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

moses said:
We all trot that out but they are a huge company with American owners, how the feck did it happen? I was really worried by their bullishness at times, thinking they were creating a storm because they had something up thier sleeves. But no, they were just being spazzos.
Click to expand...
Like you, I was thinking that they knew something that we did not. But hey, they just topped themselves.

I am getting seriously pissed off when people keep mentioning (in the media) things like "I have a lot of respect for Liverpool, but..." or "Liverpool is a great club with lots of history, but I think that..". That's all bollocks now. It's time to call a spade a spade. They are a fecking racist and really despicable club that have lied to everyone, including their own to serve their own purpose.

Respect, my arse.
 
Skywarden said:
John Henry twittered the "Kenny to post DVD" statement when it was due.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but that was tweeted at Blockbusters' Twitter account.
 
MauritianRed said:
Like you, I was thinking that they knew something that we did not. But hey, they just topped themselves.

I am getting seriously pissed off when people keep mentioning (in the media) things like "I have a lot of respect for Liverpool, but..." or "Liverpool is a great club with lots of history, but I think that..". That's all bollocks now. It's time to call a spade a spade. They are a fecking racist and really despicable club that have lied to everyone, including their own to serve their own purpose.

Respect, my arse.
Click to expand...

That's an unfortunate turn of phrase though.
 
I've just finished reading the report, the fun part of it is that its Suarez's, Kuyt's, Commoli's and the Liverpool "Team Assistance Manager's" statements that proves that Evra is telling the truth.

Suarez submitted in his written statement that he said "dale, negro" as a friendy gesture to Yaya Toure once, the exact phrase that Evra have heard.

Kuyt heard "because you are black" when Suarez told what happened to him in Dutch and Commoli actually dictated to Marriner and Dowd that Suarez said "Por que, tu es negro". Suarez then changed his story.

The Team Assistant heard that Sir Alex said to the referee after the game that Suarez called Evra "n*gger" five times - even though not even Ferguson remembered it. and he did call him negro 5 times. (Porque tu eres negro; No hablo con los
negros; Dale, negro, negro, negro)
 
The trouble flared when Evra asked Suarez why he had been kicked.
"Porque tu eres negro,'' Suarez replied in Spanish, which translates as "because you are black.''
When Evra challenged him to repeat the answer and said he would "punch him'', Suarez responded in Spanish: "I don't speak to blacks.''
After Evra threatened to hit him again, Suarez replied with a phrase that the report said translates as "OK, blackie, blackie, blackie''.


Read more: Report says Suarez called Evra 'negro' 7 times - - SI.com

says it all really


8 games seems light now.
 
ArmchairCritic said:
I did have a fair bit of respect for Liverpool FC but this whole incident has eradicated it. .
Click to expand...

I was saying exactly the same to the missus earlier this evening. Whilst I laugh at the deluded sods over at RAWK on a regular basis, I've always had respect for the club because of it's history. It's always been Liverpool and Manchester United for me, since I was a kid. I love our rivalry, it's up there with all of the major derbies in world football. I've got mates who get fecked off with Arsenal and Chelsea when these clubs just don't enter my radar - for me, Liverpool were the team to beat growing up as a lad.

But all of this has pretty much concluded for me that there are currently far too many Liverpool supporters, in their 40s and 50s, who just can't ever seem to accept any negativity surrounding their beloved players or club. I've seen it with my own eyes, when I was on holiday with a friend on a "lad's holiday" (never again) 2 years ago and there were grown men (with cockney accents mind you - but apparantly it's only Man Utd that have support in the South East) telling two fellas wearing Man Utd shirts that we "own the refs" and that "Fergie runs the FA" plus loads of other shite during a Champions League game being screened at a bar.

They were in their 40s and they actually believe this shit. Even the neutrals (blokes wearing West Ham and Reading jerseys) were a little shocked by their behaviour and victim mentality.
 
moses said:
Ironically I'd say they were lenient so Liverpool wouldn't get their knickers in a twist.
Click to expand...

Maybe so, I hope they appeal and the ban gets increased.

Seems the FA have got it wrong again, too lenient this time.
 
Aporkalypse said:
2SIy0.png
Click to expand...

PtZvw.png
 
So are they saying they know for sure that Suarez called Evra 'negro' seven times? Haven't had a chance to read the full report

But wow from the bits I've read this is a damning indictment of Suarez and Liverpool
 
I still see people elsewhere defending Suarez. Surely, they would have gotten past of the stage of saying that it's 'Evra's word vs Suarez word'. People are still using that. Hello, Suarez has admitted to using several of these terms.
 
Olly, that pic is like a visual representation of Father Ted's Golden Cleric Award-speech list. :D
 
356. Mr Suarez's pinching of Mr Evra's skin was not an attempt to defuse the situation. On the contrary, it was an attempt to aggravate Mr Evra and to inflame the situation. Mr Suarez's admitted use of the word "negro" when speaking to Mr Evra was not conciliatory and friendly. It was unfriendly and was used as part of Mr Suarez's attempt to wind up Mr Evra. The whole tenor of the exchanges was confrontational and argumentative. Adopting the words used by the Spanish language experts, Mr Suarez did not use "negro" with any sense of rapport or in an attempt to create such rapport.
Click to expand...

There it is. That's everything, and he admitted it.

357. Not only did we reject this evidence of Mr Suarez, but we found it remarkable that he sought to advance a case that was so clearly inconsistent with any sensible appreciation of what happened. Even Mr McCormick accepted in his closing submissions that the pinching could not reasonably be described as an attempt to defuse the situation. To suggest otherwise, as Mr Suarez did, was unarguable. Mr Suarez's evidence on these
topics, which was shown to be flawed, profoundly undermined our confidence in the reliability of his evidence.
Click to expand...

Suarez's testimony was so inconsistent they were sure he was lying, he changed his story when presented with video evidence. This is what lawyers do, catch you in lies. If you lie, they are going to take the other man's word. So not only does he get the admitted charge, but the rest of what Evra claims he said.

And he had access to the best lawyers, there's no excuse. He's a liar, and a racist. I don't care if you mean it or not, using that sort of language makes you a racist. It wasn't just one 'negro' that slipped out. If he's ever allowed to play football again in England he's lucky.
 
gooDevil said:
There it is. That's everything, and he admitted it.
Click to expand...

I think you might have misread that. He admitted using the word negro, but he didn't admit that it was not conciliatory and friendly, that was the finding of the panel. A finding I entirely agree with mind, but it's not as much of a confession as your post would seem to make out.
 
I genuinely don't understand the reasoning of Liverpool in all of this. I mean, I expected this sort of behavior out of RAWK, but not the club itself. Don't they realize what a massive image problem this causes in the entire world?
 
Eugenius said:
"Mr Evra denied using the words "South American" when speaking to Mr Suarez. When it was put to him that he had done so, he seemed genuinely bemused. He said to address someone as "South American" in this way is not something he would do. He said "What's the sense? What's the point?". There was no evidence of Mr Evra using this phrase on any other occasions."

evra73f68.gif
Click to expand...

So basically, things that they made up entirely include

- Evra addressed Suarez as a 'sudaca' or in some other way referred to South America
- Suarez used the word 'negrito' LOOK EVERYONE DANI PACHECO USED THAT WORD ON TWITTER TOO IT ISN'T OFFENSIVE
- Evra complained to the ref that he was being booked for being black
 
kietotheworld said:
I think you might have misread that. He admitted using the word negro, but he didn't admit that it was not conciliatory and friendly, that was the finding of the panel. A finding I entirely agree with mind, but it's not as much of a confession as your post would seem to make out.
Click to expand...

How else do you read that sentence?

I figured they made that statement because they caught him contradicting himself as to whether he was being 'friendly and conciliatory'. He claimed the pinch was friendly and then admitted that it wasn't during later questioning. I suspect they got him to admit he wasn't really being concilatory at that moment. But I haven't seen that part yet.
 
gooDevil said:
How else do you read that sentence?
Click to expand...

Thought you were reading it as him admitting that the use of the term was not friendly. My bad.

I figured they made that statement because they caught him contradicting himself as to whether he was being 'friendly and conciliatory'. He claimed the pinch was friendly and then admitted that it wasn't during later questioning. I suspect they got him to admit he wasn't really being concilatory at that moment. But I haven't seen that part yet.
Click to expand...

He admitted that the pinch wasn't really conciliatory, he was trying to tell Evra that he was not untouchable after Evra had threatened to punch him. The pinch itself is normally seen as racist in South America apparently, because it is a reference to the skin itself.

Of course, according to Liverpool, South American culture should only be considered when it comes to things that can get Suarez off the hook. Certainly the pinch was not conciliatory, as Suarez had initially (and bizarrely) claimed.
 
kietotheworld said:
He admitted that the pinch wasn't really conciliatory, he was trying to tell Evra that he was not untouchable after Evra had threatened to punch him. The pinch itself is normally seen as racist in South America apparently, because it is a reference to the skin itself.
Click to expand...

I don't remember reading that when I was going through it, I thought it said the pinch had no specific meaning to it other than to try and wind Evra up.
 
Maybe it's because I'm pissed but am I the only one thinking Kenny should walk on the back of all this?
 
Xander45 said:
I don't remember reading that when I was going through it, I thought it said the pinch had no specific meaning to it other than to try and wind Evra up.
Click to expand...

Paragraph 73

The only exception to that in this case might be in relation to Mr Suarez's alleged pinching of Mr Evra's skin. That might be said to be abusive or insulting behaviour in breach of Rule E3(1) in itself. If so, the separate question would then arise as to whether that pinching included a reference to Mr Evra's ethnic origin, colour or race.

However, in relation to Mr Evra's other allegations, the first question of whether the words used were abusive or insulting is inextricably linked to the second question of whether they included reference to ethnic origin, colour or race.

Also Paragraph 185


185. Mr Evra stated that Mr Suarez touched his arm at this stage, "indicating my skin". Mr Suarez's action is difficult to interpret; it looks like a pinch, intended perhaps to annoy or provoke. The experts were not aware of any River Plate-specific meaning attached to this gesture. It was by no means clear to the experts that this was a reference to skin colour, but
it might have been. In the experience of Peter Wade, in Colombia people may touch their own forearms to indicate their own skin colour or when issues of skin colour are being discussed or when they are indicating that skin colour was at issue in some incident, the gesture is usually to rub the forearm with the forefinger; the gesture is not used on someone else. In the context of all the previous usages of "negro" and "negros", however, it is very possible that this gesture was a way of highlighting Mr Evra's skin colour and would therefore constitute a racially offensive gesture
 
Absolutely ridiculous that Suarez would claim a pinch on the arm is a reconciliatory or friendly gesture.

His contradictions in light of Comolli and Kuyt's testimony show him up to be a real scumbag.

The FA's only contribution to this was the punishment. A measly 8 match ban. It's a complete joke.
 
Kraftwerker said:
Absolutely ridiculous that Suarez would claim a pinch on the arm is a reconciliatory or friendly gesture.

His contradictions in light of Comolli and Kuyt's testimony show him up to be a real scumbag.

The FA's only contribution to this was the punishment. A measly 8 match ban. It's a complete joke.
Click to expand...

Absolute joke. I can't stop thinking that.GCHQ similar to many others who have mentioned it here are bang on.8 months for a missed drugs test or 8 matches for racist abuse. It just doesn't make sense.

Can I just ask a couple questions. I've read the main points in articles and it seems that the 3 man panel wasn't happy with Suarez turn of events where they believe what he said was inconsistent to what he said.

What are the inconsistencies? His eveidence compared to Kuyt's and Comollis, The Pinch and the first confrontation?Also how did the panel come to the conclusion about Suarez saying negro 7 times?Apologies for this I will spend some time tomorrow reading the report fully.

RAWK will never let this go because they want 'evidence' despite him admitting using the word negro isn't good enough.

The funny thing is I said before that he would have got away with it had he not told a paper that he called him a negro (when the FA told both clubs to keep quiet. He is a complete prick.

I don't get how they can say he is NOT a racist if he did say all of that. The FA are a joke.
 
So, Dalglish and LFC knew all along that Suarez had indeed called Evra a negro yet backed him to the hilt while accusing evra of lying? christ, what an absolutely pathetic club. The fans, with all due respect to the loons that are on RAWK, are led by the club's stance on the affair. LFC have handled this poorly and have quite clearly backed a racist.

The 8 game ban, as quite a few have said is an absolute joke. I really hope the fecker appeals and has the ban extended to the end of season. LFC and Dalglish should also be punished in some way. They have basically thrown their name and image to the mud to back their star player fully aware of his actions. despicable behavior.

Kudos to the FA for a thorough investigation but they have still bottled the punishment imo. For all their hue and cry about the "kick racism out of football", there was a high profile case in hand to set an example and all they did was ban him for 8 fecking games. Should have banned him ATLEAST till the end of season.
 
RAWK is just full of contradictions.

I don't think I can read much more of it. I genuniely believe a small minority actually believe he's guilty yet are too afraid to voice their opinion knowing they'll be criticised despite what they say.

The level of stupidity that the fans reached when they released the first statement was plain ignorance where they dismissed any common sense or thoughtful thinking whatsoever.

Now look at the feckers

"We were too naive in our defence and should have played it like them, with rehearsed statements and proper legal preparation."

"This whole affair has been a PR disaster and we seemed to lose control of the narrative early on."
 
kietotheworld said:
Thought you were reading it as him admitting that the use of the term was not friendly. My bad.
Click to expand...

No, that's what I'm saying. That's what it said:

Mr Suarez's admitted use of the word "negro" when speaking to Mr Evra was not conciliatory and friendly.
Click to expand...

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!

kietotheworld said:
He admitted that the pinch wasn't really conciliatory, he was trying to tell Evra that he was not untouchable after Evra had threatened to punch him. The pinch itself is normally seen as racist in South America apparently, because it is a reference to the skin itself.

Of course, according to Liverpool, South American culture should only be considered when it comes to things that can get Suarez off the hook. Certainly the pinch was not conciliatory, as Suarez had initially (and bizarrely) claimed.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Neo_Mufc said:
I don't think I can read much more of it. I genuniely believe a small minority actually believe he's guilty yet are too afraid to voice their opinion knowing they'll be criticised despite what they say.
Click to expand...

can you blame them? Anyone who isn't saying the report is the FA's plan to get Liverpool because Sir Alex said they should, is getting abused and potentially banned if they don't immediately back down and apologise.

I don't get the point of having a forum if you won't allow free speech.

To be honest, I feel sick every time I think of RAWK. I remember when a mod closed down a thread where the OP was praising Sir Bobby Charlton, but not before calling him a tout. If I remember correctly it was around the time of the 'United' bbc drama about Munich too. Sour shower of pricks.
 
Neo_Mufc said:
Absolute joke. I can't stop thinking that.GCHQ similar to many others who have mentioned it here are bang on.8 months for a missed drugs test or 8 matches for racist abuse. It just doesn't make sense.

Can I just ask a couple questions. I've read the main points in articles and it seems that the 3 man panel wasn't happy with Suarez turn of events where they believe what he said was inconsistent to what he said.

What are the inconsistencies? His eveidence compared to Kuyt's and Comollis, The Pinch and the first confrontation?Also how did the panel come to the conclusion about Suarez saying negro 7 times?Apologies for this I will spend some time tomorrow reading the report fully.

RAWK will never let this go because they want 'evidence' despite him admitting using the word negro isn't good enough.

The funny thing is I said before that he would have got away with it had he not told a paper that he called him a negro (when the FA told both clubs to keep quiet. He is a complete prick.

I don't get how they can say he is NOT a racist if he did say all of that. The FA are a joke.
Click to expand...

No! They are not a joke and the three man commission did the best they could out of a difficult case. Without a clear evidence it's hard to punish him harder.

The most damaging thing for Liverpool is not the 8 game ban but that one of their players according to the report can't be trusted. Another worrying thing for them is that they have miss credit Evra without any single proof and that they have questioned his character in a written official statement when the commission found his witness to be credible and composed.
 
Have just read the last 10 pages. So let's get this straight.

Suarez tells Dalglish and Comolli that he said 'because you are black'. Kenny tells Marriner, Comolli tells Dowd. Dowd asks for a spelling of because you are black and instead gets negro?

So effectively Liverpool FC knew he racially abused Evra and denied this throughout?

Please correct me if I'm wrong because this just sounds fecked up.
 
^Pretty much and then Suarez said to the panel - I was misunderstood by Comolli in Spanish, and Kuyt in Dutch - despite both of them translating his words into the same English phrase from those languages....HAHAHAH.
 
I can't get over how badly Liverpool have come off as a club in this whole thing. It's beyond belief.

Comolli in particular has come off so badly that his position may be untenable.

The whole thing about him stating to the Marriner and Dowd that Suarez had said "Porque tu es negro" and even going to the extent of spelling out each word, then to turn around and deny that he said the "tu es" part so that it fits in with Liverpool's defence that the only time Suarez used the word "negro" was when he asked Evra "Porque negro?" in a friendly fashion - that's unbelievable.

He should be questioned on why his testimony that he didn't say (or spell out) the "tu es" part of the sentence to Dowd contrasts with the testimony of Dowd and Marriner that he did.

Liars, the fecking lot of them.
 
What a clusterfeck for Liverpool. If, as seems likely, all that comes of this is an 8 week ban for Suarez then they are very lucky indeed. Their actions from day one have been inherantly dishonest and incredibly stupid.

I feel for Glen Johnson who has been put in a terrible position and hopefully all this unhelpful and unnecesary talk of him being Dalglish's Uncle Tom will disappear.
 
Suarez could be banned for life if that happens again. Would love to see that happen the cnut
 
You must log in or register to reply here.