Evra accuses Suarez of racism

[Shaggy]

http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/news/latest-news/liverpool-fc-statement-8

The Club can confirm that they received the written reasons from the Regulatory Commission at short notice last night on the evening of the game against Newcastle United.

The player, the Club and our legal advisors will now take the necessary amount of time to read, digest and properly consider the contents of the 115 page judgment and will make no further comment at present.

[Lee]

No he's not but he is the one defender we could use to do the job and not suffer as a result as he can't get in the team. Would rather Carra break the ****ers legs and get a suspension rather than Agger or Skrtel.

Sounds like a plan to me mate.

[Exiled_red]

Seven times or ten times, doesn't matter really. If the offending word was used seven times there must be some video evidence. I haven't read any of the report, getting ready to go out - I don't want to get wound up on New Years Eve!

It doesn't matter how many times it was said. But the fact that he initially claims it was said 'at least 10 times' then says that he didn't literally mean at least 10 times, calls into question the reliability of his evidence, and it's slandering Suarez.

[ChesterDave]

Cant find that Matt LAwson tweet but clearly the bell end hasnt read the report

238. The footage was not of any real direct assistance in terms of what was said by Mr Suarez in the goalmouth.... However,
the video footage did shed considerable light on the sequence of events and the way in
which Mr Evra and Mr Suarez acted towards each other.

So the video evidence against him is the video evidence we have all seen, just how the panel have interpreted it.

[TheElephantMan]

It doesn't matter how many times it was said. But the fact that he initially claims it was said 'at least 10 times' then says that he didn't literally mean at least 10 times, calls into question the reliability of his evidence, and it's slandering Suarez.

I agree. I'm going to read the document myself tomorrow, but from the snippets being posted here and on FB I can't believe it's taken the FA all this time to produce such bull****! I really thought that they would make it as watertight as they could, but it seems to be absolute nonsense.

[Chrono]

In English we also often say "10 times or more" when in fact it didn't happen. It's called bull****ting.

[Fredo]

The Commission read all the witness statements (in their English version) and other
documents, and watched video clips with which we were provided, in advance of the
hearing. However, given the significant factual disputes which we were asked to resolve,
we required Mr Evra and Mr Suarez to give oral evidence in chief on the central factual
disputes as to what happened in the penalty area. Essentially, they were asked to describe
in their own words what they recalled of the incidents, before being cross-examined. This
assisted us in forming our view as to the credibility and reliability of their evidence.

[Chrono]

The way I'm reading this, Suarez was fed to the wolves. Evra had the club secretary there while Suarez was left to muddle along with a translator. He's been stitched up good and proper, this is only going to get worse when we appeal.

[ChesterDave]

Oh seriously just **** off

The referee spoke to both players. They listened and then walked away. As they did, Mr
Suarez put his hand on the back of Mr Evra's head. There are, of course, many ways of
touching an opposing player with the hand. Some are obvious attempts at conciliation
such as a handshake or sometimes a pat on the back. Others are intended to further
62
aggravate the opposing player whilst, perhaps, being made to appear like an attempt at
conciliation. In our judgment, Mr Suarez placing his hand on the back of Mr Evra's head
fell into the latter category.

[Fredo]

The meaning of Rules E3(1) and E3(2)
48.
The Rule pursuant to which Mr Suarez was charged is found in section E of the FA Rules
under the general heading "Conduct". Rule E1, with the sub-heading "Misconduct",
provides, so far as relevant:
"The Association may act against a Participant in respect of any "Misconduct", which
is defined as being a breach of the following:
...
17
(b) the Rules and regulations of The Association and in particular Rules E3 to 28
below;"
In the FA Rules, a Participant includes a player.
49.
Rule E3, with the sub-heading "General Behaviour", provides as follows:
"(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 E3(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."

[Muddled]

The more I read it, the more it boils my piss.

I can't find the words.

[Chrono]

Oh seriously just **** off

The referee spoke to both players. They listened and then walked away. As they did, Mr
Suarez put his hand on the back of Mr Evra's head. There are, of course, many ways of
touching an opposing player with the hand. Some are obvious attempts at conciliation
such as a handshake or sometimes a pat on the back. Others are intended to further
62
aggravate the opposing player whilst, perhaps, being made to appear like an attempt at
conciliation. In our judgment, Mr Suarez placing his hand on the back of Mr Evra's head
fell into the latter category.

Of course it does and of course he was attempting to aggravate the guy but how does this have any reference to the case. FFS, these lot are clowns.

[Exiled_red]

In English we also often say "10 times or more" when in fact it didn't happen. It's called bull****ting.

[TheElephantMan]

Of course it does and of course he was attempting to aggravate the guy but how does this have any reference to the case. FFS, these lot are clowns.

Did he place his hand on the back of Evra's head in a racist way?

[Exiled_red]

The more I read it, the more it boils my piss.

I can't find the words.