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

The United manager used all his nous in handling Evra’s incendiary allegations, taking the defender straight to Marriner’s room and instructing the referee to “write down what they were about to say”.

In contrast, Kenny Dalglish’s reaction was clumsy at best, cracking a joke with fourth official Phil Dowd about needing to wait the requisite 30 minutes before speaking to the referee and suggesting – incorrectly – that Evra had form with unsubstantiated racism allegations.
Click to expand...

Apologies if already posted.
 
i agree that United should do something as a team now in a show of rejection of racism. T-shirts are probably off the table considering Liverpool's debacle, but a big fund raiser or something would be nice.

I'm glad we haven't done anything like that yet, Liverpool fans would just think we're trying to get one over on them and inflame the mood around the incident. But now that things will be calming down, we really show make some sort of contribution to the cause of eliminating racism.
 
Liverpool have been quite frankly stupid the way they have handled the whole sitation. The name Klanfield will be stuck for many years by alot of people. Not just United but by all other teams.
 
gooDevil said:
i agree that United should do something as a team now in a show of rejection of racism. T-shirts are probably off the table considering Liverpool's debacle, but a big fund raiser or something would be nice.
.
Click to expand...

Not sure it would. Teams have worn them in the past. They were worn recently, but I couldn't find a picture. This appropriate one will suffice.

4583_untitled.jpg


It might look a bit petty and childish to some, I think it'd look brilliant.
 
LFC. Based at KlanField. Managed by the self styled KKK. Wankers - the entire lot of them. They will be 'walking alone' within the English football community for quite a long while now. Their ringmaster KKK has made certain of that.

I for one, cant wait for Suarez to make his re-entry back into the PL and for players of African and Caribbean heritages to make their feelings known to him along with the majority of culturally tolerant footballing fans from every club.

I really hope his first game is against us at Old Trafford so we can show the footballing world 'the template' on how a player proven to make pre meditated aggravating racist remarks to non caucasian players should be welcomed onto a football potch and during the game.
 
By Stuart James
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 3 January 2012 23.18 GMT

Liverpool's blind loyalty to Luis Suárez leaves no room for contrition

Liverpool looked to have seen the light in not appealing against the verdict but club and player still refuse to accept they are in the wrong



Luis Suárez's statement screamed his innocence while Liverpool still hold the FA responsible for tainting the player's image. Photograph: Peter Byrne/PA
At last Liverpool have seen sense. At least that was the initial reaction when news broke that the club would not be appealing against the eight-match ban and £40,000 fine imposed on Luis Suárez for racially abusing Patrice Evra. What we soon learned, however, was that Liverpool had no intention of showing any contrition, Suárez would not be apologising and, in the eyes of the club, the Football Association is to blame for damaging the reputation of a man that was found to have used the word "negro" seven times.

The blind loyalty that Liverpool have shown towards Suárez throughout this sorry saga continues to shine through despite the verdict two weeks ago and the publication of a remarkable 115-page document, compiled by the FA's independent panel, that presented a compelling case against Suárez and, at the same time, highlighted the shambles that the Merseyside club had made of trying to defend the player.

Accepting the guilty verdict represented a chance to move on; instead Liverpool have poured fuel on the fire and thrown in a couple of sticks of dynamite for good measure. In Liverpool's statement, the FA and the three-man panel it selected is accused of constructing "a highly subjective case" against Suárez. There is also stinging criticism of the report, which is described as "clearly subjective" and, as a result, held responsible by Liverpool for tainting Suárez's image.

And then we come to Suárez, whose own statement screamed his innocence and flew in the face of everything the linguistic experts told the FA panel when they analysed what the player said to Evra at Anfield, the context in which it was said and how his comments would be interpreted in his homeland and beyond. The experts' conclusion, lest it be forgotten, was that Suárez's remarks would be "considered racially offensive in Uruguay and other regions in of Latin America".

The report pointed out that while this information was useful it "is the commission's task to decide whether the use of the word in England is abusive or insulting". Suárez, judging by his statement, has still not grasped this fundamental point and also conveniently ignored the acrimonious context in which he used the word "negro" when he disputed the findings of the language experts, Professor Peter Wade and Dr James Scorer.

"In my country, 'negro' is a word we use commonly, a word which doesn't show any lack of respect and is even less so a form of racist abuse," Suárez said. "Based on this, everything which has been said so far is totally false. I will carry out the suspension with the resignation of someone who hasn't done anything wrong and who feels extremely upset by the events."

This was merely in keeping with Liverpool's approach throughout, which has smacked of arrogance at times, no more so than when those ridiculous T-shirts supporting Suárez were worn at Wigan, and on other occasions raised questions about how seriously they took the issue.

We learn in the report that when Phil Dowd, the fourth official at Anfield, knocked on the home dressing room door shortly after the Manchester United match to ask Dalglish – who had been made aware of the allegations at this point – that Andre Marriner, the referee, needed to see him and Suárez in the officials' room, the Liverpool manager, alluding to the rules that are normally in place, "made a joke about having to wait 30 minutes before speaking to the referee." When Dalglish did eventually visit Marriner (without Suárez), his response to Evra's accusations was: "Hasn't he done this before?"

Liverpool should have spent less time worrying about discrediting Evra and more time getting their testimonies right. Suárez, after being asked the same question six times in the hearing, was forced to admit it was not true that he had pinched Evra to defuse the row, as he had claimed in his witness statement. Peter McCormick, Suárez's representative, tried to explain this confusion, that cast further doubt on the credibility of the player's evidence, on "bad drafting".

Every bit as bad was the moment in the report when we learn that Damien Comolli, the club's director of football, and Dirk Kuyt, the Liverpool midfielder, changed their statements after realising that Suárez had given a different account to them. It is cringeworthy reading Kuyt's attempt to deal with this discrepancy in his witness statement. "I am aware that LS will state in evidence that what he actually said in response to the remark from PE was (translated into English) "Why, black?" or "Why, negro?" and I am perfectly happy to accept that this is what he said. I may have misunderstood what he was saying or perhaps sought to interpret what he was saying as what I thought LS might have said when, in fact, it was not what he said."

Yet according to Liverpool's statement before the Manchester City game, the mistakes have been made by the commission rather than the Anfield club or Suárez. If Liverpool truly believed that was the case they would have appealed. Instead they took the sensible decision before pressing the self-destruct button. Again.
Click to expand...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition?CMP=twt_gu
 
As someone said on Twitter earlier - can't remember who - it will be hilarious when he fecks off to a big club, probably in Spain where his "type" are widely accepted - and the Dippers will have ruined their reputation for absolutely nothing.

Because if they think he is the loyal type, then they're even more deluded than we all think they are already. Loyalty is closely linked to honesty ... enough said.
 
Skywarden said:
What's this fecking truth he's cryptically speaking about? Is he getting paranoid now as well? Out with it you miserable fool.
Click to expand...

There is no "truth." He is just further inciting their scumbag fans, and they are stupid enough to fall for it.

Appeal, or shut the feck up.
 
Rams said:
If Dogleish knows the truth then why doesn't Liverpool appeal?
Click to expand...

Because he's bluffing.

They can't appeal because they haven't a leg to stand on.

The last 3 paragraphs of Stuart James' article sum it up nicely.

Liverpool should have spent less time worrying about discrediting Evra and more time getting their testimonies right. Suárez, after being asked the same question six times in the hearing, was forced to admit it was not true that he had pinched Evra to defuse the row, as he had claimed in his witness statement. Peter McCormick, Suárez's representative, tried to explain this confusion, that cast further doubt on the credibility of the player's evidence, on "bad drafting".

Every bit as bad was the moment in the report when we learn that Damien Comolli, the club's director of football, and Dirk Kuyt, the Liverpool midfielder, changed their statements after realising that Suárez had given a different account to them. It is cringeworthy reading Kuyt's attempt to deal with this discrepancy in his witness statement. "I am aware that LS will state in evidence that what he actually said in response to the remark from PE was (translated into English) "Why, black?" or "Why, negro?" and I am perfectly happy to accept that this is what he said. I may have misunderstood what he was saying or perhaps sought to interpret what he was saying as what I thought LS might have said when, in fact, it was not what he said."

Yet according to Liverpool's statement before the Manchester City game, the mistakes have been made by the commission rather than the Anfield club or Suárez. If Liverpool truly believed that was the case they would have appealed. Instead they took the sensible decision before pressing the self-destruct button. Again.
Click to expand...

How could they appeal after that?

Every single thing they've done screams guilty as charged.

Dalglish is just deluded and trying to save face with the fans who will follow him over a cliff.
 
Lots of their fans, hyped up into thinking they were creating a siege mentality and "going to war with the FA", are calling the club gutless for not appealing.
 
The owners have publicly stated that they expect CL football - and soon. KD is on borrowed time, and this incident will only reinforce the doubts the owners initially had about his managerial ability.
 
I can't imagine Hodgson would have gone in for all that t-shirt wearing business.

When Dalglish came out before the match at Wigan wearing the Suarez t-shirt the Liverpool fans just lapped it up 'cause it was King Kenny. If he had any sort of nous he would've tried to nip (not racist) this thing in the bud by keeping quiet until the findings were published instead of inciting a bunch of notoriously excitable fans who were just itching to protest against any perceived grievance.
 
Everytime I log on I see this thread on top. Let's put this behind us already, it's getting tiresome.
 
Has anybody remotely neutral come out in Liverpool's defense after the release of the 115 page document? (Except for Cottee.) The ridicule and condemnation seem to be completely unanimous.
Jacob said:
Everytime I log on I see this thread on top. Let's put this behind us already, it's getting tiresome.
Click to expand...
Let's collectively ignore a high-profile and spectacular case involving Liverpool and United with new developments appearing almost every single day? Right.
 
It just doesn't make sense to me without an apology from Suarez, this idea that it's a misunderstanding. Anyone who really meant no offense would apologize for any unintended offense. To me that's very telling.

Add to this that Suarez insists that 'negro' is never used in a racist way in Uruguay, which is wrong, his changing testimony, it smells all wrong.

I would be willing to believe he's not a racist if he apologized and admitted 'negro' can be used in a racist way, even in Uruguay. His continued contempt for a serious issue and complete disregard for Evra's feelings leads me to believe he is a racist. I don't know that, but that's my impression.
 
@Laphroaig: Yeah, but Cottee doesn't really count. Going to him for an in-depth analysis of a situation like this is like asking Josef Fritzl for childcare advice.
 
I have no idea what the general perception of LFC's statement was, but me & Mike saw it in the pub and immediately thought it was pathetically self aggradizing and unapologetic. Not even a conciliatory (Suarez's favorite word apparently) gesture of "I'm sorry if it offended anyone - (no need to mention Evra, just anyone) and I didn't mean it" just a pure act of passive agressive defensiveness whilst trying to present themselves as the noble party who've bravely put an end to the matter on their own terms.

It was the worst kind of climb down ever. Continuing to insinuate they were victims and Evra was a cnut whilst attempting to gain the moral high ground by not appealing.

Twats. I've lost so much respect for them. And anyone that's kept abreast of my opinions of Liverpool (which I don't expect to be anyone) will know is a climb down of sorts for me, as I always try to be as objective an even devil's advocative if possible.
 
Liverpool: all mouth and t-shirts. They failed to put their money were their mouths are - no appeal despite their desire for justice and 'truth'; no pulling-out of FA competitions or withdrawing players from England duty; no further attempt to clear Suarez's 'good name'; no punishable righteous anger from Dalglish and none from Suarez even though he claims innocence.

Who would make such empty threats, who would act in these mealy-mouthed ways if they were really innocent and convinced of a terrible injustice? The guilty, that's who.
 
Daniel Taylor has just published the written press' conference with Dalgleish. Words fails me.

Transcript of Kenny Dalglish's press conference about Luis Suárez | Football | guardian.co.uk

The following is a transcript from the Liverpool press conference after the Anfield club's 3-0 defeat at Manchester City on Tuesday night:

Reporter: "Kenny, the wider world is pretty shocked that, if a player can call someone 'negro' and the player who is the victim in this takes offence, that there is no apology or contrition offered from your club."

Dalglish: "I would have thought that, if you pronounced the word properly, you maybe understand it better. I think it was Spanish he was speaking and I don't think you were speaking Spanish there."

Reporter: "OK, if a player calls someone 'negro' [Spanish pronunciation], surely the player who takes offence deserves an apology?"

Dalglish: "Ask a linguistic expert, which certainly I am not. They will tell you that the part of the country in Uruguay where he [Luis Suárez] comes from, it is perfectly acceptable. His wife calls him that and I don't think he is offended by her. We have made a statement and I think it is there for everybody to read. Luis has made a brilliant statement and we will stand by him."

Reporter: "But the FA verdict said it was 'simply incredible' to suggest it wasn't used in an offensive way when they were clearly arguing and it wasn't friendly."

Dalglish: "There's a lot of things we'd like to say and a lot we could say but we would only get ourselves in trouble. We are not trying to be evasive … well, we are being evasive because we don't like getting ourselves in trouble. But we know what has gone on. We know what is not in the report and that's important for us. So without me getting ourselves in trouble, I think that's it finished."

Reporter: "Why take the ban now and not play the next three games, including the Carling Cup semi-final against Manchester City?"

Dalglish: "He could have played for a fortnight but he has to serve eight games at some stage and this time is as good as any, isn't it? It was better to get the situation over and done with."

Reporter: "Mark Lawrenson was saying on the radio that you've got to fear now whether Suárez may feel unsettled playing in England. Is that a concern?"

Dalglish: "Because Mark Lawrenson said it? No. I don't see why we have to reply to anybody. If you're asking if I have any concern about Luis playing in England, then no."

Reporter: "Is he strong enough?"

Dalglish: "I don't have a problem with Luis playing in England."

Reporter: "Do you regret wearing the T-shirts?"

Dalglish: "You see, if one of you guys were in trouble, would you help him? Would you support him if you knew the truth and you knew it was right? Would you support him?"

Reporter: "But not with T-shirts when he has been found guilty …"

Dalglish: "Why not? If they want to show their support for their team-mate, what's wrong with that? It was a fabulous statement to make visually of their support for a guy who is endeared in the dressing room, one of their closest friends in the dressing room, and all of his friends in the dressing room can speak up adequately and perfectly well for him. And I think it is very dangerous and unfortunate that you don't actually know the whole content of what went on at the hearing. I'm not prepared, and I can't say it, but I am just saying it is really unfortunate you never got to hear it. That's all I'm saying."

Reporter: "Kenny, given how the wider public are so opposed to your view, what do you have to lose by telling us and revealing what you're saying was not included in the FA statement?"

Dalglish: "It's up to the club to decide what they want to do."

Reporter: "But if you have something to say, surely say it – because the alternative is you are digging a bigger hole for yourself?"

Dalglish: "I don't think we are digging a bigger hole but I just think it's unfortunate we can't be more forthcoming. That's the unfortunate thing."

Reporter: "In your two statements you basically accused the FA of a conspiracy against your club."

Dalglish: "So they have made a statement then …"

Liverpool press officer intervenes and asks for no more questions on Suárez.

Reporter: "The hearing was to lay out all the evidence, 115 pages of evidence, and you have said they [the FA] have done it subjectively. So why do you think the FA are targeting Liverpool and Suárez?"

Dalglish: "Maybe wrong place, wrong time. It could have been anybody. I can't answer for the FA, you ask them."

Reporter: "You think there is an agenda against Liverpool?"

Dalglish: "No. You said that. I never. You get yourself in trouble, I'm all right."

Reporter: "Are you concerned Suárez's first game back could be at Old Trafford?"

Dalglish: "I'll just be delighted to get him back."
 
The thing that's bothering me is what will United and Evra say. We have been quiet but the acceptance of the ban opens the door to go on the attack. I don't know whether we should. If we do lets think it through much better than Liverpool. Evra has got to be fuming and if he does his usual take no prisoners approach this could go anywhere.
 
Mockney said:
I have no idea what the general perception of LFC's statement was, but me & Mike saw it in the pub and immediately thought it was pathetically self aggradizing and unapologetic. Not even a conciliatory (Suarez's favorite word apparently) gesture of "I'm sorry if it offended anyone - (no need to mention Evra, just anyone) and I didn't mean it" just a pure act of passive agressive defensiveness whilst trying to present themselves as the noble party who've bravely put an end to the matter on their own terms.

It was the worst kind of climb down ever. Continuing to insinuate they were victims and Evra was a cnut whilst attempting to gain the moral high ground by not appealing.

Twats. I've lost so much respect for them. And anyone that's kept abreast of my opinions of Liverpool (which I don't expect to be anyone) will know is a climb down of sorts for me, as I always try to be as objective an even devil's advocative if possible.
Click to expand...

That's a good point actually about the conciliatory gesture.

For a club whose entire case for the defence was based around Suarez being conciliatory towards Evra, it's a great irony that they haven't shown one tiny bit of conciliation towards him in the aftermath (either immediately or following the guilty verdict) despite it being patently obvious that he's entitled to be offended by being referred to as negro, regardless of whether they believe Suarez's motives were racial abuse or not.
 
I was surprised by the aggressiveness of both Liverpool and Suarez's statements. There is no acceptance of the verdict let alone an admission of guilt, there is no apology to Evra or to the game of football for the damage that has been caused by this incident. There is just a sense that Liverpool feel that they and Suarez has done nothing wrong and that they both have been stitched up. Hence, there is no sense in fighting this any longer because the FA is corrupt and is in the pocket of SAF and United and will automatically come out against the interests of Liverpool and it's players.
 
I'd also like to say that I think the "Racist Bastard" chant we have is shit. It doesn't sit right with me.
 
I give up. This is too much bollocks for me. As if the they haven't been feeding the conspiracy enough they dangle a 'we know the real truth' in front of their fans.

They should be brought to task over this.
 
Maybe Kenny's trying to bore us all into submission.
 
I can't see this being the end. The press reaction tonight and tomorrow to Liverpool and Suarez's statements and Dalglish's press conference should be scathing. Surely the FA will have something to say?
 
Dalglish: "I would have thought that, if you pronounced the word properly, you maybe understand it better. I think it was Spanish he was speaking and I don't think you were speaking Spanish there."

Such a childish behaviour.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.