Originally posted by Chris
View Post
Liverpool fear row could force Luis Suarez out of England
By Chris Bascombe
10:52PM GMT 03 Jan 2012
The Merseyside club want Suárez protected if rival fans or players tarnish him as a racist because of the report of the Independent Regulatory Commission. The commission made it clear it did not consider Suárez a racist, and that a breach of rule E3 did not necessarily constitute racially motivated abuse. Liverpool expect the FA to act vigorously upon this should the South American be condemned in future.
They scrapped an appeal because they feared the club would have been damaged by prolonging the saga, and felt pursuing their case for another two months just to reduce the ban would have been counter-productive.
However, they are adamant the conclusions of the commission are biased heavily in favour of Evra, and insist there is still no corroborating evidence to validate his allegations.
The club’s hierarchy — including principal owner John W Henry and chairman Tom Werner – remain convinced the commission took a pre-determined stance on the striker’s guilt. That is rejected by the commission, which says Liverpool had an opportunity to challenge the make-up of the panel before the hearing.
Suárez, Liverpool believe, is an innocent victim being used as a scapegoat to enable the FA to show it takes a tough line on racism.
At the heart of Liverpool’s continued rejection of the conclusions is a belief Evra’s evidence was not subject to the same levels of scrutiny as Suárez’s. Liverpool argue there are serious examples of Evra changing his story after giving evidence on Oct 15 which have been under-played, particularly in relation to the severity of the words used by Suárez.
The commission did not consider it of great importance that Evra had claimed to be abused 10 times, in a TV interview on Oct 15, in the most severe of racial terms, but his manager said it was five times to the referee. The report settled on the use of the word “negro” – not the word originally claimed by Evra – seven times in its conclusions.
Liverpool believe this is one of the most inconsistent aspects of the whole case, of fundamental importance to the credibility and accuracy of the accusation, and yet it has been barely given weight by the commission. They also feel the fact Evra admitted provoking Suárez with abusive language of his own should have led to disciplinary procedures.
A thorough analysis of why Suárez pinched Evra, which the French defender himself admitted he had not even recalled or paid attention to during the game, was given huge importance by the panel.
Liverpool are bemused why this was considered more significant than Evra’s insulting words to Suárez which started the altercation.
Instead, the Anfield hierarchy suggest it is evidence related to what Suárez said, which altered during the course of witness testimony from Damien Comolli and Dirk Kuyt, which was decisive in the judgment.
The Merseyside club are also disturbed that the FA met Evra three times before the commission sat, and Liverpool’s legal team were not aware of this until the hearing began.
There has been no criticism from the club of their own legal team’s handling of the saga, but there are clear contradictions — and have been throughout — between what senior Anfield officials believe and what was actually said during the hearing.
Liverpool know their new statement is likely to receive more criticism, but it was decided that abandoning an appeal to reduce the sentence, while re-emphasising their belief in Suárez’s innocence, was the only way to draw a line under the grubby saga.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...f-England.html
By Chris Bascombe
10:52PM GMT 03 Jan 2012
The Merseyside club want Suárez protected if rival fans or players tarnish him as a racist because of the report of the Independent Regulatory Commission. The commission made it clear it did not consider Suárez a racist, and that a breach of rule E3 did not necessarily constitute racially motivated abuse. Liverpool expect the FA to act vigorously upon this should the South American be condemned in future.
They scrapped an appeal because they feared the club would have been damaged by prolonging the saga, and felt pursuing their case for another two months just to reduce the ban would have been counter-productive.
However, they are adamant the conclusions of the commission are biased heavily in favour of Evra, and insist there is still no corroborating evidence to validate his allegations.
The club’s hierarchy — including principal owner John W Henry and chairman Tom Werner – remain convinced the commission took a pre-determined stance on the striker’s guilt. That is rejected by the commission, which says Liverpool had an opportunity to challenge the make-up of the panel before the hearing.
Suárez, Liverpool believe, is an innocent victim being used as a scapegoat to enable the FA to show it takes a tough line on racism.
At the heart of Liverpool’s continued rejection of the conclusions is a belief Evra’s evidence was not subject to the same levels of scrutiny as Suárez’s. Liverpool argue there are serious examples of Evra changing his story after giving evidence on Oct 15 which have been under-played, particularly in relation to the severity of the words used by Suárez.
The commission did not consider it of great importance that Evra had claimed to be abused 10 times, in a TV interview on Oct 15, in the most severe of racial terms, but his manager said it was five times to the referee. The report settled on the use of the word “negro” – not the word originally claimed by Evra – seven times in its conclusions.
Liverpool believe this is one of the most inconsistent aspects of the whole case, of fundamental importance to the credibility and accuracy of the accusation, and yet it has been barely given weight by the commission. They also feel the fact Evra admitted provoking Suárez with abusive language of his own should have led to disciplinary procedures.
A thorough analysis of why Suárez pinched Evra, which the French defender himself admitted he had not even recalled or paid attention to during the game, was given huge importance by the panel.
Liverpool are bemused why this was considered more significant than Evra’s insulting words to Suárez which started the altercation.
Instead, the Anfield hierarchy suggest it is evidence related to what Suárez said, which altered during the course of witness testimony from Damien Comolli and Dirk Kuyt, which was decisive in the judgment.
The Merseyside club are also disturbed that the FA met Evra three times before the commission sat, and Liverpool’s legal team were not aware of this until the hearing began.
There has been no criticism from the club of their own legal team’s handling of the saga, but there are clear contradictions — and have been throughout — between what senior Anfield officials believe and what was actually said during the hearing.
Liverpool know their new statement is likely to receive more criticism, but it was decided that abandoning an appeal to reduce the sentence, while re-emphasising their belief in Suárez’s innocence, was the only way to draw a line under the grubby saga.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...f-England.html
I wanted us, Suarez, to fight this every inch we could take it, as high as possible. There is no way this **** can stand up.
I agree.
Comment