Evra accuses Suarez of racism

[ChesterDave]

261. Being stitched up on changing his story from using negro as 'friendly and affenctionate' because later he claims it was 'concilatory'

[Pablo]

I've just finished reading it all.

Staggering and sickening. I feel ill

[ChesterDave]

PAragraph 271 - grounds for appeal. Evidence that Evra is a lying two faced prick, has no credibility and knew exactly that the conversation was not as he claimed.

When, shortly after the match, he went to see the referee with the manager, Mr Evra
complained that Mr Suarez had said "I don't talk to you because you niggers". Mr Evra
told us that he believed, from the moment he heard Mr Suarez use the word “negro”, that this meant ******. The Commission asked Mr Evra why, then, did he not tell the referee that he had been called ******, as opposed to black. Mr Evra's answer was that even when he pronounced the word "niggers", it was not a word he liked to use. He added that maybe it was also because he was speaking in English, that "black" was the English word in his mind, and he felt he had done enough to complain by telling the referee that he had been called black.


YOU LYING ****ING TWO FACED CUNTROT

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMOWi3PRDJM"]Patrice Evra and his high pitched voice - YouTube[/ame]

[TheElephantMan]

I've just finished reading it all.

Staggering and sickening. I feel ill

How strong are the arguments against Suarez? No doubt the paragraphs posted on here are the ones which people can easily pick holes in, but it's a serious matter and there must be some points which Suarez and his lawyers couldn't easily dismiss?

[Muddled]

So according to Evra:

FA's case:

The FA's case, in short, was as follows. In the goalmouth, Mr Evra and Mr Suarez spoke to each other in Spanish. Mr Evra asked Mr Suarez why he had kicked him, referring to the foul five minutes previously. Mr Suarez replied "Porque tu eres negro", meaning "Because you are black". Mr Evra then said to Mr Suarez “say it to me again, I’m going to punch you”. Mr Suarez replied "No hablo con los negros", meaning "I don't speak to blacks". Mr Evra continued by saying that he now thought he was going to punch Mr Suarez. Mr Suarez replied "Dale, negro, negro, negro", which meant "okay, blackie, blackie, blackie". As Mr Suarez said this, he reached out to touch Mr Evra's arm, gesturing at his skin. Mr Kuyt then intervened. When the referee blew his whistle and called the players over to him shortly after the exchanges in the goalmouth, Mr Evra said to the referee "ref, ref, he just called me a ****ing black".

Yet ...

324. It was the FA's case that the second use of the word “negro” by Mr Suarez in the
goalmouth was when he said "No hablo con los negros" ("I don't speak to blacks"). It was
the unchallenged evidence of four Manchester United players that Mr Evra told them
immediately after the game that Mr Suarez had said that to him. It was also the
unchallenged evidence of Mr Marriner, the referee, that Mr Evra had told him straight
after the game that Mr Suarez had said this to him. It is, therefore, an accepted fact that Mr Evra reported these comments to those individuals straight after the game.

So was it during or after the match?

Because surely if he's claiming racial abuse during the game, it would have been noted *during* the game and there in the ref's report, without the need to request it being put in, after the game?

[Leyton388]

The club and our Lawyers are going to have a field day with this. Time to roll out the big guns

[Buzzo]

The timing is totally bizarre. A Saturday for one and New Year for 2.

Still seems like the biggest stitch up ever. A system which dispenses justice but one that lacks any legal foundation.

What a farce.

[Fredo]

I'll need Mostar here. Got a link to the full match mate?

[wavydavy]

The Twitter silence from hacks that usually never ****ing shut up is deafening.

[Fredo]

In the 58th minute of the game, Mr Suarez fouled Mr Evra between the edge of the
Manchester United penalty area and the corner flag at the Kop end. It seemed to us to be a
deliberate foul, and the referee awarded a free kick. The foul was committed by Mr Suarez
kicking Mr Evra on his right knee. Mr Evra explained that he had previously had a bad
problem in that knee. He remained on the ground receiving medical treatment for about
one minute after the tackle.
83.
Mr Evra said that while he was lying on the ground, Mr Kuyt came up to him and said
"stand up, you ****ing prick". Mr Kuyt said "This is untrue. What I did say was something
to the effect of "Stand up, stand up", as if to say that it had been a foul but he was making too much of it". The video footage did not show Mr Kuyt speaking to Mr Evra at this time,
but Mr Kuyt admitted that he did so. The dispute is about what Mr Kuyt said, not about
whether he said anything to Mr Evra at that time. Very little attention was paid to this
dispute during the hearing, and we did not find it necessary in reaching our decision to
make a finding about what Mr Kuyt had said to Mr Evra.



And they believe Evra's version.

[ChesterDave]

The timing is totally bizarre.

United played **** and dropped points today - should have seen it coming.

[TheElephantMan]

The Twitter silence from hacks that usually never ****ing shut up is deafening.

Maybe they're reading the 115 page document?

[Fredo]

Wasn't it the foul where we have evidence that Evra made a meal of it?

[Pablo]

How strong are the arguments against Suarez? No doubt the paragraphs posted on here are the ones which people can easily pick holes in, but it's a serious matter and there must be some points which Suarez and his lawyers couldn't easily dismiss?

The arguments against him are Evra's word against his. Nothing more. The video evidence showed nothing, so was just used for body language purposes.

The whole case seems to have hinged on the credibility of the witnesses and that Evra was a more "impressive" witness. They've essentially took one person's word against another, and with no substantial proof, found Suarez guilty and labelled him a racist.

It's ****ing disgusting.

Oh and even with no proof whatsoever they've also decided Suarez called him "negro" SEVEN times.

It's a huge stitch-up and it makes me feel sick

[BootRoom]

PAragraph 271 - grounds for appeal. Evidence that Evra is a lying two faced prick, has no credibility and knew exactly that the conversation was not as he claimed.

When, shortly after the match, he went to see the referee with the manager, Mr Evra
complained that Mr Suarez had said "I don't talk to you because you niggers". Mr Evra
told us that he believed, from the moment he heard Mr Suarez use the word “negro”, that this meant ******. The Commission asked Mr Evra why, then, did he not tell the referee that he had been called ******, as opposed to black. Mr Evra's answer was that even when he pronounced the word "niggers", it was not a word he liked to use. He added that maybe it was also because he was speaking in English, that "black" was the English word in his mind, and he felt he had done enough to complain by telling the referee that he had been called black.


YOU LYING ****ING TWO FACED CUNTROT

Patrice Evra and his high pitched voice - YouTube

I've just spent 15 mins looking for the vid becuase I wanted to make the exact same point; then I wondered about the authenticity of the vid. Are we sure that it's authentic?

On the report as a whole, it's a complete stitch up. They've got their decision and have totally skewed the report in favour of it. It's ****ing terrible.