Evra accuses Suarez of racism

[Chrono]

What an odd thing for Eboue to say. He might get in **** for that.

[Fivex]

Anyone else suspect it's taken this long due to delaying tactics with the scum getting their statement in? Or is it defo the FAs doing?

[Arn]

What an odd thing for Eboue to say. He might get in **** for that.

but he is probably 100% correct. It would look very bad for them if Suarez wasn't found guilty and they then find Terry guilty.

Suarez is a scapegoat to save Terry's ass. Now they can ban Terry and say that we do something about racism. He isn't the only problem out there.

The rumour is also that they interviewed some of Evra's team mates and that is something that shouldn't happen. You simply can't believe what they say in a case like this.

If they didn't backed Evra then it would look very bad for the club so who will they back? Evra of course. Will they be prepared to lie to defend him? Most probably.

It must be neutral sources only.

[Fernandinho]

Who is going to punish Eboue? He doesn't play in the PL anyway, so surely he can't get in trouble based on freedom of speech etc.

[Nicey]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPHlbqsewew"]Evra's Lies Against Suarez, Chelsea FC & Steve Finnan - YouTube[/ame]

[Ben_Itez]

Liverpool's Luis Suárez will plead not guilty to FA racism charge

• Club offer full support to Uruguay striker
• Faces long ban if found guilty of racially abusing Patrice Evra

Daniel Taylor
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 16 November 2011 20.33 GMT

Luis Suárez faces a racism charge that threatens huge ramifications for the Liverpool striker and his club after the Football Association announced he had a case to answer over Patrice Evra's allegations he suffered sustained racist abuse during Manchester United's recent visit to Anfield.

A month after the investigation began, the FA has ruled it has enough evidence to charge Suárez with an offence that, if proven, will lead to a substantial ban. A precedent was set in 2003 when John Mackie of Reading was banned for eight matches, five of which were suspended, after making racist remarks to the Sheffield United striker Carl Asaba. However, Mackie admitted that charge whereas Suárez is denying his, meaning he would almost certainly face tougher sanctions if he were found guilty.

Liverpool responded immediately by announcing that Suárez would plead not guilty, adding that they "remain fully supportive of Luis" in a dispute that threatens to have serious repercussions for the club's relationship with United.

Evra had complained after the match that he was abused "at least 10 times" and his statement to the FA accuses Suárez of using a Spanish variation of the N-word. Suárez has categorically denied the allegations, saying the words he allegedly used were not offensive or racist, but the FA investigators disagree, charging the Uruguay international with "abusive and/or insulting words and/or behaviour contrary to FA rules", including "a reference to the ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race of Patrice Evra".

Within minutes Liverpool had released their own statement to make it clear that Suárez would continue to maintain his innocence. "The club this afternoon received notification from the Football Association of their decision to charge Luis Suárez and will take time to review properly the documentation which has been sent to us.

"We will discuss the matter fully with him when he returns from international duty, but he will plead not guilty to the charge and we expect him to request a personal hearing.

"Luis remains determined to clear his name of the allegation made against him by Patrice Evra. The club remain fully supportive of Luis in this matter."

The crux of the case appears to depend on whether the FA can prove there was racial intent behind Suárez's words but it is a complex issue given that in Uruguay it is common practice for people to use derivatives of "negro" in a non-offensive way. "Negrito", for example, is a word that is often used without being deemed as racist.

However, the fact Suárez and the France international Evra were arguing at the time counts against the Liverpool player and the FA is clearly not satisfied with his first public words on the matter, when he talked last week of it merely being a "way of expressing myself. I called him something his team-mates at Manchester call him, and even they were surprised by his reaction."

What can be said with certainty is that it represents a major embarrassment for the FA and the Premier League that one of their high-profile players is charged with racism while John Terry, the England captain, is at the centre of a parallel investigation into allegations he racially abused Anton Ferdinand of Queens Park Rangers, eight days after the Suárez-Evra incident.

Liverpool would be compelled to take their own action against Suárez if he were found guilty and their manager, Kenny Dalglish, faces personal embarrassment after steadfastly defending the player over recent weeks, insisting there was no case to answer.

The Anfield club face the possibility that a long, drawn-out dispute could disrupt their season. Suárez has been their best player this season, underlying his ability by scoring all of Uruguay's goals in a 4-0 defeat of Chile on Saturday.

Evra told French television directly after the match that Suárez had been trying "to wind me up" and that "there are cameras, you can see him say a certain word to me at least 10 times. There is no place for that in 2011." His manager, Sir Alex Ferguson, who accompanied Evra when he made his complaint to the referee Andre , has submitted a statement as part of the FA investigation.

The FA is acutely aware of the sensitivities between the two clubs and asked them both at the outset not to risk inflaming the situation by discussing it in the media. Privately, United are angry that Suárez and Dalglish have ignored these instructions. The Old Trafford club say they will not make any comment "in accordance with guidance from the authorities".

"We spoke to Patrice today and he's adamant that he wants to follow it on. It's not an easy one because everyone knows that United and Liverpool have great responsibilities in terms of what happens on the field. Obviously Patrice feels very aggrieved at what was said to him and it rests with the FA now"

Sir Alex Ferguson 17 October

"We would rather have it done and dusted, out in the open. Whoever is the guilty party – the person who said it or the accuser – [should] get their due punishment"

Kenny Dalglish 28 October

"The FA will have to clarify things. There is no evidence I said anything racist to him. I said nothing of the sort. There were two parts of the discussion, one in Spanish, one in English. I did not insult him. It was just a way of expressing myself. I called him something his team-mates at Manchester call him, and even they were surprised by his reaction"

Luis Suárez 8 November



Well that's the first article i've seen which actually bothers to mention the negrito angle and how it's not deemed a racist term in Uruguay. However, as mentioned in the article, as they were arguing at the time no doubt the FA will take the view that Suarez was deliberately trying to offend Evra.

Has Dalglish submitted a statement as well as baconface? Ferguson is bound to back his player but is no more likely to have heard anything than anyone on the pitch or in the ground.

Personally, i think he's ****ed, especially with the furore over racism in football at the moment. As i mentioned earlier i wouldnt be surprised to see him get a 10 game ban perhaps with 3 suspended or summat. Additionally with Suarez perceived as some kind of cheating diver (again thanks to baconface) who cheated poor Ghana out of being the first African nation to reach the WC semi finals then he's truly screwed, gulity or not.

[Baracus]

Yeah, they never wrongly charge people do they?

Thats the problem, constantly charging for the sake of it.

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

Get Charged, tell the world and see how people treat you before you get to that stage and enjoy it.

Frightening logic.

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

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.

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.

I know. But thats the problem. They go around charging with insufficent evidence in many cases. The FA could have come out with the usual one line statement.

I don't suppose it's too much trouble for the FA to clarify that charging someone isn't an conviction of guilt but instead a commitment to investigate further.

Why did the police charge Gerrard for that incident in the pub??

I don't know. I think its ridiculous how they can and go around and do that. It causes some much grief to the accused. Again the accused has to dis-prove the charge. ( where is the innocent until proven gulity)

It should be as foresterbloke stated, a commitment to investigate further or we will be calling him in for a meeting etc.

Far to many instances where the media and public run with the notion a charge is as good as being guilty. Jo Yeate's Landlord, Rebecca Leighton, the Nurse accused of killing paitents.

Thats why I stated

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

Why else charge someone unless you did not think they where guilty'

Am I really meant to think other wise when you read that statement. Many across the country don't.

Charged with an accusation. You have to defend your innocence against that accusation of guilt. If you don't its an admission of gulit in todays world. Its a bollocks system.

[Craig_H]

That video gets more and more embarrassing and cringeworthy, the longer it goes on for.

[Craig_H]

The crux of the case appears to depend on whether the FA can prove there was racial intent behind Suárez's words but it is a complex issue given that in Uruguay it is common practice for people to use derivatives of "negro" in a non-offensive way. "Negrito", for example, is a word that is often used without being deemed as racist.

Surely proving that there was racial intent (or indeed, proving what the intention was at all) is impossible. You'd have to be a mind-reader to know what Suarez's intentions were.

The fact that 'negrito' is used in a manner which isnt derogitory, within Spanish speaking territories, added to the fact that 'proving' his intent is impossible, must make it impossible to find him guilty.

But if the FA has an agenda, they'll find him guilty regardless.

If that happens, is there any further authority that Suarez and the club could take it to, beyond the FA?

Court of Sports Arbitration in Lausanne, perhaps?

[Nicey]

That video gets more and more embarrassing and cringeworthy, the longer it goes on for.

For Evra sure

[sean_lfc]

I'm quoting a mate here, and I quite like the sound of it:

"Maybe, just maybe, we want it to go to trial..."

Maybe we've already thought well ahead...

[sean_lfc]

LoL, hello MrNice

[Ben_Itez]

Surely proving that there was racial intent (or indeed, proving what the intention was at all) is impossible. You'd have to be a mind-reader to know what Suarez's intentions were.

The fact that 'negrito' is used in a manner which isnt derogitory, within Spanish speaking territories, added to the fact that 'proving' his intent is impossible, must make it impossible to find him guilty.

But if the FA has an agenda, they'll find him guilty regardless.

If that happens, is there any further authority that Suarez and the club could take it to, beyond the FA?

Court of Sports Arbitration in Lausanne, perhaps?

If he has used the word negrito then i'd agree it'd be almost impossible to prove intent. However, in the current climate i think the FA will feel they have to be seen to act so hence (with Ferguson demanding it) they'll find him guilty and ensure he receives a long ban.

I'm sure we could take it further but don't court cases take an eternity? By the time his case his heard he'll have probably served his ban.

All in all this is bad for us. Without Suarez for a minimum of 6 games will make getting 4th spot even more difficult, if not impossible (going on current form)

[Patricks_Berger]

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?

I'm glad you're not my lawyer

[Baracus]

I'm glad you're not my lawyer

I think most are cunts. Playing Devil's Advocate.