Evra accuses Suarez of racism

[Exiled_red]

I don't think the club called Evra a liar. Somewhere in the statement there was a reference to Kenny questioning Evra having a precedent of being a bull****ter, that's about it.

Perhaps liar was too strong a word but IMO we should have focused on the inconsistencies in Evra's story this time and as an aside then reminded the panel that Evra has form for making these types of allegation (which were found to be untrue). Rather than from the outset implying that Evra was bull****ting before therefore probably is again.

[Exiled_red]

To me it would have seemed the fa doesn't use 'probabiltiy' in these so serious cases, going by their own precedent, which i'm sure our lawyers will have looked at.

I'm just not seeing any real evidence, enough to convict for such a serious, maybe life altering offence if found guilty.

I've just read a couple of things suggesting that they do use this 'balance of probability', if they don't normally then presumably an appeal on these grounds should be fairly easy on a change of procedure type technicality, however I suspect that won't be the case.

[Fredo]

Perhaps liar was too strong a word but IMO we should have focused on the inconsistencies in Evra's story this time and as an aside then reminded the panel that Evra has form for making these types of allegation (which were found to be untrue). Rather than from the outset implying that Evra was bull****ting before therefore probably is again.

Well, the video evidence (which is real evidence btw) showing Evra making a meal out of nothing and then winding up Suarez is enough to dismantle Evra's case IMO. If the club haven't used it then we've ****ed up Luis' defence. In any case, I don't think it's too late to take it to them in the correct manner. Can someone with a law background shed any light on this?

[Red_Polo]

He's Senegalese not French. He wasn't born in France.

There's more that decides a person's identity than where they were born.

Well when referring to his racial make up, what should we refer him as? Is he a blackman or isn't he a blackman?

How many times can we have this terrible argument put forward on here?

That black guy is a cunt - refers to someone's racial make-up in order to point out who is being insulted

That guy is a black cunt - adds the fact they are black needlessly into the insult in a way that suggests being black is itself worthy of insult

Very different. Yes you can use the word 'black' as a harmless descriptor but that doesn't mean it's always the case.

The FA believe Evra, which is why they can call Suarez' defence on linguistic grounds laughable etc. Because it is... once they accept the detail of the "used 7 times" account is true. If they actually believed Suarez', or even something close to it, then that defence would be completely valid instead. The issue for us then imo, is simply whether there is any decent evidence that Evra is actually more credible. That is what I really can't see....

Definitely

As you say, if Evra's believed then the nuances are irrelevant. If Suarez is believed then it comes down to the tone/context as to what was intended. Which is why I want to see this 'pinch' they have focussed on in questioning him.

[badpiggy]

But there's **** all evidence mate. Unless the FA comes out with an 'appeal proof' version there's a lot to infer that Suarez has been hard done by. It's too important an issue to dismiss like that. Take the ****ers to court for tarnishing his and the club's image. Too many morons jumping on the bandwagon after 115 pages of 'probabilities'.

I don't dispute for a second the holes in the report, the lack of evidence and also the possibility or even likelihood that Suarez has been treated badly. None of that really changes the fact that we approached the case in a combative pro-Suarez way instead of a conciliatory and clear anti-racism manner. We knew going into the hearing what the burden of proof would be and now we're left with a banned and humiliated player and the daft image of grown men, professional footballers and representatives of a massive global sports club wearing t-shirts supporting the "aggressor " as our defence tactics. And that's not to mention the further and possibly dangerous deepening of bitterness between the fans of both clubs.

[Red_Polo]

FFS this was not the time to take an LFC vs the world stance. Like it or not we should have tried to defuse the situation and be seen to be proactively and obviously anti-racism.

Looks like we handled things very amateurishly as a club

But there's **** all evidence mate. Unless the FA comes out with an 'appeal proof' version there's a lot to infer that Suarez has been hard done by. It's too important an issue to dismiss like that. Take the ****ers to court for tarnishing his and the club's image. Too many morons jumping on the bandwagon after 115 pages of 'probabilities'.

Defusing the situation doesn't have to mean admitting something you haven't done, though.

[Fosterbloke]

What a **** up. I'm pretty close to not giving a **** about Tuesdays result against City.

[john316]

I think the odds of a proper appeal are fairly remote - I think Ian Ayre will be overruled by the owners who will want this story put to bed before it spirals completely out of control. I think we have very little to make the FA change their mind. They had an outcome in mind before hand, they have heard all of the evidence and ruled against us. Hearing all of the evidence again is just wasting our time ultimately unless we have some amazing new evidence to present to a new panel.

The FA have proven themselves to be a totally reprehensible organisation in their handling of this matter and have undermined the same anti-racism campaign they think they have supported in this whole case. We instead need to get cleaning up the damage caused by the accusations that could end up causing long term damage to us at this rate.

[Assassin]

The club should appeal and insist on the use of Lie Detectors at a re-hearing.

[ChesterDave]

The problem is that if we appeal Suarez could be suspended for more matches.

If we don't appeal another piss weak allegation could see him banned for life. **** the suspension. This has to be sorted

[Fosterbloke]

Someone mentioned releasing a full rebuttal but not an appeal. I think this is the right thing to do as the ****ing Assholes won't budge.

Let's get on with our football and see what happens.

[Lecter]

Someone mentioned releasing a full rebuttal but not an appeal. I think this is the right thing to do as the ****ing Assholes won't budge.

Let's get on with our football and see what happens.

[G]

Someone mentioned releasing a full rebuttal but not an appeal. I think this is the right thing to do as the ****ing Assholes won't budge.

Let's get on with our football and see what happens.

Exactly my thoughts.A full point by point dismantling of the report.

[Kenneth]

Someone mentioned releasing a full rebuttal but not an appeal. I think this is the right thing to do as the ****ing Assholes won't budge.

Let's get on with our football and see what happens.

Even if it deprives assassin of his lie detector evidence.

[ChesterDave]

We haven't seen the video evidence of the pinch, but does anyone really believe that Suarez was being friendly and conciliatory in the circumstances? Is that really a convincing scenario? If not, then he's probably guilty in that instance. I don't think we've got a leg to stand on if the video is as suggested. My only fear is that the club has taken this so far and raised the stakes so high that we feel we have to appeal even if we have little grounds to and make things worse.

I think the pinch matters piss all to what he has said. Luis change of stance from this being concilatory to an attempt to wind up is whats got him convicted of this.

I may get some of this wrong as its all merging into one big mess in my mind but lets look at the chain of events.

1. Evra insults Suarez - he is given significant character credit for admitting he did this.
2. The term he used can have three possible translations - a vulgar reference to female genitalia, son of a bitch, or ****ing hell.
3 .Suarez admits he did not hear this - Suarez receives little or no credit as a character for acknowledging he did not hear this
4. After disputed exchanges it is agreed that Evra physically threatens Suarez. No character discreditment for this threat of violence
5. The pinch movement. The FA have decided that as Suarez changed his story on motivation his is unreliable. Therefore Patrice Evra's events are correct and Suarez had said all those words. The pinch then becomes significant to further wind Evra up after Suarez has made reference to his skin colour. Of course, if the Suarez version of that chat is correct then Evra is being a big wuss getting himself wound up over nothing and a pinch has **** all to do with his skin colour and is just designed to get Evra sent off.
6. The ref calls them over, talks to them, Suarez walks off pats him on the head and uses negro once in a concilatory manner as he claimed.
7. Number 6 is bull**** because the FA have already sided in favour of Evra on point 5. Further more, because point 5 has been decided to be true, number 6 is seen as a further attempt to inflame the situation.
4. Its OK to threaten violence as he had just been called blackie blackie blackie so he is antagonised in a hostile situation and unable to act calmly
3. Far from receiving praise for failing to hear an insult, Suarez is demonised as a discreditred witness.
2. The FA decide that as a credible witness compared to a discredited one the most favourable translations of Evra is obviously the one he used. He sparring partner of course used the worse possible translation because he is discredited.
1. Further praise heaped on Evra because he is so credible.

The FA have decided the pinch movement was inflamatory and moulded the evidence [sic] around that.


Pure. Unadulterated. Bull****.