Evra accuses Suarez of racism

[Liverpel]

I simply don't know where to start with this...

The picture that shows the caring side of John Terry as he poses in Hamleys with a black baby

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1hOtCt27i

That reminds me of the Father Ted episode where he was accused of being a racist.

[little dave hedgehog]

That reminds me of the Father Ted episode where he was accused of being a racist.

yeah but everything reminds you of that episode. get a new episode, ffs.

[Exiled_red]

Anyone of any race (or mixed race) can be racist towards anyone of any other race (or mixed race).

[mick the click]

...and what's this????? Mr Winter...a joint venture twixt us and the mancs????

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/8976550/Liverpool-manager-Kenny-Dalglish-calls-for-FA-to-act-over-fans-abuse-of-Luis-Suarez.html

Liverpool manager Kenny Dalglish calls for FA to act over fans' abuse of Luis Suarez
Kenny Dalglish has called on the FA to protect Luis Suarez from the "antagonism" of opposing supporters. Wigan fans booed Suárez on Wednesday, the day after the striker was banned for eight matches for calling Patrice Evra "negro" during Liverpool's game with Manchester United at Anfield on Oct 15.


Liverpool also noted the chants about the Uruguayan sung by Manchester United supporters at Fulham on the same night this week. "I think where they [the FA] have to be more supportive is the reaction from people – and the antagonism of the crowds – towards Luis,'' said Dalglish. "That is the great problem."

In the wake of the case, Dalglish asked the FA to publish "guidelines" on what words are unacceptable in football. In his unsuccessful defence, Suárez cited "cultural differences", arguing that it was a descriptive, not racial epithet. "It would be helpful to everyone if someone gave us some guidelines about what you can and cannot say,'' said Dalglish. It is safe to assume that "negro", regardless of its usage in Latin America, would be on any list of proscribed words in England.

The whole sorry saga has been made more problematical by the commission's delay in publishing its reasonings, which Dalglish accidentally called "the written retort" yesterday. The presence of a verdict but no explanation has created a cauldron of uncertainty, bubbling with poisonous conspiracy theories and bile from sections of two great clubs' extensive supports.

If the racially abused Evra must always be remembered as the one who has suffered most, damage has also been inflicted on the relationship between United and Liverpool. Both clubs had been working hard behind the scenes to improve relations, including a possible joint overseas venture, but the Suárez-Evra maelstrom has set back that rapprochement.

A tense situation has deteriorated even further since the FA pronounced Suárez guilty on Tuesday evening. For all his inevitable desire to back his player, Dalglish erred in wearing that T-shirt supporting Suárez. As manager, Dalglish should have left such acts to the players. His words alone were eloquent enough backing for the man in the No 7 shirt he once graced.

"It's never a disappointment when your team-mates and people you work for give you their undivided support,'' said Dalglish. "For me, that's the least he deserves. Luis was quite emotional, very grateful. He is a very strong character. Obviously he would be better off without it, but he is a strong enough character. He has handled it very well up to now so I wouldn't expect him to show anything other than total strength.

''If Luis is fit and well, he will be considered for the matches until such time that he is under sanction.'' Suárez loves playing, feeling frustrated when rested.

In supporting Suárez in the immediate aftermath of the verdict, Liverpool issued a strong statement, accusing the commission of pre-judging him and attacking Evra's integrity. Dalglish defended the wording. "The statement couldn't have caused anybody any trouble,'' he insisted. United were hardly impressed.

Clearly, the commission made a major mistake in not releasing the verdict and "written reasons" simultaneously, leaving Dalglish and many others bemused. "In another walk of life, they would have waited [to announce the outcome] until they had it [reasons] ready. It might be weeks."

Dalglish was keen to strike a conciliatory tone, almost calling for calm amid the frenzied polemicising. "If everybody waited until the statement is written and shown on the FA website, you will have a better idea of why they came to their reasoning,'' he argued.

In the search for enlightenment, the "written reasons" will be pored over as if they were the Rosetta Stone. People will want to know how the tariff of eight games was reached. They will want to know if a precedent has been set which could apply to John Terry, the England captain, if he is charged by the FA with racially abusing Anton Ferdinand. Will the commission provide a lexicon of acceptable and unacceptable words?

So many questions need answering. Is the delay designed to ensure that when Liverpool appeal (within 14 days of receiving the written reasons), Suárez's ban takes in Old Trafford on Feb 11? Is there any legitimacy to Liverpool's hope that any of Evra's comments come under FA scrutiny? Did the commission note that Suárez's grandfather was black?

From the Boston base of the club's owners to the Kop, Dalglish enjoys incredible backing. For those arguing he is too powerful, that the club miss the steadying presence of an executive like Peter Robinson in the past, it needs mentioning that Dalglish is aware of his responsibilities to Liverpool's image. He just wants to support a popular player who he feels has suffered an injustice.

Yet the fact remains that Suárez has been found guilty of racially abusing Evra. The fact also remains that the tribalism tainting relations between Liverpool and United, and Anfield's long-standing scepticism towards the FA, has turned the manageable blaze of a disciplinary case into a towering inferno.

Like Sir Alex Ferguson, Dalglish cares about the game but, again like Ferguson, he will fight his club's corner. Liverpool's manager wants people to see that the FA could have agendas and he will be following any Terry developments with interest. He has already publicly noted that the FA has undermined its own disciplinary system by challenging Uefa's, successfully so in reducing Wayne Rooney's three-match ban for violent conduct.

Another United player. Paranoia permeates the heated air in the debating chamber deliberating on Suárez v Evra. Rancour deepens between England's greatest two clubs. Sadly, like a broken sewer, this story will drip and drip, run and run, threatening to contaminate the season, spreading ill-will to all men.

[Vermilion]

Hopefully without seeming to be denegrating the importance and badness of racism, when a non racist person makes a racist comment in the heat of the moment, is it worse than wishing death on someone, or wishing terminal illness on someone, because going on the reaction to Suarez it seems it is.

Then again, it's football fans, so agendas are rife.

[Exiled_red]

I would assume it's some cultural or anti-racism campaign or something like that

[Paul12]

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?

I don't want to take the conversation off at a tangent, but I personally would regard a racist as someone who treats or thinks of people differently because of their race or skin colour. On that 'definition', all the evidence suggests he is not a racist. But he might still have made an abusive comment that included one or more references to Evra's colour.

[Liverpel]

Sir Alex Ferguson has broken his silence on the Luis Suárez affair, describing the Liverpool striker's eight-match ban for racially abusing Patrice Evra as "the right decision" and indicating that the Anfield club should accept the guilty verdict.

Liverpool's vigorous defence of the Uruguayan, including the controversial decision to warm up for their game at Wigan in Suárez T-shirts, has led to widespread criticism throughout the game. Ferguson was not willing to talk about Liverpool's protest statement, in which they described Evra as "not reliable" and called on the Football Association to issue a separate charge against the Manchester United defender, but he made clear that the Premier League champions felt vindicated.

"Our support of Patrice was obvious right from the word go and that's still the same. The matter is over and I think we're satisfied that they [the FA's independent commission] found the right decision. This wasn't about Manchester United and Liverpool at all. It was nothing to do with that. This was an individual situation where one person was racially abused."

Liverpool maintain that was not the case, despite Suárez reportedly admitting using the word "negro", and are now waiting for the commission chairman, Paul Goulding QC, to deliver his full written findings before deciding whether to lodge an appeal.

That risks an even longer ban and Ferguson drew a parallel with the way United reacted when Evra was banned for four matches in 2008 for becoming embroiled in a post-match fight with Sam Bethell, a Chelsea groundsman. The club, he pointed out, had accepted the verdict.

"Patrice got that suspension for the incident down at Chelsea when no one was there, just a groundsman and our fitness coach. He got a four-match ban and we had to wait two weeks for the evidence to come through. We were quite astounded at that. A four-match ban? We thought it was well over the top for a trivial incident. But it happened and there's nothing you can do about it, you know."

The insinuation was that Liverpool should accept Suárez's guilt but there is no sign of that from Anfield, with Kenny Dalglish maintaining he had no regrets over the T-shirt protest and aggressive wording of their statement.

"The club have issued a statement and the players have made their statement both visually and verbally," said Dalglish. "The statement couldn't have caused anybody any trouble. I don't think the players have caused any trouble with the FA either with their statement or by their support with the T-shirts. If we are not in any trouble, we will just leave it at that before we do get into any trouble."

Dalglish said "it might be weeks" before the commission's findings are made public and believes the verdict and the reasons for it should have been released simultaneously. In the vacuum, the Liverpool manager fears opposition crowds will declare open season on Suárez, as was the case at the DW Stadium on Wednesday.

He said: "I wouldn't think it is helpful to anybody that it [the verdict] is done before we have seen the written documents. If that's the way they have always done it then we cannot complain. I wouldn't know because I have never been involved in anything like this before.

"They [the Football Association] run the game; we don't, do we? Whether you agree with it is another matter. In another walk of life, they would have walked away and waited until they had it ready. But this is what happened. I think where they have to be more supportive is the reaction from people – and the antagonism of the crowds – towards Luis. That is the great problem."

The Liverpool manager believes the fallout from the complex case will be far-reaching for the FA. "It would be helpful to everyone if someone gave us some guidelines about what you can and cannot say," he argued. Yet despite his concerns over the hostility towards Suárez, who is also facing an improper conduct charge for allegedly making an offensive gesture towards Fulham supporters at Craven Cottage on 5 December, Dalglish is adamant the 24-year-old can handle the scrutiny.

"Obviously he would be better off without it, but he is a strong enough character and he has handled it very well up to now so I wouldn't expect him to show anything other than total strength. If Luis is fit and well, he will be considered for the matches until such time that he is under sanction."

Ferguson is clearly unimpressed with the lengths to which Liverpool have gone, including Dalglish's decision to wear a Suaárez T-shirt during a television interview on Wednesday. "I don't need to talk about it," he said, before adding pointedly: "I'm happy with how I run my club."

The United manager was asked whether he fears it will worsen the rivalry between the two clubs. "This is the biggest derby game in the country," he replied. "It's never needed anything to light the powder keg; it's always there."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/dec/23/alex-ferguson-luis-suarez-ban

[ChesterDave]

A trivial incident? It was a ****ing brawl.

[Vermilion]

Ferguson, as hypocritical as ever.

[Exiled_red]

No surprises there with old Whisky nose's comments

[Mostar]

Ferguson, as hypocritical as ever.

Nothing new

[JHP]

I don't want to take the conversation off at a tangent, but I personally would regard a racist as someone who treats or thinks of people differently because of their race or skin colour. On that 'definition', all the evidence suggests he is not a racist. But he might still have made an abusive comment that included one or more references to Evra's colour.

I think the FA rule is that players must not make racist, violent, threatening, abusive, obscene or provocative behaviour, conduct or language.

My point was that I would have thought that only racists will use racist language or conduct themselves as a racist.

[Beastie]

I would assume that in all cases the punishment should reflect the crime. The FA in delivering their verdict, the way it was written (Suarez is not a racist but used a racist comment) and the lengthy delay in releasing the findings, have given the press freedom to crucify him. The punishment that he is receiving goes way way beyond what could be considered appropriate for his crime. The FA has a duty of care to both players, and in delivering their findings should have been aware of the nature even should I say culture of the English press. If anybody has made a mistake in understanding the English culture it is the FA.

It makes Blatters handshake idea look positively genius.

[Fernandinho]

Can someone please do me a favour and summarise the last 30 pages of this for me

Have any new developments occured/appeals been started...