Evra accuses Suarez of racism

[Exiled_red]

I guess that they are suggesting that if you deliberately racially abuse someone because of your prejudices you are a racist. If you 'racially abuse' someone 'accidentally' (because of cultural differences for example), you are guilty of racist abuse, but because it wasn't due to your own beliefs or prejudices you aren't racist.

This is probably very badly worded but hopefully you understand what I'm trying to say. I guess what I am trying to say is that there is maybe some consideration of intent in their interpretation.

[Lee]

Loving our togetherness right now, what a club.

Imagine if this had happened 15 months ago under the old cunt.

Do I believe that Luis Suarez is a racist?

First of all I would have to pose the question 'who is Luis Suarez'. And if you were to tell me that he was Liverpool Football Club's number seven, and our most infuential player of 2011 then I would have to have a discussion with Paul Konchesky and we'd all agree to disagree. However, Luis will have his opinion and I will have mine. You'll have to ask him as to whether he's tainted our relationship, my relationship with Sir Alex, and his relationship with the fans, Sky and the Barclays Premier League.

Then we'll all agree to sit in the corner, not rock the status quo and give Christian Poulsen eight games to show the fans that he can pass the ball.

[BootRoom]

I guess that they are suggesting that if you deliberately racially abuse someone because of your prejudices you are a racist. If you 'racially abuse' someone 'accidentally' (because of cultural differences for example), you are guilty of racist abuse, but because it wasn't due to your own beliefs or prejudices you aren't racist.

This is probably very badly worded but hopefully you understand what I'm trying to say. I guess what I am trying to say is that there is maybe some consideration of intent in their interpretation.

That makes sense, but it doesn't make sense, at least to me, to hand out an 8-match ban for accidental/unintentional use of a racist term.

[Exiled_red]

That makes sense, but it doesn't make sense, at least to me, to hand out an 8-match ban for accidental/unintentional use of a racist term.

Like I say my post is badly worded, perhaps I should have said 'naive' instead of 'accidental' but I think you know what I'm suggesting. I'm not sure if it's right but this is the only explanation I can come up with that makes sense (to me at least).

[Buzzo]

That's my issue with it.

The FA are claiming the word is the problem, no matter the intention of the word. You could argue that's fair enough.

However Evra is the problem. If he feels Suarez is not a racist, why complain about the word he used, as he must believe it was used without racist intentions, & therefore unintentionally offended him.

It's clear to me Evra was looking for excuses for a poor performance, used that as an excuse in the spur of the moment on French tv, & was then urged to follow it up with a formal complaint by his peers or seniors at the club.

I wonder if this case will boil down to Etymology?
Its heading that way. And is somewhat relevant. The thing I find incredible is that the discussion is playing out in the media, with few of the social commentator's having the courage to talk about the word that was used. 'Negrita' or 'Negro' (Im not sure which was used) which everyone is basically being defined as being equivalent to Evra being called a '******'. And that his ignorance of English language and customs is not an excuse for his use of the word. It seems important to discuss the facts? Nobody in the press seem to be capable of discussing the language used because the issue is so thorny. Its going to run and run and run. The fact that Evra also referred to Suarez using a racially descriptive word (I forget what it is) also seems to be being ignored (or is this because Suarez did not make a complaint?).

I also do not understand why the FA report is not instantly available. Surely the compiling and completion of this should be in advance of the judgement and sentencing? This thread will end up with billions of posts, and none of us will be any the wiser or better for it. This entire situation makes me embarrassed to be British.

[wavydavy]

I'm getting the impression that the average footy fan really doesn't give two ****s about this. It's the media doing this to death. Everyone else,I think, just thinks he's been a bit daft. The FA are gonna end up looking total bellends over this when the long awaited report arrives and reveals practically **** all. Everyone's gonna look at what he's said and go "Oh yeah,is that it?" Talksport did two hours tonight on it and apart from a few hand picked weirdos no one bothered their arse phoning in. The fact that it's Evra aswell hasn't exactly got everyone burning Suarez effigies the length and breadth of the nation. Amongst the sensationalist journos and media there are a few who are starting to tell it like it is. Luis is no racist and every football fan in Britain knows it(whether they admit it or not).

[Exiled_red]

Personally my view is that as this is the first real instance where they have had to judge a racism case they want to appear tough to send out a strong message.

I think they have initially looked at the evidence purely in black and white, and concluded that Suarez has used what they deem to be a racist term so they have applied a letter of the law punishment (not considering the cultural differences). For the FA this gets the message out there through the headlines and press reaction of a long ban that if you say something that is deemed racist you will get an 8 game ban for a first offence a 12 game ban for a second offence... in short you will get a long punishment.

In taking this approach they must have then known that the player/club would appeal. I think an appeal will then hand down a more appropriate (i.e. shorter) ban because it considers the cultural and language differences. I think this may always have been the intention.

Initally handing out a long ban and not considering cultural differences, then reducing it on appeal when cultural differences are considered, makes it easier to justify handing out the same 8 match ban in a more clear cut case. i.e. if Suarez were initally handed a 4 match ban (because cultural differences were considered) then someone else where cultural differences weren't a factor could argue that they shouldn't be handed more than 4 games because of the precedent this set. Whereas initially giving Suarez an 8 match ban sets a precedent for the worst cases. It's a nasty thing to do to Suarez, but this is the FA they are only concerned with themselves.

[Rafa Justice]

What are your guys thoughts on stuff that's posted on other forums? Seen loads of libel posted on the f365 forum and the modd/admins seem to be letting it slide. Accusing the club of inciting racial hatred, being racist, etc. The forum is owned by Sky. Seeing as the club are banning The Mirror for their headline, would they have something to say about Sky basically condoning libelling the club?

[Leyton388]

What are your guys thoughts on stuff that's posted on other forums? Seen loads of libel posted on the f365 forum and the modd/admins seem to be letting it slide. Accusing the club of inciting racial hatred, being racist, etc. The forum is owned by Sky. Seeing as the club are banning The Mirror for their headline, would they have something to say about Sky basically condoning libelling the club?

Im sure the club will be monitoring the situation and will take strong action in due course and send out the Grabinator.

[little dave hedgehog]

funny what they expect from a guy who arrived less than a year ago and didn't speak a word of english.

[Buzzo]

funny what they expect from a guy who arrived less than a year ago and didn't speak a word of english.

That's the thing. Didn't the alleged conversation take place in Spanish...?

[Rafa Justice]

Im sure the club will be monitoring the situation and will take strong action in due course and send out the Grabinator.

You can't view it without a login tbf. The admin of the site is **** scared of libel as the main site was sued by Martin O'Neill over a story they copied from The Mirror. His lawyers were all over it and the admin was ****ed over as he wrote the story. They can't even mention his name on there.

[Vermilion]

Saw this comment on U-tube below the vid posted above, and by ElAlonso, i didn't actually know what words Evra had used, just knew he said 'South American' but in Spanish i thought.

This is unfair, I mean, because if you punish Suarez and Evra not? He said

"Do not touch me Sudaka"

a racist term for the South Americans in Europe, the only thing racist is the decision of FA

Then doing a bit of research....found this question on Yahoo...

Question...¿Alguien me puede explicar que es un sudaka o sudaca o como se escriba?

Answer....Mejor respuesta - Elegida por el usuario que pregunta
Se escribe SUDACA, y es un término despectivo usado en España para referirse a los sudamericanos, con las connotaciones peyorativas de que son medio indios y pobres, que tienen que venir a buscar trabajo. Esto, evidentemente, no es lo que YO pienso, es lo que connota el término.
Pero tampoco te ofendas demasiado, macho, yo creo que hay términos despectivos en todos los países contra los extranjeros o contra los del propio país pero de otra provincia. Así de majos somos en la raza humana.

Translated.....

Question....Someone can explain what a greaser Sudaka or Composing?

Answer...Sudaca is written, and is a derogatory term used in Spain to refer to the South Americans, with the pejorative connotations that are half Indian and poor, who have come to find work. This obviously is not what I think, is what the term connotes.
But do not be offended too, man, I think there are derogatory terms in all countries against foreigners or against their own country but another province. It's nice people are in the human race.

http://es.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060914121910AAO2biT

If Evra used this word, and the above description of it's meaning is true, then the FA are on a very sticky wicket imo, and charging one without the other is quite simply a travesty.

[john316]

Where is the Captain and Vice Captain in all this, with public support of Suarez? Reina has said something, and Johnson has let his feelings be known.

The only players far as I'm aware who have personally released comment are those with an official Twitter/Facebook account? Carra/Stevie G don't use either far as I'm aware and neither is going to release official statements to something like the Echo. They avoided that approach during the dark days of the 'previous administration' and I'd imagine we won't hear anything unless they comment on a match day.

[Shanks]

If the panel had said he's racist and racially abused Evra I could follow the argument.
If they said he's not racist and did not racially abuse Evra I could follow that also.
I could also follow if they said he's racist but didn't racially abuse Evea.
I can't though follow the argument that he's not racist but did racially abuse Evra. I would have thought that only racists racially abuse people.

Can someone explain to me how they can rationalise what to me are two conflicting conclusions?

I do suspect that The FA and Evra have to say they think he's not racist to avoid b wing sued; as I assume they don't have evidence that he's racist.

Am I missing something obvious or maybe I don't understand the nuances of racism and racial abuse?

And that is why the FA need to come out and explain this, sooner rather than later.. It's just a big mess at the moment and the media are adding more fuel to the fire..