Evra accuses Suarez of racism

[Baracus]

You're saying we cant defend him and he shouldnt have said the word. You've got him as guilty already!

Yes. I have him as guilty because they charged him.

Why else charge someone unless you did not think they where guilty. For him to prove again he is innocent.

They have had well over a month to question both sides, form an opinion and judge the case.

Why bother taking it further? They've heard both sides of the case.

Now they will question him again, based on what evra said, he will defend his stance. Back and forth. They should have done that already, whats new?

[Shaggy]

Me too, we are fiercely defensive of him and while we'd defend all our players of course we do have a real "**** you, he's innocent" attitude here which makes me believe they dont have much.

The FA's statement is crap aswell and basically just says theyve charged him because Evra asked them too. We'll see what happens at the hearing, the worry is who is going to be on this commitee! I'll guess at Alex Ferguson, David Gill, Gary Neville, the president of the Ghanaian FA as a special guest and Bill Kenwright.

[Mattshark]

Yes. I have him as guilty because they charged him.

Why else charge someone unless you did not think they where guilty. For him to prove again he is innocent.

They have had well over a month to question both sides, form an opinion and judge the case.

Why bother taking it further? They've heard both sides of the case.

Now they will question him again, based on what evra said, he will defend his stance. Back and forth. They should have done that already, whats new?

Sorry but under all circumstances that is stupid, lets hope you never get called for jury duty.

[Chris]

Yes. I have him as guilty because they charged him.

Frightening logic.

[truefan999]

He has not been charged with racially abusing him has he?

I thought he was charged with abusive and insulting language etc. They may not be the same.

Just sounds like Evra being a soft c**t.

Sir, sir the bad man just called me names and I am upset.

Can you imagine what football would be like if everyone got charged?

[souliv]

So what Baracus is saying that everyone charged is guilty , what a completely stupid statement

[McDermotX]

Breaking news on SSN when I saw it defo had it as racial abuse.......unless I'm mistaken. Can't be arsed finding the press release.


(pracitcally foaming at the mouth they were)

[fah-q]

Maybe Baracus lives in Mega-city one

[Craig_H]

Lets say he gets found guilty. Thats all we will be doing every game he plays, amongst rival fans and the media. Laughing of another alleged remark.

Fowler coped alright with the 'smackhead' nonsense and the mancs didnt need to offload Ferdinand for the drugs test stuff.

[Baracus]

Call me stupid, a fool whatever. The problem is the system. I've stated why.

They are basically charging someone based on the accusers word. The accuser should bring forth the evidence. Where as we have some charged as gulity having to prove that he is innocent. Hardly a system of innocent until proven gulity.

[Kenneth]

Fowler coped alright with the 'smackhead' nonsense and the mancs didnt need to offload Ferdinand for the drugs test stuff.

There's no comparison though really.

[Mostar]

Sad times.

Only good thing in this is that he'll have a chance on the personal hearing to defend himself and hopefully clear his name.

Very worrying that he's been charged and it would be interesting to know why type of ban he'll incur if those charges are proven in the court of law.

[ChesterDave]

At least he has Sepp Blatter on his side.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/15757165.stm

[Craig_H]

Yes. I have him as guilty because they charged him.

Why else charge someone unless you did not think they where guilty. For him to prove again he is innocent.

They have had well over a month to question both sides, form an opinion and judge the case.

Why bother taking it further? They've heard both sides of the case.

Now they will question him again, based on what evra said, he will defend his stance. Back and forth. They should have done that already, whats new?

They might think that he's guilty and therefore charged him, but as shown already, there's been tonnes of people charged by the FA, and then cleared/found not guilty. Wouldnt the FA have thought they were guilty too, at the time? Hence charging them?

Yet, they were found innocent. So being charged doesnt mean guilt, it just means the FA feel there is a case to answer. Normally i'd be inclined to think that by charging him, they might feel they have something on him but in a case of alleged racism, one feels they HAD to charge him either way, otherwise be seen to not care about racism in football - which the FA could never allow to happen.

[Craig_H]

There's no comparison though really.

There is a comparison, in terms of Baracus saying how other fans/media will always be on at him about it and that it means we should sell him, because he wont be able to cope or whatever. Which is clearly nonsense, players have had mud thrown at them before, had fans give them stick over it and yet gone on to do well, with no need on their club's part, to sell them.