Sport Football Thread 2011/2012

[SMD]

Not in its entirety.

Then how does that make you any better than the people you're claiming are thick?

[the_debaser]

I've read most of it. There's no incontrovertible evidence or hard fact to say Suarez is guilty, it's more the case that on the balance of probability he is.

There's no way Liverpool could or should sack him over this.

[exwhyzed]

Then how does that make you any better than the people you're claiming are thick?

Because I'm not blindly supporting a player who has pretty convincingly been found guilty of using racist language. Everyone, absolutely everyone, but their own fans are stunned at how Liverpool have responded to this. It's completely mindblowing how deluded they've all become.

[SMD]

Because I'm not blindly supporting a player who has pretty convincingly been found guilty of using racist language. Everyone, absolutely everyone, but their own fans are stunned at how Liverpool have responded to this. It's completely mindblowing how deluded they've all become.

You're blindly condemning him.

[the_debaser]

Anyway, should Evra also be punished for threatening to assault Suarez?

[Windowlicker]

Anyway, should Evra also be punished for threatening to assault Suarez?

He should be shot.

[footle]

Suarez probably thought that pinching things was customary in Liverpool. He shouldn't be condemned for that cultural misunderstanding.

[emjay2kay]

Wait till you get to around paragraph 115, it takes a turn for the worse

In what way? It seems to be just setting out what everyone says happened after the game, and much of it has been agreed.

[emjay2kay]

Anyway, should Evra also be punished for threatening to assault Suarez?

Well, since Suarez has been found guilty of racially insulting Evra, his chances of succeeding with a defence of provocation are pretty good.

[SMD]

In what way? It seems to be just setting out what everyone says happened after the game, and much of it has been agreed.

They discuss the two sides, the cultural nuances, the credibility of the evidence... then toss most of it to one side and make some spectacular leaps of logic.

[SMD]

Well, since Suarez has been found guilty of racially insulting Evra, his chances of succeeding with a defence of provocation are pretty good.

Evra admitted that he abused Suarez first.

[dan_tm]

Suarez probably thought that pinching things was customary in Liverpool. He shouldn't be condemned for that cultural misunderstanding.

Oh, that's good.

[Timmo]

The fact Suarez kept changing his story is enough proof for me.

[SMD]

The fact Suarez kept changing his story is enough proof for me.

Evra changed his story three times.

[DC Lemon]

"I would refer to Glen Johnson as 'negro' in the same way that I might refer to Dirk Kuyt as 'Blondie' - because he has blond hair, or Andy Carroll as 'Grandote' - 'Big Man' - because he is very tall.

Well, Buck-toothed Ratface, that's what we do in this country, apart from the bit about ol' Negro Johnson because that's kind of considered offensive.

[Timmo]

Dirk Kuyt is ginger so his argument falls down entirely.

[KRP]

Well, since Suarez has been found guilty of racially insulting Evra, his chances of succeeding with a defence of provocation are pretty good.

Provocation can only be used as a defence to murder. I seem to remember reading about one case where a father who had killed his baby tried to use the defence (didn't work).

[emjay2kay]

Provocation can only be used as a defence to murder. I seem to remember reading about one case where a father who had killed his baby tried to use the defence (didn't work).

Ha, no prizes for guessing how long it is since I passed my criminal law exams then.

[El Pibe]

You're blindly condemning him.

He's been naughty. He's been punished. Build a bridge and get over it!

[Chooch]

I'm assuming SMD believes Suarezs defence that he was trying to be nice and courteous to Evra then?

[SMD]

I'm assuming SMD belives Suarezs defence that he was trying to be nice and courteous to Evra then?

I'm sorry, I thought the FA were supposed to be impartial and not decide if it's one or the other? This is the first time any of us have seen the evidence and it's a fucking clusterfuck. They make excuses all over the shop for Evra - to the extent of saying his side of the story is credible because his team mates said that he told them. It's such a bizarre case of 'I said so therefore it's right' I can't believe it passes for evidence. And they excuse his abuse of Suarez in Spanish because of the cultural nuance.

[SaintM]

If you are right then Liverpool will appeal and the entire thing will be thrown out. Let's wait and see what they do, eh?

[Guest]

I'm assuming SMD belives Suarezs defence that he was trying to be nice and courteous to Evra then?

We are assuming the FA are now believing Evra is a credible witness, when in the past they said he wasn't.

The FA also believe Kuyt is a liar. Can't they charge him with lying too?

It's just a massive mess and they've made a rod for their own back with this. Rumour is it may drag on for ages, perhaps through the courts.

[redbloodcell]

Its not the FA that have made the ruling.

[Tangent]

I have not read the evidence. Can someone tell me exactly what Suarez claims he said. I know he's supposed to have changed his story, but I'm interested in what words he has actually admitted to saying. SMD?

[Guest]

If you are right then Liverpool will appeal and the entire thing will be thrown out. Let's wait and see what they do, eh?

That would lovely! Let's argue about other things.

[Guest]

I have not read the evidence. Can someone tell me exactly what Suarez claims he said. I know he's supposed to have changed his story, but I'm interested in what words he has actually admitted to saying. SMD?

I'm sorry. Unless you read the entire 115 pages yourself certain sections of the forum will jump up and down and scream blue murder.

I'm still surprised about what Evra said initially to Suarez and what Ferguson said to the ref after the game. All lies, now.

[Tangent]

I'm sorry. Unless you read the entire 115 pages yourself certain sections of the forum will jump up and down and scream blue murder.

It's a simple question. I'm sure someone who has read it can answer.

[Timmo]

I don't know what you're all so upset about, he can use this time off to work on his finishing.

[BlinkyBear]

I'm still surprised about what Evra said initially to Suarez

To which Suarez was perhaps even more suprising with this gem:

Evra then told Suarez he was going to hit him, to which the Uruguay international replied in Spanish: "Dale, negro, negro, negro." That translates to "okay, blackie, blackie, blackie".

Scumbag.

Anyways, for those of you who can't be arsed to read all 115 pages, Football365.com's summary is quite useful:

The Football Association released the independent regulatory commission's full written reasons on its website on Saturday evening.

The 115-page document goes into detail of the case and the conversation the two players had during the match at Anfield on October 15.

On December 20, following a lengthy investigation by an Independent Regulatory Commission, the FA announced that Suarez would be banned for eight matches and fined £40,000 for racially abusing Evra.

The ban was suspended pending an appeal by the Merseyside club.

The report stated in its summary: "Mr Evra was a credible witness. He gave his evidence in a calm, composed and clear way. It was, for the most part, consistent, although both he and Mr Suarez were understandably unable to remember every detail of the exchanges between them.

"Mr Suarez's evidence was unreliable in relation to matters of critical importance. It was, in part, inconsistent with the contemporaneous evidence, especially the video footage. For example, Mr Suarez said that he pinched Mr Evra's skin in an attempt to defuse the situation. He also said that his use of the word 'negro' to address Mr Evra was conciliatory and friendly. We rejected that evidence.

"To describe his own behaviour in that way was unsustainable and simply incredible given that the players were engaged in an acrimonious argument. That this was put forward by Mr Suarez was surprising and seriously undermined the reliability of his evidence on other matters.

"There were also inconsistencies between his accounts given at different times as to what happened."

The incident was triggered in the 58th minute of the match when Suarez fouled Evra. Five minutes later the Manchester United defender was marking Suarez at a Liverpool corner, the first time the two players had come together since the foul.

The two players were then involved in a row, and they were spoken to by the referee Andre Marriner.

Evra made a complaint to the referee at the time and after the game, which triggered an FA investigation.

On November 16 Suarez was charged with using abusive and/or insulting words and/or behaviour towards Evra, including a reference to Evra's ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race.

Between December 14 and December 20 the commission heard evidence about the incident from the match officials and staff from the two clubs including Ryan Giggs, Sir Alex Ferguson and Kenny Dalglish.

The FA's case, according to the report, was that Evra asked Suarez why he had kicked him, to which the forward replied: "Because you are black."

When Evra challenged him to repeat the answer and said he would "punch him", Suarez said: "I don't speak to blacks."

According to the report, Evra then told Suarez he was going to hit him, to which the Uruguay international replied in Spanish: "Dale, negro, negro, negro." That translates to "okay, blackie, blackie, blackie".

Suarez denied the charge. The report stated that Suarez said he "used the word 'negro' in a way with which he was familiar from his upbringing in Uruguay".

The report said: "In this sense, Mr Suarez claimed, it is used as a noun and as a friendly form of address to people seen as black or brown-skinned (or even just black-haired)."

Suarez maintained that when he said "Por que, negro?" to Evra, it was intended in a conciliatory and friendly way. Suarez said this was the only time that he used the word "negro" in his exchanges with Mr Evra during the match.

As part of its investigation, the FA instructed two experts to prepare a written report on the linguistic and cultural interpretations of the words "negro'' and "negros" in Rioplatense Spanish.

Evra also said in his evidence to the commission that Suarez went to touch him and was gesturing at his skin. The report said it looked like Suarez pinched Evra, which the Liverpool player admitted to in his original witness statement to "diffuse the situation".

The language experts concluded that, after analysing Evra's account of the incident, Suarez's use of the words "negro" and "negros" would be understood as offensive in racial terms in Uruguay and Spanish-speaking America. The physical gesture of touching Mr Evra's arm would also, in the context of the phrases used, be interpreted as racist, said the report.

However when the experts looked at Suarez's version of events, they concluded that the terms he used would not be interpreted as racist in Uruguay and Spanish-speaking America.

The commission said in the report that in order to come to a conclusion, it was important to look closely at the credibility and reliability of the witnesses.

Evra, said the commission, was "an impressive witness'' who "demonstrated a measure of balance in his evidence''.

The commission admitted that Suarez was undergoing a stressful time, but said he was "not as impressive a witness as Mr Evra".

In evidence to the commission, Suarez eventually admitted that the pinching of Evra was not an attempt to diffuse the situation.

"This was one example of where Mr Suarez's witness statement was demonstrated to be inconsistent with the facts as shown in the video footage. No satisfactory explanation was given for this inconsistency," said the report.

Another area focussed on in the findings was Suarez's claim that the term he used was "meant in a conciliatory and friendly way".

The commission's members did not agree and stated: "The suggestion that he behaved towards Mr Evra at this time in a conciliatory and friendly way, or intended to do so in using the word "negro", is, in our judgment, simply not credible.''

The commission found that because the conversation took place during "heated exchanges'' which were "confrontational and argumentative" then the interpretation of Suarez's comments to Evra were offensive.

Describing the reason for the severity of the sentence, the commission said: "If professional footballers use racially insulting language on a football pitch, this is likely to have a corrosive effect on young football fans, some of whom are the professional footballers of the future. It also has a potentially damaging effect on the wider football community and society generally. Every professional footballer should be able to play competitive football in the knowledge that references to the colour of his skin will not be tolerated. The same goes for all levels of football.

"Those who are victims of misconduct of this nature should know that, if they complain and their complaint is upheld, the FA will impose an appropriate penalty which reflects the gravity of this type of misconduct."

The commission concluded: "The charge against Mr Suarez was that he used insulting words which included a reference to Mr Evra's colour. We have found that charge proved on the evidence and arguments put before us. The FA made clear that it did not contend that Mr Suarez acted as he did because he is a racist. Mr Evra said in his evidence that he did not think Mr Suarez is a racist.

"Mr Suarez said in evidence that he will not use the word "negro" on a football pitch in England in the future, and we believe that is his genuine and firm intention."

In a statement Liverpool said: "The club can confirm that they received the written reasons from the Regulatory Commission at short notice last night on the evening of the game against Newcastle United.

"The player, the club and our legal advisors will now take the necessary amount of time to read, digest and properly consider the contents of the 115 page judgment and will make no further comment at present."

Liverpool have previously suggested they will appeal and have remained steadfastly behind their player, his team-mates controversially wearing T-shirts with Suarez's face on them prior to the draw at Wigan 11 days ago.

Liverpool have been given until January 13 to respond, meaning Suarez will be free to play in their next three games, including their Carling Cup semi-final, first leg trip to Manchester City on January 11.