fecking hell, not reading that. Suarez tried to provoke Evra. I don't think he is a racist. Just a horrible person that is all.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the report finds that Suarez made a racial reference several times, not just one comment. And went as far as saying things like "because you are black" when Evra asked why Suarez kicked him.

I had it down as Suarez making a racist comment, which doesnt mean he is a racist just that he said something out of order that he clearly shouldnt have.

But it turns out his reasoning during the game was absolutely racist. Not "100% not racist" as Poyet had claimed.
 
Well, I've read it. It's pretty clear (but repetitive!) on both the evidence and the reasoning behind the verdict and punishment.

I've also read the comments and highlights on here so I'll just throw in a couple of extra bits that I'm pleased to see cleared up.

First those vague comments about Hernandez using the term "negrito" - from para 353 - A Mexican footballer, Omar Esparza, is widely known in Mexico as "el Negrito". Hernandez, the Manchester United player, has been a close friend of Omar Esparza for many years and refers to him as "el Negrito" in an affectionate way. Hernandez admitted that terms such as "Negrito" can be used with close friends and in certain situations without it being offensive.

No surprise there.

Then there was the allegation about Evra using the term "South American" - which migrated in some sections of the press to a rather offensive Spanish term "sudaca". Apparently even Suarez said it was South American, spoken in English, which doesn't really qualify as an insult. Even so, Evra says he didn't say it, "What's the point?" as he phrased it.

I had also wondered if Evra had tried to report the remarks to Marriner during the game and apparently he did. What he didn't say to the ref was that rather odd comment on getting a yellow card of, "Is it because I'm black?" that someone leaked to the press.

Anyway, I'm glad the report's out. I hope Liverpool get their heads sorted out soon, we really don't need another batch of fuel on the fire before our next match with them.
 
Omar Esparza doesn't even have a different color of skin than other Mexicans, how could he see it as offensive?
 
The outrage of Liverpool fans about how their player would be unfairly branded as a racist looks fecking stupid now, doesn't it?

Smalltime, bitter, pathetic, lying cnuts.
 
Poor Scousers, all those months of research about the South American culture and the relevance of word Negrito, where instead the word used was Negro. I still can't get my mind how the hell does Liverpool club defend the use of word "negro".
 
It's just the spanish for black though, isn't it? They were talking in Spanish at the time so the word, in isolation, isn't as pejorative as it would be in English.

The context in which it was used, though, was despicable. Far worse than you'd think from the earlier reports.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
It's just the spanish for black though, isn't it? They were talking in Spanish at the time so the word, in isolation, isn't as pejorative as it would be in English.

The context in which it was used, though, was despicable. Far worse than you'd think from the earlier reports.
Click to expand...

Yes that was far worse than I had first too. Which actually does make it all the more appalling. What a pathetic excuse of a human being
 
Thing is it's Saurez isn't it? he's not actually been the model professional in the past has he? biting players, cheating at the WC, diving and now racially abusing fellow professionals. Some CV.
 
Only Liverpool could turn one of their players racially abusing another into them being victims. Its unbelievable.

Suarez is an utter scumbag, why would he be talking affectionately to Evra in a match in which they were both trying to wind each other up?
 
Is there real evidence in the report or it is still he said she said? Looks like Pool fans are still not convinced of any wrong doing on Suarez's part.
The FA ( SAF's friends) want to stick it to Liverpool.
 
championo said:
Is there real evidence in the report or it is still he said she said? Looks like Pool fans are still not convinced of any wrong doing on Suarez's part.
The FA ( SAF's friends) want to stick it to Liverpool.
Click to expand...

There's evidence that points to that Suarez is a liar, while there's nothing suggesting that Evra's not telling the truth.
 
Reading through some of the report, interesting that broadcasters provided footage not seen on TV. I say this because I remember initially we were wondering how the FA could prosecute based on video evidence based on the camera angles that we saw.
 
EricaNo7 said:
He really is a nasty little twerp isn't he? I've just read in the other thread what he said about his handball in the World Cup
Click to expand...

If I were Liverpool, I'd be shot off him in the summer. He's more hassle than he's worth, he's a good player but he's clearly overhyped...I think Berbatov's scored more this season...and he's not even played much. Liverpool have lost big time on this, and their actions could be seen as condoning racism...something needs to be done in order to repair some damage.
 
I tried to keep neutral to an extent with all this, but with the statement, Liverpool made themselves look silly.....now it's just ridiculous. Their digging a bigger hole with it, it's insane how awfully they've handled this.

ps. I read the whole fecking thing on the toilet this morning. not a cool way to start the year.
 
"MR GREANEY: Mr Suarez, the first thing I would like to ask you, now that we have seen those again, is: is it correct, as you say in paragraph 27 of your witness statement, that you were trying to defuse or calm down the situation in the goal mouth?

A. That's why I was explaining to him that it was a normal foul.

Q. Let me be as clear as I can. Was your aim, when you were in the goal mouth, and speaking to Mr Evra, to calm down the situation?

A. I wasn't thinking about speaking to anyone. He was the one to come to me and speak to me.
Q. What we want to know, or at least I do, is what was in your mind? Was it in your mind to try to calm down the situation?

A. He was asking me, "Why did you kick me?" Those were football conversations, and I replied, "This is a normal foul. What do you want me to do?"

Q. Do you see paragraph 27 of your statement? Does it read: "I was trying to defuse or calm the situation"?

A. By the gesture I was doing with my hands, I could show that I was trying to explain the situation, because these are conversations that you have in the field.

Q. Mr Suarez, I have to suggest to you that my question is really a very simple one. In the goal mouth, and in particular as you pinched the skin of Mr Evra, do you say you were trying to calm the situation?

A. Not after the pinch, because he was saying that he was going to hit me.

Q. I'll just make one more attempt, and then we will move on. In your
statement, over which we have understood you took some care, you have said of the pinching: "I was trying to defuse the situation." All I wish to know is whether that is true or not.

A. I was not trying to calm down the situation, but trying to explain to Evra why I was doing this foul, and when - then he replied, "I'm going to hit you", and I was trying to show him that he was not untouchable, not in the foul and not by the gesture that I did with the - by the pinch I was doing to his arm, that he wasn't untouchable.
Click to expand...

When Suarez was interviewed at the hearing, was he interviewed in Spanish or English?

If the interview was in english, maybe these inconsistencies are due to Suarez poor command of english, in the same way that Drogba's "sometimes i dive" came out in a way that wasn't intended.

I still can't believe Suarez was racist and i guess i'm trying to play devil's advocate exploring all possibilities. The inconsistencies in Suarez's stories are baffling and surely its down to language and misunderstanding? Other wise not only is Suarez guilty he was also lying!
 
Skholesy said:
When Suarez was interviewed at the hearing, was he interviewed in Spanish or English?

If the interview was in english, maybe these inconsistencies are due to Suarez poor command of english, in the same way that Drogba's "sometimes i dive" came out in a way that wasn't intended.

I still can't believe Suarez was racist and i guess i'm trying to play devil's advocate exploring all possibilities. The inconsistencies in Suarez's stories are baffling and surely its down to language and misunderstanding? Other wise not only is Suarez guilty he was also lying!
Click to expand...

He had two translators, one that was his own and one that was independent. H
 
Hilarious how the only side of the story to actually leak was the one Suarez/Liverpool provided, with the "South American" insult intact, "you're booking me because I'm black" and the single instance of "negro" being used by Suarez.

Doesn't really take a genius to work out where the leak was coming from does it? A shame it probably can't be proved, because that would make for another disciplinary hearing for sure.
 
Skholesy said:
When Suarez was interviewed at the hearing, was he interviewed in Spanish or English?

If the interview was in english, maybe these inconsistencies are due to Suarez poor command of english, in the same way that Drogba's "sometimes i dive" came out in a way that wasn't intended.

I still can't believe Suarez was racist and i guess i'm trying to play devil's advocate exploring all possibilities. The inconsistencies in Suarez's stories are baffling and surely its down to language and misunderstanding? Other wise not only is Suarez guilty he was also lying!
Click to expand...

Suarez admitted to Comiolli in Spanish and Kuyt in Dutch that he called Evra a negro.
Besides their were two linguistic experts and Liverpool's defense counsel who was there to advise Suarez.
 
All interviews were done in his native language with the presence of an interpreter from Liverpool as well as an independent interpreter.
 
Where did you find that transcript Skholesy? Do they have transcripts of all the interviews in the original report? Must have missed them then.
 
Well, he told Comolli, Dalglish and Kuyt what he said...but I suspect Comolli panicked and tried covering it up knowing the severity of it all. I think he'll carry the can once the dust settles.
 
Skholesy said:
Another poster posted that in this thread a few pages back, 137 i think it was...

Edit: it was page 135 of this thread, post #5376 by RonaldoVII
Click to expand...

Ah cheers. Just did a quick search of the report, that's the only part of any transcript they've included. Don't see why they can't release all the transcripts as well as the additional video evidence.
 
Skholesy said:
When Suarez was interviewed at the hearing, was he interviewed in Spanish or English?

If the interview was in english, maybe these inconsistencies are due to Suarez poor command of english, in the same way that Drogba's "sometimes i dive" came out in a way that wasn't intended.

I still can't believe Suarez was racist and i guess i'm trying to play devil's advocate exploring all possibilities. The inconsistencies in Suarez's stories are baffling and surely its down to language and misunderstanding? Other wise not only is Suarez guilty he was also lying!
Click to expand...

Directly above those quotes, where the paragraph starts:
Mr Greaney cross-examined Mr Suarez about this paragraph in Mr Suarez's witness
statement, just after showing Mr Suarez a clip of the goalmouth incident. The extract from
the transcript below omits the translation of the questions into Spanish, and Mr Suarez's
answers in Spanish. The answers given below are the interpreter's translation of Mr
Suarez's answers in Spanish.
Click to expand...
 
KM said:
Suarez admitted to Comiolli in Spanish and Kuyt in Dutch that he called Evra a negro.
Besides their were two linguistic experts and Liverpool's defense counsel who was there to advise Suarez.
Click to expand...

Not just that he called him a negro but that he said 'because you're a black'

This is what Comolli and Kuyt understood him to have said, having spoken to him in Spanish and Dutch respectively.

Suarez later claimed that both had misheard him. Comolli is fluent in Spanish and Kuyt is native Dutch. Strange that both would mishear the exact same phrase in two different languages.

It's sad also that Comolli will have known that phrasing is extremely racist yet chose to cover Suarez's arse. The club and its staff lack integrity from top to bottom.
 
Skywarden said:
Directly above those quotes, where the paragraph starts:
Click to expand...

Ah apologies. Read only the post on here, not the actual report.

Ah well, that settles it for me then - that lying scum deserve more than an 8 game ban, more for having the cheek to try and cover things up than for the act itself.

I do hope he learns from it and it doesn't negatively affect the rest of his career though. Would be a shame as he is a very good player
 
gooDevil said:
No, that's what I'm saying. That's what it said:



I mean, that's as basic as it gets, he admitted the use of 'negro' was not friendly. I'm not sure how they came to that conclusion, but I suspect he was asked directly and said as much, like he eventually admitted when questioned about the pinch, as posted earlier. Or am I way too tired to understand our disagreement? I'll try again in the morning!
Click to expand...

The word "admitted" in the report refers only to use of the word negro itself, but he maintained that it was conciliatory and friendly throughout. The second part of the sentence, 'was not conciliatory and friendly' is just a finding of the panel, rather than what he admitted. If he had admitted it as you read it then there would surely be no dispute over it.

Suarez admitted that the pinch wasn't friendly, but he hasn't admitted to any of the conversation the Evra claimed they had about being wanting to show Evra he wasn't untouchable, has he? It's a lot to keep straight. I thought Suarez only admitted to answering 'Por Que, Negro' when asked something about the foul by Evra.

But his testimony was so bad, and off, and then he changed it to agree with video testimony given later, that they've decided Evra's word is much more reliable here.
Click to expand...

He admitted that a conversation took place, a dispute over a foul, which he supposedly intended to calm by pinching Evra. He maintained that he did not use the word negro in this dispute.
 
I wonder if Kuyt and Comolli feel bad now.

If it wasn't for them Liverpool would have had a much stronger case. Idiots trying to cover up everything, and then Kuyt goes and wears a Suarez shirt.

Bizarre.
 
Skholesy said:
Ah apologies. Read only the post on here, not the actual report.

Ah well, that settles it for me then - that lying scum deserve more than an 8 game ban, more for having the cheek to try and cover things up than for the act itself.

I do hope he learns from it and it doesn't negatively affect the rest of his career though. Would be a shame as he is a very good player
Click to expand...

The inconsistency in his defence is absolutely baffling. This for example:

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". Secondly, at least as expressly reported by Mr Dalglish, Mr Suarez's remark
was a riposte to being taunted by Mr Evra. If that is correct, it would suggest that Mr
Dalglish understood Mr Suarez's comment to be in the nature of retaliation for having
been called "South American". But that would suggest that the riposte "You are black" was
used in a derogatory sense, which is contrary to Mr Suarez's case. In fact, Mr Suarez told
us that he did not consider being described as South American to be derogatory, so it is
difficult to understand why this was referred to as a "taunt".
Click to expand...

I mean really? Who told them they would get anywhere with this shitty inconsistency? And they have the nerves to consider an appeal. Amazing.
 
I honestly can't believe Liverpool were aware of some of those facts and still paraded around wearing t-shirts. Kuyt reported Suarez said "because you are black" and yet he still goes out in a public display of protest. fecking disgrace of a club.

If I were the owner I'd get rid of Kenny and Comolli immediately, seriously what were they thinking
 
Twigginater said:
I wonder if Kuyt and Comolli feel bad now.

If it wasn't for them Liverpool would have had a much stronger case. Idiots trying to cover up everything, and then Kuyt goes and wears a Suarez shirt.

Bizarre.
Click to expand...

Also, putting that Suarez said "Dale, negro" to Toure in a friendly manner into the written statement was a huge blow to their defence
 
I know I have said this before but has an employer don't Liverpool have a duty to do something.
It is clear now that the racism is much worse than first thought and Suarez has been found out to be lying.
In any other place of work the person would be sacked , why should football be any different , I know your all going to say it because of the money and they wont sack him , but is it not going to be bad on them that they openly supporting a racist and a lying one at that.
They could lose much more in lost sponsorship , than the money for Suarez.
 
Dalglish seems to be a law unto himself, he goes blundering into these things like a tit without even thinking and no-one at that club dares to say anything to him. Maybe on the school yard saying 'You are black' in response to a "taunt" of "You are South American" would be grounds for both men to be treated equally, but not when there are FA rules forbidding references to colour, but none to references of continent.

If it was a taunt, calling him South American in a derogatory way (which I find a bit incredible anyway) and Suarez responded in kind by saying 'You are black' in a derogatory way, which it obviously would be in response to an insult or taunt then Suarez is definitely guilty as charged and bang to rights. There is no self defence rule when it comes to these sorts of things. Perhaps there is a case to be made against Evra as well, maybe "King Kenny" thought he was at a different trial. cnut of a man.
 
kietotheworld said:
Dalglish seems to be a law unto himself, he goes blundering into these things like a tit without even thinking and no-one at that club dares to say anything to him. Maybe on the school yard saying 'You are black' in response to a "taunt" of "You are South American" would be grounds for both men to be treated equally, but not when there are FA rules forbidding references to colour, but none to references of continent.

If it was a taunt, calling him South American in a derogatory way (which I find a bit incredible anyway) and Suarez responded in kind by saying 'You are black' in a derogatory way, which it obviously would be in response to an insult or taunt then Suarez is definitely guilty as charged and bang to rights. There is no self defence rule when it comes to these sorts of things. Perhaps there is a case to be made against Evra as well, maybe "King Kenny" thought he was at a different trial. cnut of a man.
Click to expand...

In any case, Evra was found not to have said that. It was a lie by Liverpool to give Saurez an 'excuse' to have said what he said.
 
:lol: Amateur hour. If you're going to lie/bend the truth, atleast be bothered enough to make sure everyone has their story straight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.