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

I'm just totally speechless at the levels of sheer delusion from Liverpool fans. Even passionate ABU's have been criticising Liverpool has hell frozen over?!?!
 
It's like having a video of Suarez punching Evra in the face, then taking the stills and saying "As you can see in these two images, Evra's face was here, but he's moved it forward here as he has clearly tried to headbutt Suarez's hand".
 
Pexbo said:
It's like having a video of Suarez punching Evra in the face, then taking the stills and saying "As you can see in these two images, Evra's face was here, but he's moved it forward here as he has clearly tried to headbutt Suarez's hand".
Click to expand...

:lol: I love how they still continue to deny the obvious. The biggest one from liverpool fans is evidence evidence where is the evidence. If you read the Regulatory Commission's document it's pretty damning.

Correct me if I'm wrong but from what I could understand from the rather long winded document was that Dirk Kuyt, his own team mate pretty much told the panel that Suarez told him about how he said the slur to Evra?
 
KingCantona87 said:
:lol: I love how they still continue to deny the obvious. The biggest one from liverpool fans is evidence evidence where is the evidence. If you read the Regulatory Commission's document it's pretty damning.

Correct me if I'm wrong but from what I could understand from the rather long winded document was that Dirk Kuyt, his own team mate pretty much told the panel that Suarez told him about how he said the slur to Evra?
Click to expand...

Both kuyt and comolli said the same thing
 
Crispy71 said:
Both kuyt and comolli said the same thing
Click to expand...

It is like me robbing a bank. I then boast to two of my mates saying how I robbed the bank. I then get arrested then deny I robbed the bank. I then go to trial and first say I didn't rob the bank then my two friends are cross examined and say I did then I say I did. That's perjury isn't it?
 
KingCantona87 said:
It is like me robbing a bank. I then boast to two of my mates saying how I robbed the bank. I then get arrested then deny I robbed the bank. I then go to trial and first say I didn't rob the bank then my two friends are cross examined and say I did then I say I did. That's perjury isn't it?
Click to expand...

This is part of the reason as to why the FA said that bucktoothtwat wasn't a credible witness. What made it funnier was that he spoke to kuyt in dutch, and spoke to comolli in spanish but insisted that they both had misunderstood him - in their native languages - but both came to the same conclusion as to what he had said - Strewth!:rolleyes:
 
Anyone remember back in the day, when we had a free press and freedom of expression?


Police confiscate Manchester United fanzine with Luis Suárez Klan joke

• Red Issue shows Ku Klux Klan hood on back cover
• United fanzine has 'Suárez is Innocent' under image

Manchester United's game with Liverpool was preceded by the police confiscating several thousand copies of the Red Issue fanzine because of a spoof cut-out-and-keep poster showing a Ku Klux Klan hood on its back cover.

The "Suárez is Innocent" image led to the fanzine being removed on the basis that police deemed it could incite racial hatred and cause problems between the two sets of supporters.

The police's match commander, Ch Supt Mark Roberts, said: "Shortly before kick-off we were made aware that a Manchester United supporters' fanzine being sold outside Old Trafford featured a potentially offensive image.

"Officers are now seizing the fanzines and in consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service we will take appropriate action against anyone either found selling this particular fanzine or provocatively displaying the image in public.

"Officers have also been made aware of a T-shirt on sale outside the ground that is also deemed to be offensive. We are also seizing these items and anyone found wearing one will be required to remove it and hand it to police.

"At this stage we have arrested one man in relation to the T-shirts on suspicion of a racially aggravated public order offence and we will be continuing to work with the clubs to minimise the impact of the image, which we consider to be offensive.

"I have taken this cause of action as both items are potentially offensive and we cannot be in a situation where hundreds or thousands of people were displaying offensive images at a football match. The consequences of taking no action could have resulted in public order incidents inside or outside the ground."

United are aware of the matter but say the decision was taken by the police.

Red Issue says it will take legal advice about whether it can sue for damages, pointing out it was a satirical image that had brought no complaints from the public
 
I thought it was understandable to confiscate the fanzines, it could only have provoked further negativity and a risk of violence.
 
ralphie88 said:
Anyone remember back in the day, when we had a free press and freedom of expression?


Police confiscate Manchester United fanzine with Luis Suárez Klan joke

• Red Issue shows Ku Klux Klan hood on back cover
• United fanzine has 'Suárez is Innocent' under image

Manchester United's game with Liverpool was preceded by the police confiscating several thousand copies of the Red Issue fanzine because of a spoof cut-out-and-keep poster showing a Ku Klux Klan hood on its back cover.

The "Suárez is Innocent" image led to the fanzine being removed on the basis that police deemed it could incite racial hatred and cause problems between the two sets of supporters.

The police's match commander, Ch Supt Mark Roberts, said: "Shortly before kick-off we were made aware that a Manchester United supporters' fanzine being sold outside Old Trafford featured a potentially offensive image.

"Officers are now seizing the fanzines and in consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service we will take appropriate action against anyone either found selling this particular fanzine or provocatively displaying the image in public.

"Officers have also been made aware of a T-shirt on sale outside the ground that is also deemed to be offensive. We are also seizing these items and anyone found wearing one will be required to remove it and hand it to police.

"At this stage we have arrested one man in relation to the T-shirts on suspicion of a racially aggravated public order offence and we will be continuing to work with the clubs to minimise the impact of the image, which we consider to be offensive.

"I have taken this cause of action as both items are potentially offensive and we cannot be in a situation where hundreds or thousands of people were displaying offensive images at a football match. The consequences of taking no action could have resulted in public order incidents inside or outside the ground."

United are aware of the matter but say the decision was taken by the police.

Red Issue says it will take legal advice about whether it can sue for damages, pointing out it was a satirical image that had brought no complaints from the public
Click to expand...

I don't particularly have an issue with the police doing that. Their priority is public safety, and so they will have wanted to eliminate anything inflammatory that might spark more aggro, such as the KKK masks.

It was heated enough as it was with Suarez's behaviour, and being the Munich anniversary. I was lucky enough to have the Liverpool fans' coach drive past me while waiting for the bus, every one of them pushing each other out the way so that they could be in the front of window doing their fecking airplane gestures.
 
Crispy71 said:
This is part of the reason as to why the FA said that bucktoothtwat wasn't a credible witness. What made it funnier was that he spoke to kuyt in dutch, and spoke to comolli in spanish but insisted that they both had misunderstood him - in their native languages - but both came to the same conclusion as to what he had said - Strewth!:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Trying telling this to a scouser :) Logic and common sense are not present ;)
 
Agent Red said:
I don't particularly have an issue with the police doing that. Their priority is public safety, and so they will have wanted to eliminate anything inflammatory that might spark more aggro, such as the KKK masks.

It was heated enough as it was with Suarez's behaviour, and being the Munich anniversary. I was lucky enough to have the Liverpool fans' coach drive past me while waiting for the bus, every one of them pushing each other out the way so that they could be in the front of window doing their fecking airplane gestures.
Click to expand...

They weren't masks, they were the size of a hand. It was a joke.

You're advocating a system where the police can essentially close down a publication for a day because there is the potential that someone might be offended by something in it (despite the fact there were no complaints).

What do you think that means for the likes of red Cafe?
 
Nothing as it's not even remotely comparable to the situation yesterday in any sense whatsoever.
 
Agent Red said:
I don't particularly have an issue with the police doing that. Their priority is public safety, and so they will have wanted to eliminate anything inflammatory that might spark more aggro
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Hectic said:
Nothing as it's not even remotely comparable to the situation yesterday in any sense whatsoever.
Click to expand...

What, the police having power to stop the publication of anything that they consider is "potentially offensive" at a football match when everyone is wandering around checking their smart phones? You don't think that is something that owners of football internet messageboards should be concerned about?

Pretty much everything in ever United fanzine is offensive to scousers. They even have a disclaimer on the front of RI about it. If the GMP get away with this (I don't think they will) this has huge implications for free speach around football matches in this country.

Should the police have also stepped in to stop United fans singing inflamatory songs? Where do you stop?
 
Agent Red said:
I don't particularly have an issue with the police doing that. Their priority is public safety, and so they will have wanted to eliminate anything inflammatory that might spark more aggro, such as the KKK masks.
Click to expand...

True.
 
ralphie88 said:
What, the police having power to stop the publication of anything that they consider is "potentially offensive" at a football match when everyone is wandering around checking their smart phones? You don't think that is something that owners of football internet messageboards should be concerned about?
Click to expand...

No, that isn't a concern.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/s...NYT+>+Sports)&seid=auto&smid=tw-nytimessports

If the Fenway Sports Group is to be the responsible team owner in soccer that it has proved to be in baseball, it needs to get hold of Liverpool, its club in England’s Premier League, and repair its global image fast.

On Saturday, Liverpool lost at Manchester United, 2-1, allowing United to temporarily move into first place in the Premier League. There is no disgrace in such a loss; United, the defending English champion, is vying to keep that title this season, and it very rarely loses at home.

But there was disgrace, witnessed by television viewers around the world, in the refusal of Liverpool’s Luis Suárez to shake the hand of United’s Patrice Evra before kickoff.

The hand might not always be offered with sincerity. It might often be less than the noble sign of pregame respect between opponents that FIFA would like to have us believe it is. But in this case it was important to show a global audience that Suárez and Evra were man enough to touch palms and bury the enmity between them.

This was the first time that Suárez had started a game since he was barred for eight matches for repeatedly calling Evra racist names when they competed against each other last October. Suárez claimed that the words he uttered, as used in his Uruguayan hometown, were not racist but could be affectionate. Evra, who is black and French, but understands Spanish well, said he was deeply offended.

Both players are feisty, provocative, volatile characters, as their records for their clubs, and their national teams, have long shown. Evra led the French team that mutinied against its coach and refused to train during the 2010 World Cup. Suárez was the player who made no apology for deliberately handling the ball that led to Ghana’s elimination from that tournament, and he was purchased by Liverpool after he was suspended in the Dutch league for biting an opponent.

It would seem that each of them would wish to show that, for the sake of their team if not their own reputation, they could abide by the rules and rituals of the game that makes their fortune.

Manchester United Manager Alex Ferguson began the week by publicly asking his players to rise above any bitter feelings they had and display sportsmanship on the field. He said he spoke with Evra on Saturday morning.

“Patrice and I had a chat,” Ferguson said, “and he said: ‘I’m going to shake his hand. I’ve got nothing to be ashamed of. I want to keep my dignity.’ ” When the moment arrived, it was beyond Evra’s grasp.

Suárez shook hands with the referee, and then with the child who was United’s mascot for the day. He then stared at the ground, ignoring the hand extended by Evra and walking toward the next man in line, goalkeeper David de Gea.

Evra grabbed the arm of Suárez, who shrugged him off. De Gea seemed to try to ask Suárez to shake Evra’s hand, and he again refused. The next United player in line, Rio Ferdinand, then withdrew his hand as Suárez passed.

“After seeing what happened, I decided not to shake his hand,” Ferdinand said after the game. “I lost all respect for the guy.”

Ugly repercussions followed. The United crowd booed Suárez, as the Liverpool crowd had booed Evra in its stadium when the teams met in the F.A. Cup two weeks ago.

In the tunnel as the teams headed to halftime Saturday, the teams scuffled after Evra attempted to say something to Suárez. The police and stewards intervened to separate the players.

The Suárez-Evra feud overshadowed the top-class soccer these teams are capable of. United quickly took a 2-0 lead on two goals by the Liverpool-born Wayne Rooney.

The first was from a corner by Ryan Giggs, when Rooney’s sharp anticipation and reflexes led to a short-range volley in a poorly defended penalty area. The second started when Antonio Valencia preyed on an error from Jay Spearing and with split-second vision teed up Rooney, who put a shot between the legs of goalkeeper Pepe Reina.

A late consolation goal by Liverpool, with Suárez reacting like lightning to Ferdinand’s failure to control a deflection, highlighted Suárez’s immense talent. It is that talent that everyone should be talking about, and not racism, especially in a game in which 11 nationalities were represented.

Long after the lights were switched off at Old Trafford, Suárez wrote on Twitter that he was “sad” because of the loss and “disappointed because everything is not that it seems.”

Liverpool Manager Kenny Dalglish claimed he did not see Suárez refuse the handshake, or the shoving in the tunnel at halftime. He had said earlier in the week that Suárez should not have been barred for what he said about Evra, but that he had spoken to Suárez and he knew that Suárez would shake the hand of Evra.

When he was asked on Sky TV after the game why Suárez had not, Dalglish avoided directly answering the question.

“I think you are bang out of order to blame Luis Suárez for whatever happened today,” Dalglish said.

Shortly before that, Evra was whooping to all corners of the stadium. The referee, Phil Dowd, who had managed the game commendably, at that point physically restrained Evra and asked him not to further inflame the players or the supporters.

Ferguson was less charitable. “He is a disgrace to Liverpool Football Club,” he said of Suárez. “That certain player should not be allowed to play for Liverpool again.”

It is time for John Henry and Tom Werner, leaders of the Fenway Group that controls Liverpool, to state clearly the direction the team will take on this issue.
Click to expand...

Even NY Times reporting on it now, feel for the owners of Liverpool having to balance the huge potential and global presence/reputation of the club against their best player and a manager who is a hero to the fans who have both acted like total cnuts this whole time.
 
ralphie88 said:
What, the police having power to stop the publication of anything that they consider is "potentially offensive" at a football match when everyone is wandering around checking their smart phones? You don't think that is something that owners of football internet messageboards should be concerned about?

Pretty much everything in ever United fanzine is offensive to scousers. They even have a disclaimer on the front of RI about it. If the GMP get away with this (I don't think they will) this has huge implications for free speach around football matches in this country.

Should the police have also stepped in to stop United fans singing inflamatory songs? Where do you stop?
Click to expand...

If Liverpool supporters decided to bring a shit load of derogatory Evra masks into OT and the police got wind of this they would have been taken away at the turnstiles. The police's main concern is that the game go smoothly and there's no aggro between supporters after/during the game. I don't think its some huge free speech issue. Just police trying to control the already sky high tension.
 
ralphie88 said:
They weren't masks, they were the size of a hand. It was a joke.

You're advocating a system where the police can essentially close down a publication for a day because there is the potential that someone might be offended by something in it (despite the fact there were no complaints).

What do you think that means for the likes of red Cafe?
Click to expand...

They were designed to look like masks. The size isn't particularly relevant.

Red Issue should have been aware of the danger of confiscation beforehand. Of course I'm not advocating a system where the police can close down any publication, but in the context of yesterday's game I don't have an issue with them not wanting them in the stadium.

You seem to be focusing on people 'potentially being offended'. That's not what the police were concerned about. They were concerned about people potentially being injured as a result of violence, and confiscating inflammatory items such as the masks minimises that risk.
 
kps88 said:
If Liverpool supporters decided to bring a shit load of derogatory Evra masks into OT and the police got wind of this they would have been taken away at the turnstiles. The police's main concern is that the game go smoothly and there's no aggro between supporters after/during the game. I don't think its some huge free speech issue. Just police trying to control the already sky high tension.
Click to expand...

There's a bit of confusion here. It would be the stewards that would (and did) take away Suarez and Evra masks yesterday, because they reached ground regulations.
 
PFA chief 'sickened' by Suarez snub - Football news | MSN Sport UK

Gordon Taylor said:
Professional Footballers' Association chief executive Gordon Taylor says he feels "sick in my stomach" after Luis Suarez caused further controversy by refusing to shake the hand of Patrice Evra on Saturday.

Suarez's actions led to a negative atmosphere throughout the Manchester United versus Liverpool Premier League clash, which saw altercations in the tunnel both at half-time and after the match.

Taylor also revealed his disappointment that Liverpool shunned his attempts to mediate in the row shortly after the original Evra-Suarez incident, saying the Merseyside club refused "any acceptance of culpability".

Taylor told BBC Radio 5 Live: "I thought it might have been a time to draw a line under it and move on. Having heard before the game there was going to be handshakes, [and then] that it was so deliberately averted, I just felt quite sick in my stomach.

"I'm extremely concerned that its reached this level now. It's going to have to be sorted by the FA, the Premier League, the PFA, the League Managers' Association ... because there's great rivalry which is no bad thing between clubs and cities, but this has escalated beyond that.

"Racism is an issue within a civilised society that, if it's allowed to run riot, divides people and separates them. Football is a sport that's supposed to bring people together and overcome such barriers. We have had a great record of assimilating players from all over the world, from different cultures and creeds, for a long time now.''

Asked if Liverpool had been responsive to the PFA's approaches to help bring the matter to a close, Taylor said: "I would have to say that in the very beginning, no they weren't, so as a result this has developed into where it has.

"It's my job to try to stop such issues escalating. At the very beginning I approached both clubs but it wasn't possible to get that reconciliation or any acceptance of culpability or apology and from that time on it's just escalated.

"The situation is running away with us and this isn't healthy for football, particularly with the government looking into the governance of football. I would have expected the Liverpool owners and directors to bring about a better atmosphere and draw a line under it.

"There is nothing to be gained by the matter festering, for the image of the game. If the handshake was offered by Patrice Evra I thought he [Suarez] would shake it but then he diverted it away. It was anything but helpful and caused this genuine reaction. It has undermined Kenny [Dalglish] as well.''
Click to expand...

Apologies if posted. More attention and scrutiny placed upon him.
 
Agent Red said:
They were designed to look like masks. The size isn't particularly relevant.

Red Issue should have been aware of the danger of confiscation beforehand. Of course I'm not advocating a system where the police can close down any publication, but in the context of yesterday's game I don't have an issue with them not wanting them in the stadium.

You seem to be focusing on people 'potentially being offended'. That's not what the police were concerned about. They were concerned about people potentially being injured as a result of violence, and confiscating inflammatory items such as the masks minimises that risk.
Click to expand...

Yes they were designed to look like masks, but they couldn't be used as masks because (a) they were too small, and (b) who takes scissors and string to a football match? It was satire, nothing more.

The "potential offence" issue was what was in the GMP statement about the confiscation. It sounds for all the world that they don't actually know what, if any, grounds they had for the action they took.

We are meant to live in a free society. If people commit or are about to commit criminal offences, then the police can and should act. But I've yet to see anything that suggests what RI did breached any law.
 
ralphie88 said:
Yes they were designed to look like masks, but they couldn't be used as masks because (a) they were too small, and (b) who takes scissors and string to a football match? It was satire, nothing more.

The "potential offence" issue was what was in the GMP statement about the confiscation. It sounds for all the world that they don't actually know what, if any, grounds they had for the action they took.

We are meant to live in a free society. If people commit or are about to commit criminal offences, then the police can and should act. But I've yet to see anything that suggests what RI did breached any law.
Click to expand...

I interpreted the 'potential offence' thing as implying a risk of it escalating an already tense situation.

RI probably didn't breach any law, but the police took the action in context. Had RI been sold on a non-match day or outside of the stadium, I very much doubt there would have been any restrictions. It was just a temporary measure to try and reduce any possible chance of trouble on the day. Much like the restrictions on alcohol inside stadiums but not in the surrounding area etc.

As for your comment about would they do the same to stop potentially offensive chanting, they already do do that to all extent possible. Unfortunately some nasty chants will always crop up and it's difficult to try and nail anyone singing them. In this instance the best you can hope for is people just not joining in (as I didn't with the 'murderers' one yesterday).

But when it's racist chanting etc. there have been instances of people being prosecuted, and this backs up the pre-match announcement they make about following through on prosecuting anyone caught behaving in this way.
 
WARNING OVER LIVERPOOL'S GLOBAL IMAGE

The Luis Suarez controversey has attracted criticism in the United States where the press have called for Liverpool's American owners to intervene.

Suarez has again found himself in the spotlight after ignoring United captain Evra's outstretched hand prior to kick-off at on Saturday's encounter at Old Trafford.

The match was Suarez's first start since completing his eight-match ban for racially abusing French international Evra in the reverse fixture at Anfield in October.

The incident has led to widespread condemnation for the Uruguay international, with United manager Sir Alex Ferguson so incensed after the game that he branded the striker a "disgrace to Liverpool Football Club" and claimed he should never play for them again.

In the United States, the New York Times believes Liverpool's Boston-based owners, Fenway Sports Group, need to act in order to 'repair the club's global image'.

Leading with the headline "Another Ugly Incident Mars Liverpool's Good Name", the Times wrote: "If the Fenway Sports Group is to be the responsible team owner in soccer that it has proved to be in baseball, it needs to get hold of Liverpool, its club in England's Premier League, and repair its global image fast.

"On Saturday, Liverpool lost at Manchester United, 2-1, allowing United to temporarily move into first place in the Premier League. There is no disgrace in such a loss; United, the defending English champion, is vying to keep that title this season, and it very rarely loses at home.

"But there was disgrace, witnessed by television viewers around the world, in the refusal of Liverpool's Luis Suarez to shake the hand of United's Patrice Evra before kick-off."

The article concluded by saying: "It is time for John Henry and Tom Werner, leaders of the Fenway Group that controls Liverpool, to state clearly the direction the team will take on this issue."

The Associated Press said the incident had overshadowed United's triumph.

"Luis Suarez's refusal to shake hands with Patrice Evra overshadowed Manchester United's 2-1 win over rival Liverpool that lifted the defending champions to first place in the Premier League on Saturday," AP wrote.

Describing the incident, Uruguayan newspaper El Pais wrote: "Suarez was among the final players in the team. And the awaited moment arrived and created tension for several seconds. Without hesitation, Suarez avoided the hand of Evra and did not greet him.

"And as the Uruguayan striker went to greet the following player, the Frenchman, angered, grabbed his arm. But Suarez freed himself and continued to the remaining players.

"After the handshakes, both Suarez and Evra received the support of their team-mates."

It added: "After the final whistle, Evra celebrated the win next to Suarez, rousing the fans. The Uruguayan did not respond to the provocation and continued walking towards the tunnel.

"The referee and other Liverpool players intervened in this latest episode, separating the players, to keep things from escalating."
Click to expand...

WARNING OVER LIVERPOOL'S GLOBAL IMAGE | Football Transfer News, Football News, Fixtures, Results, Match Reports, Stats
 
Well, it's a start.

Hopefully stops all the bollocks 'he actually wanted to shake Evra's hand' chat as well...
 
"I have spoken with the Manager since the game at Old Trafford and I realise I got things wrong.

"I've not only let him down, but also the Club and what it stands for and I'm sorry. I made a mistake and I regret what happened.

"I should have shaken Patrice Evra's hand before the game and I want to apologise for my actions.

"I would like to put this whole issue behind me and concentrate on playing football."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.