Evra accuses Suarez of racism

[Vermilion]

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...

No, just more of the same, people having their say.

[JHP]

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...

No but we are all disgruntled and indignant

[Vermilion]

No but we are all disgruntled and indignant

Don't forget 'befuddled', i know for a fact that there is befuddlement.

[baitman]

im not sure if this has been touched on earlier in the thread, but the FA want us to not be racist, and embrace all cultural diversity, yeh...
so, why crucify our lord and saviour luis suarez at christmas time and not consider his ethnic diversity and the fact that there IS a language difference, and what he said has been taken the wrong way by the race card throwing ****.

[ChesterDave]

im not sure if this has been touched on earlier in the thread, but the FA want us to not be racist, and embrace all cultural diversity, yeh...

Yep. The Kick it Out Campaign. Its very apt, as kicking is about the only thing the FA seem to tolerate.

[TheElephantMan]

I wonder what punishment Suarez would have received if he'd have just nutted the little ****?

[Jack D Rips]

It's being claimed that the delay in issuing the basis for the verdict is because the QC has taken a holidy with the full blessing of the FA.

If that is true the arrogance and incompetence of the FA is beyond belief.

He is married to the Dean of Salisbury, Manchester City fan and Spurs season ticket holder. Due to her job I doubt she would be taking a holiday at this time of year.

[Red_Polo]

You've spouted this "above" and "below" referring to different races bull**** before in this thread. If I actually knew what the **** you were on about I might get offended. It reads like total nonsense

I'll try to explain again.

Racism is the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, distinguishing it as inferior or superior to another race. Racism is therefore based on a perceived hierarchy (by racists) e.g. as practised previously in US/ South Africa, where whites are supreme (that is those with most power and authority are at the top of the racial hierarchy) but where blacks are above people of mixed race (as Suarez could be deemed due to his grandfather).

Racists see those beneath them (in their perceived hierarchy) as inferior and are therefore able to racially abuse them. Hence why society recognises racial abuse of whites over blacks but generally does not vice verse.

On the same basis blacks can be seen to abuse mixed race but mixed race (lower in the perceived hierarchy) are no more able to abuse blacks than blacks are able to abuse whites. Of course racial abuse can take place between any race but historically society/ laws have only really recognised abuse from “superior” races to “lesser” races.

This therefore leads to my point that in the way racism has generally been applied Evra could abuse Suarez but Suarez could not abuse Evra. Especially so with Evra using sudaca to Suarez.

Is that any clearer?

I sense from your comment "you might get annoyed" that you're sensing some racism on my behalf, don't waste your time thinking that, I'm not racist.

You're on to a loser trying to put together a single coherent rational basis for racism. It is irrational and incoherent, and it can both come from and be directed towards people of any background.

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

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.

Anyone can make a racist comment, actually being a racist suggests that the ideas those comments express permeate your worldview to some significant extent. Whether someone has said something racist and whether someone is racist are two completely separate matters.

im not sure if this has been touched on earlier in the thread, but the FA want us to not be racist, and embrace all cultural diversity, yeh...
so, why crucify our lord and saviour luis suarez at christmas time and not consider his ethnic diversity and the fact that there IS a language difference, and what he said has been taken the wrong way by the race card throwing ****.

Agree with you. Based on what has been reported, I think one of the fundamental problems in the way people have interpreted this situation is they have suggested what Suarez said was racist based on literal translation. (It probably doesn't help that some people are also wrongly saying he is innocent based on literal translation.) This is essentially applying the English connotations to the Uruguayan Spanish words, which is pretty idiotic. Frankly I think the way this has been dealt with has show more racism than anything Suarez is alleged to have said.

[TheElephantMan]

Agree with you. Based on what has been reported, I think one of the fundamental problems in the way people have interpreted this situation is they have suggested what Suarez said was racist based on literal translation. (It probably doesn't help that some people are also wrongly saying he is innocent based on literal translation.) This is essentially applying the English connotations to the Uruguayan Spanish words, which is pretty idiotic. Frankly I think the way this has been dealt with has show more racism than anything Suarez is alleged to have said.

Everyone I have engaged in discussion with seem to think that Suarez has called Evra a ******. I'm sorry for using that word, but people need to be made aware that Suarez did not use that word - Suarez did not use a word which is deemed racist in our country or any other. That is a fact. It's pissing me off because the lack of information is fuelling the ignorant crap that people are spouting. If the FA weren't so incompetent the full details of their report would be available and there wouldn't be so much conjecture. I really feel for Luis right now, this is incredibly frustrating.

[alunevans]

i agree with Redhot on this.

i dont for one second think LS is racist. However the context in which he said his remark (that he admits to) was hardly friendly it was intended to wind evra up. It did wind him up.

its very complex with cultural differences and to me the punishment is laughably long and a laughably small (for a footballer) fine.

just to add another conspiracy theory, perhaps this is the strong message to people (inc uefa and fifa) on racism but they know on appeal that either the decision would be overturned or the ban shortened.

cant see that being the case but then i dont see the other theories being the case either.

the actual report is crucial to understanding what the offence he has been found guilty of and how the punishment applies to that offence.

I would hope its not like the Masch respect campaign issue.

To be fair, nobody knows what context he said it in. How do you know he was trying to wind him up? Some players respond to a heated opponent by winding them up, some respond by placating. Which was Suarez doing? None of us know.

I don't know what Suarez was doing when he said the Spanish word that can't be translated.

I don't even know if the word he used is a racist word. I've written tonight to a Spanish friend in Madrid who listens to the podcast to try and have him guide me through what the word negrito means.

If it was equivalent to the n-word in this country then I'd be looking for the club to sell him so I'm not being my team right or wrong as my values override my football team.

But what I've read so far suggests that it's not the Spanish translation of the n-word.

The next question is to find out whether it's racially offensive and if not why not.

There are two possible reasons why it might not be. One, that it just isn't full stop. Much like the word hat isn't.

Two, that it's racially offensive yet accepted in the way some well dodgy racial words were "ok" here in the 1970s.

I wouldn't want players to feel they can say dodgy words here just because the political climate is such back home that they normally can.

But I don't know the answers to any of these questions as yet in any definitive way.

I'm not sure the panel do either in truth which is what makes this feel like a potential injustice.

I also don't understand the delay in sending their judgement. Feels like a stitch up to not just send the details straight away.

I'll iet you know what my Spanish friend says if he does shed some light on the linguistics.

[Lecter]

TBF Gerrard's abroad and as for Carra, I think he's got the hump.I don't think he's happy at all.

Gerrard is in the UK theres been pics of him training at Melwood all this week

[TheElephantMan]

If it was equivalent to the n-word in this country then I'd be looking for the club to sell him so I'm not being my team right or wrong as my values override my football team.

I'm not sure the panel do either in truth which is what makes this feel like a potential injustice.

I also don't understand the delay in sending their judgement. Feels like a stitch up to not just send the details straight away.

If the FA had released their report at the same time as the verdict then we wouldn't have all the damaging speculation and conjecture. Why can't they just enlighten us? I want to know the truth. I don't believe for a second that Suarez is a racist, I believe that he is completely innocent. I want to know the facts, the FA have handled this abysmally.

[alunevans]

My Spanish mate replies but it feels just as nuanced and complicated as earlier, plus he points out Spanish Spanish and South American Spanish have additional nuances and differences too.

He says that negro in itself is not an insult unless accompanied by an insulting word. I guess this is a bit like the use of the word black over here.

He said in the main it's a generally praising word.

He said that English speakers should be aware that it carries no burden of being a bad word at all as it does in English.

However his comments on negrito were more confusing.

He said the context is what gives the meaning. The diminutive makes it derogatory in the sense of patronising.

The confusing bit though is that he says that even though use of the word implies that negro is not a good characteristic, he says it is nonetheless not patronising in a racial sense.

He says that in Uruguay there isn't really a racial sense of the characteristic of being black. It is much more a social sense, a class sense.

So according to him, his take is that it is derogatory, but not too much, and not racist. It is more a word to mock somebody, to let him now that what he says is not hurting you.

I've asked for clarification because I'm not fully understanding this concept that a patronising and derogatory word (in this context) for someone who is black is at the same time "not racial."

He seems to be saying it has no more power than calling someone fatty or baldy. So I remain confused as I wouldn't accept that argument over here. Yet he's not putting the argument from a "my club right or wrong" approach at all.

I don't know how the panel picked the bones out of this because I'm already feeling that I need to be both an expert in Spanish linguistics and an expert in Uruguayan society to have any chance of really appreciating what this word means.

I think at the very least it's clear that he hasn't used an n-word equivalent, but apart from that I'm very confused as to what this word means and why.

When I hear more, I'll share the gist of it.

[alunevans]

To sum up in a nutshell I'm getting the confusing message from him that

a) negrito implies that being black is not a good characteristic
b) that this has no racial element to it.

I don't get that. It's confusing to me in the extreme but seems straightforward and natural as an explanation to my friend.

Wouldn't mind hearing anyone else's take on this who can offer an explanation of those two apparently competing ideas, especially anyone who has experience of South American culture and/or the Spanish language.

[mothman]

Here's how it will play out.

1. For the next 2 weeks until the report comes out, Suarez will he harried, abused and slated relentlessly by fans and the press.

2. The FA report will come out and will be a non-event, there will be nothing concrete in it. Liverpool will appeal.

3. The ban will be reduced, the FA will issue some sort of conciliatory remark that will reduce Suarez's guilt without clearing him completely. This remark will not make its way into the newspapers.

4. All news about 3. above will be hidden in small font deep within the newspapers - there will be no headlines. If any paper needs to apologize for slander it will be hidden away so completely only a miner with a headlight on would find it.

5. The average yob fan will still continue to harrass and abuse Suarez with " racist"