he's a dreadful little creature who bites and insults other players - just to wind them up! Even if he isn't a racist, he knew exactly what he was doing AND what he was saying. He's totally vile , and suits LFC to a tee
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.
he's a dreadful little creature who bites and insults other players - just to wind them up! Even if he isn't a racist, he knew exactly what he was doing AND what he was saying. He's totally vile , and suits LFC to a tee
Oh, they've rolled out the tshirts I see, that means he must be innocent, right?
Stay classy Liverpool.
I'd say Kennys delighted with all this, not a word about them drawing with fecking Wigan.....
Stay classy Liverpool.
I'd say Kennys delighted with all this, not a word about them drawing with fecking Wigan.....
"65% of Metro readers think threw ban is too harsh"
Of course they do, mr editor. Definitely a representative sample!
Of course they do, mr editor. Definitely a representative sample!
Oh, they've rolled out the tshirts I see, that means he must be innocent, right?
Stay classy Liverpool.
I'd say Kennys delighted with all this, not a word about them drawing with fecking Wigan.....
Classy and Liverool are now two words which can never be associated with each other again, unless they were included in a sentence to show polar opposites
agreed, just a shame that such talented footballer is such a swine.
he's undoubtedly a very good footballer - and a VERY poor specimen of a human being
How long will the appeal take? Are they going to drag it out for weeks again?
at the Suarez t-shirts last night and in particular when Dalglish wore one. I still find it quite incredible that a football club of Liverpool's standing, having had time to reflect on their hasty website statement of the previous evening, could deem it appropriate to send their players (and even their manager) out in those ridiculous t-shirts as a response to a player being found guilty of racist abuse.
They have shown utter contempt for the independent disciplinary process and trivialised a very serious issue.
They have shown utter contempt for the independent disciplinary process and trivialised a very serious issue.
Bit harsh in my opinion to absolutely slaughter him for that.
It's one of those things - it's far from the most offensive racial thing you can say, and doesn't really show any ill-intent, but it does show total ignorance of the whole issue and a lack of awareness of the modern world.
I'm actually amazed that the BBC don't ensure all their presenters are thoroughly trained up on this stuff, given how tight their editorial guidelines are about word use on their news broadcasts.
Yeh I agree, these things just grow arms and legs once it all gets started.
Its a bit ignorent of him, nothing more than that, it isnt malicious.
I think the thing is you have to stay entirely within the "rules", because otherwise you have to start worrynig about where to draw the lines.
Ron Atknisons wasn't coming from a massively different place when he made his gaff... he genuinely didn't realise how unacceptable it was.
Probably the same to a degree for goofy cnut too, in fact, which takes us back to the whole point - there are certain things you just can't say, and ignorance / lack of ill-intent are no excuse.
So, how is it actually possible for Liverpool fans on Rawk to actually be like that? Is there like a declaration they sign before hand to try their very best to post in such an incredibly melodramatic, cheesy chick flick tone and shall not in any scenario put across a genuine opinion which doesn't toe the line?
Who's the driving force and who's in charge of Liverpool F.C?
For such a old, prestigious and successful club this last months must been a all time low. We are now entering a stage when Suarez actions against Evra are secondary and the response from all involved are primary. How could this happened? Yesterday was a new PR disaster and if this goes on they will end up with much more problems then just a 8 game ban.
For such a old, prestigious and successful club this last months must been a all time low. We are now entering a stage when Suarez actions against Evra are secondary and the response from all involved are primary. How could this happened? Yesterday was a new PR disaster and if this goes on they will end up with much more problems then just a 8 game ban.
And especially given the issue at hand. When the spotlight is on racism and discrimination, you select your words carefully, as it is an extremely sensitive subject. Him using the word twice goes to show how ignorant, unaware and out of touch he is with this issue. You can't have a man discussing racism in football go on to refer to players as 'coloureds', its surreal that he has such little awareness.
Even that, if Suarez just hold his hands up and said "I'm truly sorry, I didn't know that what I said is offensive", offer his full apology to Evra, and perhaps give a few thousand pounds tot he kick it out campaign, then I doubt we'll see this issue escalate like this.
But no, Liverpool ignore the probability that their player may be wrong. They choose to play the victim card vehemently and even try to put the blame on Evra. They fecked themselves and have no one else to blame.
Unfortunately, they're to busy pointing the blame on someone else to realise that.
I don't understand why they are this Evra smear campaign. Suarez admitted saying the word 'negro'. If you're black and someone you are having an argument with says that to you, how else are you meant to take it!
Actually a very interesting point! To even attempt to address the racism issue, or lack of, in the game when you're so completely ignorant to what can be considered racist is really quite incredible.
I noticed that at the time and knew it would be in the papers. Nothing that an apology won't fix I don't think.
When will the details of the Suarez investigation be realised, hope it's soon, Liverpool are going to look incredibly bad no doubt.
When will the details of the Suarez investigation be realised, hope it's soon, Liverpool are going to look incredibly bad no doubt.
James Lawton: One-eyed tribalism of supporters who fail to see the harm
A poll was running two-to-one that Suarez was harshly treated
JAMES LAWTON
THURSDAY 22 DECEMBER 2011
James Lawton: One-eyed tribalism of supporters who fail to see the harm - News & Comment - Football - The Independent
Kick It Out is an entirely laudable campaign to hose away the last effluent evidence that racism has any longer more than a scabrous toe-hold in English football. Unfortunately, the banning of Luis Suarez for eight matches by an independent regulatory panel and the charging yesterday of Chelsea and England captain John Terry by the Crown Prosecution Service tells us more about the problem than we probably wanted to know.
The trouble is not so much the threat of lingering prejudice, absurdly in such a cosmopolitan game, as disturbing indications that a majority of football followers in this country see the issue not as a rare unifying force but another opportunity to exhibit the most raw and one-eyed tribalism.
Yesterday we were told that voters in a Sky News national poll were running around two-to-one in favour of the belief that Suarez has been harshly treated. Quite apart from any concern about the foundation of the Suarez conviction – a matter on which the Football Association has a duty to be more revealing over the next few days – is the worry that many are refusing to register the seriousness of the offence and its utterly insidious potential.
Put another way, there must be alarm that many around English football would struggle to identify a moral issue – as opposed to a partisan one – even if it came in the form of a disabling, two-footed tackle.
The confidence of the CPS that a conviction can be obtained against Terry when he goes to court in February is guaranteed only to escalate the controversy that has erupted so prodigiously in the wake of the Suarez verdict.
Terry, as he has from the moment of his confrontation with Anton Ferdinand in October, was yesterday declaring both his innocence and his intention to fight "tooth and nail" to prove it. Despite this, the FA is now obliged to consider the possibility of its worst-case scenario – a conviction for England's captain of a racist offence and an appalling onset of déjà vu.
Terry has, of course, once before been ejected from the captaincy on the grounds that his off-field behaviour had created serious division in the dressing room. Now, at the approach of next summer's European Championship, he is at risk of being found guilty of a crime that would make his leadership of a squad which in its last outing contained seven players of mixed or entirely non-white origins just about entirely inappropriate.
This is so even if the majority of English fans, or at least the most voluble of them, were yesterday insisting that the crimes which put Suarez and now Terry in the dock might have been dismissed in the way of an ill-timed tackles or some dissenting backchat to the referee.
Some even got round to disinterring the Blatter Solution, the idea from the Fifa president that the racially abused should play on until the final whistle and then, like good resilient chaps of the world, shake hands with those who offered them the abuse.
The FA has brought a ton of pressure on itself by proceeding against Suarez, as it was against Terry until a QPR fan reported him to the Metropolitan Police, but if there have been times when the FA's collisions with Sepp Blatter have provoked the suspicion that it was operating from something less than outright moral indignation, there is no question that it has gained the higher ground on this occasion.
For some the only issues in the Suarez and Terry cases have been those of innocence or guilt, the alleged crimes themselves having never been seen as less than poisonous to the good health of the national game. That this appears to have been less than the majority view over the last 24 hours is surely as dismaying as the possibility that racism, in any identifiable form, might in the future be seen as something less than heinous if it happened to be practised by one of your star players.
For the FA, and the Fabio Capello who acted so swiftly the last time he believed Terry had surrendered the right to captain his country, there cannot be much doubt about their obligation. They have taken a hard position and it has brought some obvious difficulties. If Terry is found guilty, the decision is of course automatic. He goes.
In the meantime, there are grounds to believe that as England contemplate their warm-up preparations for the European finals, his suspension from national team duties – without prejudice, as they say – might not be too grievous an offence against natural justice. Whatever the outcome of the racism charge, there is some reason to believe that the edited reruns of the affair at Loftus Road which were aired for much of yesterday's rolling news did not exactly portray Terry as a natural-born leader of superior judgement.
It was one of the bleaker conclusions on a day when moral certainties were not exactly bouncing against the walls.
A poll was running two-to-one that Suarez was harshly treated
JAMES LAWTON
THURSDAY 22 DECEMBER 2011
James Lawton: One-eyed tribalism of supporters who fail to see the harm - News & Comment - Football - The Independent
Kick It Out is an entirely laudable campaign to hose away the last effluent evidence that racism has any longer more than a scabrous toe-hold in English football. Unfortunately, the banning of Luis Suarez for eight matches by an independent regulatory panel and the charging yesterday of Chelsea and England captain John Terry by the Crown Prosecution Service tells us more about the problem than we probably wanted to know.
The trouble is not so much the threat of lingering prejudice, absurdly in such a cosmopolitan game, as disturbing indications that a majority of football followers in this country see the issue not as a rare unifying force but another opportunity to exhibit the most raw and one-eyed tribalism.
Yesterday we were told that voters in a Sky News national poll were running around two-to-one in favour of the belief that Suarez has been harshly treated. Quite apart from any concern about the foundation of the Suarez conviction – a matter on which the Football Association has a duty to be more revealing over the next few days – is the worry that many are refusing to register the seriousness of the offence and its utterly insidious potential.
Put another way, there must be alarm that many around English football would struggle to identify a moral issue – as opposed to a partisan one – even if it came in the form of a disabling, two-footed tackle.
The confidence of the CPS that a conviction can be obtained against Terry when he goes to court in February is guaranteed only to escalate the controversy that has erupted so prodigiously in the wake of the Suarez verdict.
Terry, as he has from the moment of his confrontation with Anton Ferdinand in October, was yesterday declaring both his innocence and his intention to fight "tooth and nail" to prove it. Despite this, the FA is now obliged to consider the possibility of its worst-case scenario – a conviction for England's captain of a racist offence and an appalling onset of déjà vu.
Terry has, of course, once before been ejected from the captaincy on the grounds that his off-field behaviour had created serious division in the dressing room. Now, at the approach of next summer's European Championship, he is at risk of being found guilty of a crime that would make his leadership of a squad which in its last outing contained seven players of mixed or entirely non-white origins just about entirely inappropriate.
This is so even if the majority of English fans, or at least the most voluble of them, were yesterday insisting that the crimes which put Suarez and now Terry in the dock might have been dismissed in the way of an ill-timed tackles or some dissenting backchat to the referee.
Some even got round to disinterring the Blatter Solution, the idea from the Fifa president that the racially abused should play on until the final whistle and then, like good resilient chaps of the world, shake hands with those who offered them the abuse.
The FA has brought a ton of pressure on itself by proceeding against Suarez, as it was against Terry until a QPR fan reported him to the Metropolitan Police, but if there have been times when the FA's collisions with Sepp Blatter have provoked the suspicion that it was operating from something less than outright moral indignation, there is no question that it has gained the higher ground on this occasion.
For some the only issues in the Suarez and Terry cases have been those of innocence or guilt, the alleged crimes themselves having never been seen as less than poisonous to the good health of the national game. That this appears to have been less than the majority view over the last 24 hours is surely as dismaying as the possibility that racism, in any identifiable form, might in the future be seen as something less than heinous if it happened to be practised by one of your star players.
For the FA, and the Fabio Capello who acted so swiftly the last time he believed Terry had surrendered the right to captain his country, there cannot be much doubt about their obligation. They have taken a hard position and it has brought some obvious difficulties. If Terry is found guilty, the decision is of course automatic. He goes.
In the meantime, there are grounds to believe that as England contemplate their warm-up preparations for the European finals, his suspension from national team duties – without prejudice, as they say – might not be too grievous an offence against natural justice. Whatever the outcome of the racism charge, there is some reason to believe that the edited reruns of the affair at Loftus Road which were aired for much of yesterday's rolling news did not exactly portray Terry as a natural-born leader of superior judgement.
It was one of the bleaker conclusions on a day when moral certainties were not exactly bouncing against the walls.
I think its a shocker. He has made these statement just 36 hours after an Independent body has been through a very complicated debate about the nuances of language acceptable within the confines of English football and British law and returned with returned with definitive ruling .... only for a very high profile employee of the BBC to go and make exactly the same mistake.
I don't think Alan Hansen is racist, not in the slightest, in fact Im a huge admirer of his, he was one of the best defenders I've ever seen play the game, always comes across as a gentleman and has a acute and discerning mind on modern day football. He should not be hung out to dry for this. But his words are deeply disturbing and he should quickly make an unreserved apology and then go out of his way to show he has learnt a lesson. If only Suarez had followed the same route, we would not have this entire hoohaa.
It reminds me of the much derided Jade Goody and her insulting insinuations towards the Indian actress Shilpa Shetty on Celebrity Big Brother. No, not that Im an avid fan of BB or really give a shit about Jade Goody, but I was very impressed by her shock and remorse for what she said and genuinely believed her that she was ignorant in what she said, and she went to great lengths to repair the bridges that she broke with many trips to India. A parody of the z list celebrity world she may have been, but she went hugely up in my estimations with those acts of hers and its how I remember her.
Liverpool FC and the racist who plays for them would do well to study the Jade Goody case study and learn a thing or two about humility and acceptance of the law. They would find the British people, yes even fans of Manchester United, far more sympathetic to their predicament their their current strategy.
Cheer up Kenny Dalglish,
Oh what can it mean,
to a sad Scouser klan leader,
with a shite racist team.
or summat like that.
Oh what can it mean,
to a sad Scouser klan leader,
with a shite racist team.
or summat like that.
Gus Poyet can feck off, hope we play Brighton in the FA Cup. Would like to see Fergie deal with him.
You know, I just thought about how insane it is that Liverpool suggested that Evra be charged for allegedly calling Suarez a 'South American'...and yet they want Suarez cleared! Would they really have the gall to claim fairness if that actually happened?
I'm starting to wonder where they are drawing the line here.
It would be nice to know something about his time at Ajax, if he used the term 'negro' in reference to anyone while there and what might have happened. If he does it as a habit, surely it came up very quickly when he was there.
I can't really believe that the word 'negro' is never used with malice in Uruguay. But it's very hard to believe he didn't understand that 'negro' is offensive in most of the world. Surely he's seen some television or movies from outside Uruguay, it's something most 6 year olds could tell you.
I'm starting to wonder where they are drawing the line here.
It would be nice to know something about his time at Ajax, if he used the term 'negro' in reference to anyone while there and what might have happened. If he does it as a habit, surely it came up very quickly when he was there.
I can't really believe that the word 'negro' is never used with malice in Uruguay. But it's very hard to believe he didn't understand that 'negro' is offensive in most of the world. Surely he's seen some television or movies from outside Uruguay, it's something most 6 year olds could tell you.
Alan Hansen using 'coloured' as the term for black people - like PeterStorey said, cringeworthy. No I don't think he is racist but I am staggered that a well paid presenter on the BBC could be so ignorant.
This whole mess has opened up a can of worms and exposed a lot of sad, terrifying views. If honest I find it depressing reading the comments sections of every latest article posted. It depresses me that so many people are using the PC brigade line to justify their views
This whole mess has opened up a can of worms and exposed a lot of sad, terrifying views. If honest I find it depressing reading the comments sections of every latest article posted. It depresses me that so many people are using the PC brigade line to justify their views
Alan Hansen has "unreservedly" apologised for twice using the word "coloured" to describe black footballers on Match of the Day on Wednesday evening when discussing the current John Terry and Luis Suárez racism cases.
Hansen, 56, the show's long-time pundit, said: "I unreservedly apologise for any offence caused – this was never my intention and I deeply regret the use of the word."
Hansen, 56, the show's long-time pundit, said: "I unreservedly apologise for any offence caused – this was never my intention and I deeply regret the use of the word."
Reina saying that Suarez have been crucified. Queue "Suarez on a cross" t-shirts in the next match.
Yes, okay Saurez admitted to using the term, but no, he is not guilty at all! We stand by him that this is a farcical and ridiculous decision, and we will contest it every single day. Also, we want Patrice Evra charged with offending Saurez by referring to him as a 'South American', because that truly is beyond the pale.
So "There has to be evidence for the appeal to be accepted though; evidence which has not been considered during the initial ruling," which is unlikely, unless they can bring forth another linguistics expert and this counts as new evidence, which I would hope it wouldn't.
And the 2nd part basically says the Court of Arbitration for Sports won't take the case unless they are challenging the validity of the rule, citing 'irrationality' or 'procedural unfairness'?
Just had a chat with a Liverpool supporter at work and he said exactly this.
He said Suarez didn't say it to mean offense and that Evra finding it offensive is his own fault and that this sort of thing probably happens all the time in football and we should just get on with it.
So judicial review principles - procedural unfairness would mean Suarez has to show that the panel didn't follow the right procedure in reaching their decision (e.g. failed to take into account relevant considerations, or took into account irrelevant considerations; irrationality means Suarez has to show the panel reached a decision that no reasonable decision-maker could reach.
narrow grounds.
narrow grounds.
Don't forget that they are also wrongly condemning Evra on his "previous allegations" and painting him to be a drama queen and a liar. But also using his level headed statement to the FA that said "I do not believe Suarez to be Racist". Let's forget the fact they have taken that out of context and forgotten to add the "but he used racist words to insult me" bit....
No no no, Hansen, you're doing it all wrong! Don't Liverpool let you use their PR department? Someone get Kenny on this, we won't let Hansen walk alone!
Don't you know that coloured doesn't carry any co notations in Scotland and/or Uruguay?
You people are so insensitive
You people are so insensitive