Evra accuses Suarez of racism

[Roboklopp]

Fair point PTP, assuming they play by the rules.

[BigChief]

Fair point PTP, assuming they play by the rules.

That's what I'm getting at with my question. Can we not retrospectively force this issue to go to a court of law. Doesn't matter if no one complained, Suarez has now been confirmed guilty of racism that should be enough for the police to now step in.

Then watch the shoddy FA plans unravel.

[The_weatherman]

That's what I'm getting at with my question. Can we not retrospectively force this issue to go to a court of law. Doesn't matter if no one complained, Suarez has now been confirmed guilty of racism that should be enough for the police to now step in.

Then watch the shoddy FA plans unravel.

Isn't the ban based on being abusive rather than racist though? Although, if so, that makes the case weirder still.

[Lecter]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMOWi3PRDJM"]Patrice Evra and his high pitched voice - YouTube[/ame]

[The_weatherman]

I'm so mad I can't concentrate, goddamit

[Shaggy]

Liverpool FC: James’ Pearce’s verdict on the Luis Suarez ban

• by James Pearce, Liverpool Echo
• Dec 21 2011
Comments (18)
Recommend (16)
•

•
A FEELING of disbelief and anger hangs over Anfield today. Over the past two months Liverpool FC have stood firmly behind Luis Suarez confident that the serious allegations of racist abuse made by Patrice Evra would be thrown out.
Yet the club’s worst nightmare came true last night. The Football Association handed out an eight-game ban, coupled with a £40,000 fine, after the independent regulatory commission found him guilty of ‘used insulting words’ towards Evra including a ‘reference to his colour’.

An appeal is certain with Liverpool FC’s hard-hitting statement laying bare their fury at not only the outcome but also the way in which this investigation was conducted.

The fact is this was a case of one player’s word against another’s. Remarkably, the three-man panel decided that Evra was the more reliable witness.

This was the same player who was involved in high profile allegations of racism three years ago following a bust-up with Chelsea groundsman Sam Bethell at Stamford Bridge.

An FA hearing described Evra’s account of events that day as “exaggerated and unreliable” and the charge of racism was thrown out.

After the 1-1 draw at Anfield back on October 15 Evra accused Suarez of racially abusing him “more than 10 times” yet no-one inside a crowded penalty area at the Kop End or in the crowd heard anything.

Not one of Evra’s team-mates came forward to back up his serious allegations, including goalkeeper David De Gea, who speaks Spanish.

Suarez, for his part, admitted to saying ‘why, negro?’ to Evra on one occasion after Evra said ‘Don’t touch me, you South American’.

The word ‘negro’ is Spanish for black and in his native South America it is not deemed to be offensive. Someone with black hair is often called that without any malice intended.

Brighton boss and fellow Uruguayan Gus Poyet recently explained: “In Uruguay it is a nickname for someone whose skin is darker than the rest. It is not offensive. Such people are part of society.

“We will defend them, go to war with them, share everything with them and at the same time use that word.”

Strangely, those linguistic and cultural differences appear to have carried little weight with the commission.

As did the fact that Suarez took time out during the 2010 World Cup in South Africa to attend charitable projects in the townships promoting inclusion for everyone in sport.

As did the fact that prior to his move to Anfield in January this year he was captain of a multi-racial Ajax team.

As did the fact that Suarez comes from a mixed race family background himself as his grandfather is black.

There are fears that the FA have wanted to make an example of Suarez. That they had to be seen to be strong on racism following the governing body’s long-running feud with Fifa president Sepp Blatter, who was recently pilloried for suggesting someone who is racially abused during a game should simply shake hands with the perpetrator after the final whistle.

Paul Goulding QC, who chaired the independent commission, even accepted in his opening statement that Suarez wasn’t racist. So why come to the conclusion they did?

There is also anger at the way the investigation was conducted.

Suarez was interviewed on just one occasion. He was asked for his version of events and was never shown any video footage.

However, Evra was interviewed on more than one occasion and given video evidence to consider before he submitted his final statement. Why?

Why also has Evra not been charged despite admitting during the course of the investigation that he made foul mouthed comments to Suarez about a member of his family.

With Suarez also facing another FA charge for an alleged offensive gesture made to Fulham fans recently, there are real concerns that a witch hunt is being conducted against Liverpool FC.

For now Liverpool must wait until the commission’s written judgement arrives through the post over the coming days. From then they will have 14 days in which to lodge an appeal.

In the meantime Suarez, who described yesterday as ‘painful’, is available for Liverpool FC to face Wigan at the DW Stadium tonight – but whether he’s in the right frame of mind is another matter.

[Havors]

Well at the end of the day a quick appeal to the European Courts, or even the UK courts would put pressure on the FA to pull their finger out and do things properly.

If suarez worked in any other job in the uk and called someone negrito and that person complained then it would go to a disciplinary hearing where it would be thrown out as there is no way of proving one way or another what context it was in or if it was meant in a derogatory manner.... That is were you start to need PROOF and WITNESSES, as the consequences are potential life changing.

This "independent" board can not prove that it was meant maliciously so therefore can not reprimand suarez. Whether he admits saying it is irrelevant. I could say the word Ni**er but that does not mean i was being racist, it all depends on context and translation/cultural context in the suarez case. Would he have been charged with being xenophobic if mentioned Evra's nationality?

Even if Suarez had said it maliciously they can not prove he did so, so therefore can not be found guilty without evidence.

[BigChief]

Isn't the ban based on being abusive rather than racist though? Although, if so, that makes the case weirder still.

Its definitely a racial ban: 4 matches for abuse and 4 additional for racial slur.

[The_weatherman]

The rule that is being applied

E. CONDUCT
MISCONDUCT
1. The Association may act against a Participant in respect of any “Misconduct”, which is defined as being a breach of the following:
(a) the Laws of the Game;
(b) the Rules and regulations of The Association and in particular Rules E3 to 28 below;
(c) the statutes and regulations of UEFA;
(d) the statutes and regulations of FIFA;
(e) the rules or regulations of an Affi liated Association or Competition; and
(f) an order, requirement, direction or instruction of The Association.

2. The same facts or matters may constitute a breach of more than one rule, regulation,
statute or law referred to above, The Association may bring a charge or such charges as it
sees fit.

GENERAL BEHAVIOUR
3.
(1) A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.
(2) In the event of any breach of Rule E 3(1) including a reference to any one or more of a person’s ethnic origin, colour, race, nationality, faith, gender, sexual orientation or disability (an “aggravating factor”), a Regulatory Commission shall consider the imposition of an increased sanction, taking into account the following entry points:
For a first offence, a sanction that is double that which the Regulatory Commission would have applied had the aggravating factor not been present.
For a second offence, a sanction that is treble that which the Regulatory
Commission would have applied had the aggravating factor not been present.
Any further such offence(s) shall give rise to consideration of a permanent
suspension.
These entry points are intended to guide the Regulatory Commission and are not mandatory.
The Regulatory Commission shall have the discretion to impose a sanction greater or less than the entry point, according to the aggravating or mitigating factors present in each case.

[JohnDoe]

Do people still think the FA is not corrupt?

[The_weatherman]

So the word is abusive first and racist second? What constitutes being abusive? Is not calling other players divers on the verge of being abusive? Is that not bringing the game into disrepute? So if the word is negrito and it's abusive and brings the game into disrepute I reckon Hernandez should be banned for that as well.

[Craig_H]

The bit in the LFC statement, which questions Evra's character, has been removed.

[destinydude]

So the word is abusive first and racist second? What constitutes being abusive? Is not calling other players divers on the verge of being abusive? Is that not bringing the game into disrepute? So if the word is negrito and it's abusive and brings the game into disrepute I reckon Hernandez should be banned for that as well.

Easy now there pal. Hernandez said it when he was in Mexico and it is accepted language there.

I understand the frustration that we are going through but let's not get to the Chicarito said it, he should be banned BS

[Shaggy]

Which bit?

This is what's there at the moment.

Liverpool Football Club is very surprised and disappointed with the decision of the Football Association Commission to find Luis Suarez guilty of the charges against him.

We look forward to the publication of the Commission's Judgment. We will study the detailed reasons of the Commission once they become available, but reserve our right to appeal or take any other course of action we feel appropriate with regards to this situation.

We find it extraordinary that Luis can be found guilty on the word of Patrice Evra alone when no-one else on the field of play - including Evra's own Manchester United teammates and all the match officials - heard the alleged conversation between the two players in a crowded Kop goalmouth while a corner kick was about to be taken.

The Club takes extremely seriously the fight against all forms of discrimination and has a long and successful track record in work relating to anti-racist activity and social inclusion. We remain committed to this ideal and equality for all, irrespective of a person's background.

LFC considers racism in any form to be unacceptable - without compromise. It is our strong held belief, having gone over the facts of the case, that Luis Suarez did not commit any racist act. It is also our opinion that the accusation by this particular player was not credible - certainly no more credible than his prior unfounded accusations.

It is key to note that Patrice Evra himself in his written statement in this case said 'I don't think that Luis Suarez is racist'. The FA in their opening remarks accepted that Luis Suarez was not racist.

Luis himself is of a mixed race family background as his grandfather was black. He has been personally involved since the 2010 World Cup in a charitable project which uses sport to encourage solidarity amongst people of different backgrounds with the central theme that the colour of a person's skin does not matter; they can all play together as a team.

He has played with black players and mixed with their families whilst with the Uruguay national side and was Captain at Ajax Amsterdam of a team with a proud multi-cultural profile, many of whom became good friends.

It seems incredible to us that a player of mixed heritage should be accused and found guilty in the way he has based on the evidence presented. We do not recognise the way in which Luis Suarez has been characterised.

It appears to us that the FA were determined to bring charges against Luis Suarez, even before interviewing him at the beginning of November. Nothing we have heard in the course of the hearing has changed our view that Luis Suarez is innocent of the charges brought against him and we will provide Luis with whatever support he now needs to clear his name.

We would also like to know when the FA intend to charge Patrice Evra with making abusive remarks to an opponent after he admitted himself in his evidence to insulting Luis Suarez in Spanish in the most objectionable of terms. Luis, to his credit, actually told the FA he had not heard the insult.

[Maxiedge]

The English FA has now left itself open to the same accusation of cynicism. What Suarez is alleged to have done is wrong. To draw attention to the colour of someone's skin in a manner that could be construed as pejorative is not acceptable in our reality.

There is a clear case for punishment as part of a process of education. But the eight-game ban would seem to go much further.

Last paragraphs from the BBC write-up. Interesting last line. Are they suggesting a bit of a conspiracy against us?