Evra accuses Suarez of racism

[Gaz]

PES is for homosexuals with a hard on for inferior aesthetics and 90s gameplay
We are all Aliens just that most of us have not made first contact with ourselves yet
Carmina Burana is what I hear in my head every time I post on an internet forum, walk into a room, climb a mountain, save a kitten up a tree, save a small country, watch Steven Gerrard score a goal.
Marky was a misunderstood genius sent from the future to kill Sarah Conner, unfortunately he misheard Sarah Lee and died of over consumption of delicious frozen foods.

Pssss right I am off

[Liverpel]

A view on this from a Manc perspective:


How Patrice Evra has never played the race card and why assumptions are dangerous
OCTOBER 17, 2011 227 COMMENTS
Football can do a lot of things. It can turn completely stable people into emotional wrecks, it can play with our emotions like nothing else, save perhaps a member of the opposite sex. In short, it’s a very powerful thing. One thing it should not do, however, is to change our perspective. Not footballing perspective, of course you should feel free to argue that your team is better than my team, your fans are louder than my fans, your grass is greener than our grass. But our general perspective, such as the ability to analyse a serious claim, should be unmoved by which football team we hope scores more goals than the other.
On Saturday, Patrice Evra of Manchester United accused Luis Suarez of Liverpool of making racist remarks towards him. Unfortunately, though the ‘of”s in the previous sentence should not be of importance, they have been made so. It has become about football. This is not an incident about football. It took place on a football pitch, between two men wearing football shirts, but it’s not about football. To *******ise a famous Bill Shankly quote, it’s much more important than that.
Immediately after the allegations were made, a lot of people reacted based on which team they supported. United fans were quick to label Suarez a racist, with certainty, whilst Liverpool fans accused Evra of lying, also with certainty.
The latter however, took a somewhat more sinister form. Liverpool fans, and employees, claimed Evra had a history of playing the ‘race card’. For those who don’t know, the race card refers to exploitation of racist attitudes to gain a personal advantage, typically by falsely accusing others of racism against oneself. In essence, they were saying Evra had in the past lied about being targeted by racial abuse. A very serious claim, I’m sure you’ll agree. It stands to reason that if it is a serious thing to claim racist abuse, it is also a serious thing to claim someone has lied about claiming racial abuse.
Liverpool’s official website columnist, Kristian Walsh, claimed on Twitter that “Patrice Evra has accused racism of three players before today. All three have been cleared.” This tweet was retweeted by hundreds of Liverpool fans, as were similar ones. The problem was, that it wasn’t remotely true, not one bit.
In fact, before Saturday, Evra had accused zero people of racism, not the three quoted by Mr. Walsh and dozens of other Liverpool fans, not two, nor even one. There have been two incidents involving Evra and accusations of racial insults, the only problem is that Evra did not claim in either that he was racially abused – the claims came from others.
In the 2006 case of claimed racial abuse by Steve Finnan, the accusation was levelled at Finnan by a deaf fan who claimed he lip-read the racial slur. Evra declined to complain. A rather odd thing to do for a man with a supposed inclination to play the race card, I’m sure you’ll agree.
In the case with involving Chelsea groundsman, Tony Bethell, it was Mike Phelan and Richard Hartis of Manchester United’s coaching staff who claimed they heard the abuse. As the FA report says “The two witnesses who say they heard those words directed by Mr Bethell at Mr Evra are the Manchester United first team coach Mr Mike Phelan and the goalkeeping coach Mr Richard Hartis.” It later goes on to say “Even if we disregard the fact that Mr Evra has never claimed to have heard such a remark on that day, it is notable that there were several other people far nearer to Mr Bethell at the critical point in time than were either Mr Phelan or Mr Hartis.”
So in reality, Evra accused neither Finnan nor Bethell of a racist remark. The claims were done by others. These are the cold, hard facts.
Liverpool is a club that has been hit hard by lies in the past, namely by the despicable Kelvin Mackenzie and the Sun. One might therefore assume that their fans would be careful to ensure that they themselves endeavor to have the full facts of any case emerge. Of course, accusations of racism against Luis Suarez and accusations of the actions of fans on a day where 96 people died are on different scales, however the principle should remain. If in one instance you abhor lies being told where an accusation is made, you should probably endeavor not do so yourself in another instance.
As I touched on earlier, Manchester United fans who have assumed Suarez’s guilt are also worthy of scorn. Just as a lot of Liverpool fans would have reacted differently if Glen Johnson had accused Nemanja Vidic of racist remarks, so too would a lot United fans. Perhaps even incidents involving Johnson and “playing the race card” would have been fabricated.
“Innocent until proven guilty” should not be a changeable stance. If that’s your belief, it’s your belief. It should not be changed because of which football team you prefer. Of course, just as important as “innocent until proven guilty” is that the lack of a guilty verdict does not necessarily mean innocence. In the 1998 adaption of the old play “12 Angry Men”, a juror slowly and painstakingly convinces his fellow jurors not to convict a seemingly guilty man. In the aftermath of the case, he is asked who he believed committed the murder. He replies, to the amazement of the queror, that he thinks it was probably the man he just convinced everyone to acquit.
If, which seems likely, there is found to be not enough evidence, or none, to prove Suarez made racist remarks, inevitably people will assume that Evra was lying. But surely if your initial requirement to the claims that Suarez was racist was “prove it”, the same logic should be applied to the claims that Evra was lying? A lack of proof does not mean an incident has not happened, it simply means it cannot be proven to have happened. As dangerous as it is to assume Suarez is guilty, it is equally as dangerous to conclude Evra is lying if it cannot be proven. It is for this reason that Liverpool as a club have been irresponsible if they have, as has been reported, called for a ban for Evra if the allegations can’t be proven.
The instant reaction of “he’s lying” to an accusation of racism is not only foolish, but dangerous. Chris Kamara has stated that he was frequently racially abused on the football pitch, but would not report it, as it would be impossible to prove and therefore he would not be believed. The 1999 Macpherson Report in Britain concluded that “There is a fear that when people do report incidents [of racism] they won’t be believed or it won’t be taken seriously”. It is therefore safe to assume that the reaction of people to a claim of racist abuse is quite important, and not merely footballing banter. We are talking about something that can have a severe knock-on effect for other people.
Football is a wonderful thing, but can also be a dangerous thing. When we as football fans are switching our moral views, assuming guilt or fabricating incidents based on the shirt a man is wearing, we have gone too far. We cannot and must not lose perspective because of it. As ridiculous as it is for a man who didn’t have another care in the world on Saturday at 12.45, it is only a game.

http://therepublikofmancunia.com/how-patrice-evra-has-never-played-the-race-card-and-why-assumptions-are-dangerous/

[Fivex]

He makes a fair point in that we might never be able to prove what happened but he needs to get off his high horse by the looks of it.

He stopped at the 2nd incident - no mention of the 3rd incident - which was presumably the bizarre Senegal claims? Why no mention of this? But also misses other glaring points, for example why did Evra not report it during the match? Why then present his complaint to the media instead of going through official channels.

He said himself that football fans will ignore things to suit their agenda, which is exactly what he's done here.

[Shaggy]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/oct/19/luis-suarez-liverpool-patrice-evra-united?CMP=twt_gu

Evra must find witness to back him over Suárez racism claim

• FA may drop investigation unless further evidence is found
• Liverpool may ask FA to act in face of 'malicious allegation'

Daniel Taylor
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 19 October 2011 22.41 BST


Luis Suárez increasingly looks like he will not face any charges from the Football Association unless Patrice Evra can produce witness statements to support his allegation that he was racially abused during Manchester United's 1-1 draw at Liverpool last weekend.

The FA is planning to send a delegate to Manchester to interview Evra, possibly on Thursday, now that he is back in the country following the Champions League tie against Otelul Galati.

However, the case may rest on whether any of Evra's team-mates can corroborate his accusation that Suárez repeatedly racially abused him. The Uruguayan has vehemently denied the allegation, with the support of his club, and the FA needs to determine whether it is simply one man's word against another's. If that is the case, there may be nowhere further for the investigation to go.

The FA can also study television pictures but it would be highly unusual if it were to bring in lip-readers, and the inquiry will instead focus initially on what precisely the Senegal-born Frenchman claims was said, and whether his allegations can be backed up.

Evra had claimed on French TV that it happened "at least 10 times", but his case is undermined by the fact he did not bring the allegation to the attention of the referee, Andre Marriner, during the match.

The first Marriner knew of it was afterwards when Evra, accompanied by Sir Alex Ferguson, went to the referee's room to ask him to include it in his match report. Marriner then told the Liverpool manager, Kenny Dalglish, who spoke to Suárez and established that the Uruguayan denied the allegation.

Liverpool's belief is that if the case cannot be proved the FA should consider taking action against Evra on the grounds that it was a malicious allegation. This is unlikely to happen, however, unless there is categorical evidence that Suárez did not do what Evra claims.

A more likely outcome is that the case will be dropped if there are no other United players to support Evra's story. If that is the case, the FA may not even interview Suárez, having already been made aware from the Liverpool end that the allegation is denied. The FA is particularly sensitive to the rivalry between the clubs and eager not to be seen to be making any rash judgments.

However, anti-racism campaign groups such as Kick It Out believe Evra should have approached the referee during the game. Kick It Out launched its three-week 'One Game, One Community' action programme last weekend, and the row between Evra and Suárez came on the same day that both players wore T-shirts to promote the campaign.

[Arn]

However, the case may rest on whether any of Evra's team-mates can corroborate his accusation that Suárez repeatedly racially abused him.

His team-mates shouldn't be allowed to testify. It would be a joke if that happened. Evra or Suarez banned....hmmm.....I think I will imagine up that I heard something because we really need Evra and Liverpool would be ****ed if Suarez got banned.

Just an example of how a few if not all the Man U players must think if they testified.

[BootRoom]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2...ted?CMP=twt_gu

"However, anti-racism campaign groups such as Kick It Out believe Evra should have approached the referee during the game. Kick It Out launched its three-week 'One Game, One Community' action programme last weekend, and the row between Evra and Suárez came on the same day that both players wore T-shirts to promote the campaign."

That's the key part right there; it seems quite incredulous that Evra claims to be very upset about this, yet made no mention of it at the time to the ref, and waited until the end of the game.

[MrMichael]

He makes a fair point in that we might never be able to prove what happened but he needs to get off his high horse by the looks of it.

He stopped at the 2nd incident - no mention of the 3rd incident - which was presumably the bizarre Senegal claims? Why no mention of this? But also misses other glaring points, for example why did Evra not report it during the match? Why then present his complaint to the media instead of going through official channels.

He said himself that football fans will ignore things to suit their agenda, which is exactly what he's done here.

Indeed. He also mentions that Evra "declined to complain" in the thing with Steve Finnan. He completely fails to mention that Evra also refused to support Finnan and deny anything had been said, leaving the whole thing hanging over his head until professional lip readers eventually debunked the claims. I remember seeing the footage of that, and whatever it was Finnan really said, Evra blatantly would have heard and so could have dismissed the whole thing in 5 seconds.

His team-mates shouldn't be allowed to testify. It would be a joke if that happened. Evra or Suarez banned....hmmm.....I think I will imagine up that I heard something because we really need Evra and Liverpool would be ****ed if Suarez got banned.

Just an example of how a few if not all the Man U players must think if they testified.

Hang on Arn, that would be ridiculous. So lets just say for a minute Suarez did do it, and the whole ManU team heard him, none of their evidence whould be taken? Really? Yes the FA should treat it as not entirely impartial, but by the same rule you're also saying that Suarez wouldn't be able to call Liverpool players to say they didn't hear anything. This would make racism on the football pitch, as long as the ref doesn't hear it, more or less impossible to prosecute.

[Neil Young]

Talking of assumptions...

...This is not an incident about football. It took place on a football pitch, between two men wearing football shirts, but it’s not about football...

[/url]

What 'incident'? Is he or she talking about the racial abuse? If so, someone has inadvertently assumed it's happened. Or perhaps the poster refers to the allegation of racial abuse. Yet that didn't take place on the football field.

So the poster has conflated two different things and accordingly managed to skew the very argument he or she is trying to make.

Tricky things, assumptions. They easily infect our thinking without our noticing.

It's right to complain about 'the race card'. It's an odious concept IMO view.

[Arn]

Indeed. He also mentions that Evra "declined to complain" in the thing with Steve Finnan. He completely fails to mention that Evra also refused to support Finnan and deny anything had been said, leaving the whole thing hanging over his head until professional lip readers eventually debunked the claims. I remember seeing the footage of that, and whatever it was Finnan really said, Evra blatantly would have heard and so could have dismissed the whole thing in 5 seconds.



Hang on Arn, that would be ridiculous. So lets just say for a minute Suarez did do it, and the whole ManU team heard him, none of their evidence whould be taken? Really? Yes the FA should treat it as not entirely impartial, but by the same rule you're also saying that Suarez wouldn't be able to call Liverpool players to say they didn't hear anything. This would make racism on the football pitch, as long as the ref doesn't hear it, more or less impossible to prosecute.

That is the only way to take care of cases like this. You can't have team mates supporting your case. It must be neutral sources only.

I didn't create the World If you allow team mates to support your case then it open up a lot chances to get other players banned.

There is as you say a bigger chance that a racist will get away with it but it is better than having a lot of made up racist claims against innocent players.

[Neil Young]

I mentioned the same thing. Roy Keane said that he got instructed by Fergie to take players out of games, that means injure them etc.

I can't say that it is impossible or totally unrealistic that Fergie instructed Evra to blame Suarez for racism. He is the type of manager that would do that if it could help his team.

He alway do whatever help his team. Alway.

[Chrono]

It's right to complain about 'the race card'. It's an odious concept IMO view.

How is it a concept? People have abused every possible angle in the past for selfish reasons and race is certainly one of those.

The number of times I have seen idiots losing an argument with someone immediately turn it from the original disagreement to a race issue is ridiculous.

Or do you not like the phrase?

[Shaggy]

Nice little dig at Ferguson's post match drivel

Kenny Dalglish has pledged Liverpool's 'total and utter' support to Luis Suarez as he continues to battle allegations of racism against Manchester United's Patrice Evra.

France international Evra has alleged that the Reds striker made derogatory comments about during last weekend's 1-1 draw between the sides at Anfield.

Liverpool have backed Suarez in the argument while United boss Sir Alex Ferguson insists that Evra is determined to pursue his case, which the Football Association are currently investigating.

Dalglish today reiterated the club's stance on the matter and insists that Suarez retains the support of everyone at Anfield not only in the racism row but also against accusations of diving.

He said: "The only thing we'll will say and then that's it put to bed - the football club and everyone at the football club is totally, utterly and fully behind Luis Suarez.

"There was an allegation after the game about him diving all over the place, and then another allegation from Patrice Evra.

"Obviously, the two things are quite emotive, but we fully support the wee man in both things, and everybody at the football club does.

"The football club came out at the start of the week and made their position known, and apart from what I've said there, we won't be adding to it.

"We fully look forward to a complete and transparent report from the FA, and we'll cooperate 100% fully."

http://www.clickliverpool.com/sport/liverpool-fc/1214586-liverpool-fc-totally-and-utterly-behind-luis-suarez-in-racism-row.html

[Lee]

He alway do whatever help his team. Alway.

Nice little dig at Ferguson's post match drivel

http://www.clickliverpool.com/sport/...acism-row.html

Kenny is the polar opposite of Ferguson when it comes to intelligence, articulation and class.

[little dave hedgehog]

i love how kenny always calls people wee.

[Norbs]

He alway do whatever help his team. Alway.

pisstaker