Suarez: FA publishes reasons for his ban in full

[Chicken Runner61]

Surely the transcript of what was said was purely what Evra told them it was with no other evidence. I still fail.to understand how they can charge Suarez on that basis. The are effectively saying they dont believe Suarrez. I can see why Liverpool are upset.

As Walt stated above Suarez kept changing what he said, but there was video evidence and statements from other which seemed to match the events as stated by Evra and others. Suarez's defence seems to be not that he never said it but that it was what he says all the time here and in S America. The worst thing is that Gus is saying the same sort of thing and worse still if he did try and wash over it by saying that Evra has a history of making these claims.

Evra should not have to put up with that crap in any circumstances and if his claims are true there is no way he should let it continue.

Liverpool are just worried their best player might go home and TBH so are many on here in regard to Gus - but that doesn't make it right

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

You are quick to denounce Evra, but no criticism of Suarez? Your post may be interpreted as racism is tolerable if provoked?

I have followed your posts on this issue since day 1, and now we have the official report, still no condemnation of Suarez (or Gus for blindly sticking up for him).

That's an interesting point. I can certainly think of several NSCers whose position on all discussions of racism is simply 'defend the white guy'.

I don't count Lord Bracknell of their number, however.

 

[NMH]

I'm sure he knows he was being racist
Trying to lie his way out of trouble, the club should have told him to apologize from the start to save all this inquest

Ahem... although I can only agree with your sentiment, he should not have to be told by his club - he should face up to his own foibles and admit to his racism as wrong and with no place in sport.

 

[Publius Ovidius]

" I don't talk to blacks"

Mmmmm....do we want that sort of player in our league?

 

[Tooting Gull]

" I don't talk to blacks"

I wonder if Glen Johnson will be wearing T-shirts defending him next week after finding out what was in that report...

 

[Lord Bracknell]

That's an interesting point. I can certainly think of several NSCers whose position on all discussions of racism is simply 'defend the white guy'.

I don't count Lord Bracknell of their number, however.

Thank you. My observations about Evra should be put in the context of the fact that there has been no investigation into Evra's conduct - because no complaints were made to the FA about Evra. I'm fairly certain, though, that any inquiry into what Evra said to Suárez would conclude that Evra started the confrontation and that he behaved in an unacceptable manner.

 

[Chicken Runner61]

Thank you. My observations about Evra should be put in the context of the fact that there has been no investigation into Evra's conduct - because no complaints were made to the FA about Evra. I'm fairly certain, though, that any inquiry into what Evra said to Suárez would conclude that Evra started the confrontation and that he behaved in an unacceptable manner.

Why because he's Black?

I think your are wrong on this LB - I think the Fa looked into the events as far as they related to provocation - but there is / was no provocation that made Suarez's racism acceptable.

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

Why because he's Black?

I think your are wrong on this LB - I think the Fa looked into the events as far as they related to provocation - but there is / was no provocation that made Suarez's racism acceptable.

No kind of provocation should make racism acceptable.

However, Evra does admit he used a phrase that means 'your sister's c--t' and that happened before the behaviour over which Suarez was pulled up to the inquiry.

 

[TS90]

Evra running up to the ref and saying "Ref, ref, he called me black."

Is a particular highlight. So who wants to break the news to him?

 

[Diego Napier]

You are quick to denounce Evra, but no criticism of Suarez? Your post may be interpreted as racism is tolerable if provoked?

I have followed your posts on this issue since day 1, and now we have the official report, still no condemnation of Suarez (or Gus for blindly sticking up for him).

I read LB's post as an attempt to illustrate that there was a bit more to it than Tom H's assertion that all you needed to do was read a single paragraph to understand the entire context.

 

[Chicken Runner61]

No kind of provocation should make racism acceptable.

However, Evra does admit he used a phrase that means 'your sister's c--t' and that happened before the behaviour over which Suarez was pulled up to the inquiry.

That goes on all the time and worse but there is a line you don't cross and Suarez crossed it, from what I read Evra didn't - To sort of prove that I'm pretty sure Suraez doesn't have a sister (6 brothers)!

 

[Reading Posh]

Thank you. My observations about Evra should be put in the context of the fact that there has been no investigation into Evra's conduct - because no complaints were made to the FA about Evra. I'm fairly certain, though, that any inquiry into what Evra said to Suárez would conclude that Evra started the confrontation and that he behaved in an unacceptable manner.

Evra's comment was considered by the Commission. The language experts concluded, and the Commission agreed, that the phrase is equivalent to saying something like "f*** me", and Suarez didn't hear the comment anyway. So Evra has no case to answer, wouldn't you agree?

 

[Acker79]

Evra's comment was considered by the Commission. The language experts concluded, and the Commission agreed, that the phrase is equivalent to saying something like "f*** me", and Suarez didn't hear the comment anyway. So Evra has no case to answer, wouldn't you agree?

Anton Ferdinand didn't hear John Terry' comments, yet Terry is facing court over them, so not hearing the comments doesn't mean Evra doesn't have a case to answer.

 

[fozzie's paper boy]

A reasonable analysis, although will the FA have the guts if he is found innocent in court?

I think if Terry is found not guilty in a criminal court (suspect Roman might be able to stump up the cash for a half decent brief) then the FA are in all sorts of trouble. Having been completely and rightly hardline about racism they either have to charge him (and work out how to write 115 pages explaining how it's ok to contradict the judgement of a criminal court), or if not then they run the risk of being accused of having one rule for the ignorant foreigner and another for the England captain (shortly before a major tournament). And even there is no case then there will be the decision about whether he keeps the captaincy, or indeed gets picked for England.

So on balance I think the FA will be secretly hoping they throw the book at Terry in court...interesting one to watch!

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Having been completely and rightly hardline about racism they either have to charge him (and work out how to write 115 pages explaining how it's ok to contradict the judgement of a criminal court),

The burden of proof in the criminal case will be beyond reasonable doubt, whilst if you look in the Suarez report at the FA it's on the balance of probability. Whilst there might not be enough evidence to convict Terry in a criminal court there might be enough for the FA to find him guilty. An analogy with everyday prosecutions failing in the criminal court but being successful in a private prosecution can be made as the proof burdens are the same.

What you have suggested should not be an issue for the FA.

 

[fozzie's paper boy]

The burden of proof in the criminal case will be beyond reasonable doubt, whilst if you look in the Suarez report at the FA it's on the balance of probability. Whilst there might not be enough evidence to convict Terry in a criminal court there might be enough for the FA to find him guilty. An analogy with everyday prosecutions failing in the criminal court but being successful in a private prosecution can be made as the proof burdens are the same.

What you have suggested should not be an issue for the FA.

Yep - completely understand the subtle differences re burden of proof - and agree therefore in theory they should have no qualms about pursuing a case against Terry. My point is that with the intense public and media scrutiny a guilty verdict in court would make the F.A.'s lives a lot easier.

 

[Ⓩ-Ⓐ-Ⓜ-Ⓞ-Ⓡ-Ⓐ]

Suarez has hit back at this ban, performing a cover of WuTang's classic Shame on a N***a...

"Old dirty Suarez, live and uncut, I roll with the reds and I dive when I'm touched"



[yt]5wwREHz7k5s[/yt]

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

My point is that with the intense public and media scrutiny a guilty verdict in court would make the F.A.'s lives a lot easier.

Totally agree. And a criminal conviction will make the majority of the nation very happy. It's no less than he and his horrible nasty family deserve.