Parky

Great result. Fergie seething.

We'll lose today. The important thing will be to protect the GD.

What about the bloody glove?

He was fined after a game against Feyenoord Rotterdam in November 2007 for a half-time altercation in the changing rooms with team mate Luis Suárez, which caused manager Adrie Koster to substitute them both before the second half.[9] It was reported on 14 July 2008 that Luque had no future at Ajax. Technical director Danny Blind told Sportweek: "Ajax has told Luque that he has to leave the club. I told Albert myself that we don't want to go on with him and if I've told it to him I really don't know who else I should inform."

Yeah think that's fair. If they win the next one or get a respectable draw against City then a goal to KD. Was pretty close to giving them a goal as they really had good spells against Chelsea. Even then, could you really give Dalglish a goal lead over you when they'd still be level/behind Newcastle? Good point.

Hold on a minute. This is the same Ryan Taylor who has gained us quite a few points recently? Drop him for a couple of mistakes under pressure against the leagues best team? Drop the fella whose done so well for the last 10 games for a young kid who is untried or tested in the prem? Same lad that would have been a hell of a lot more exposed had it not been for the chap playing in front of him on the left wing. Forgot his name again? Who is it? See this is a debatable point. I get how Jonas was asked to do a job against Stoke and it worked. But...... He now doesnt attack at all (not that I think it was ever great). If we had someone, him or another, attacking down the left, that would also ease pressure on Taylor because they would be defending against us and not us sitting back at defending against them. Whether you agree with me, you'll have heard the phrase " the best line of defence is attack". Basically what Im getting at here. And, because he is attacking we have turned very one sided with most attacks coming down the right either with Obertan or Sammi. Much better in my deluded opinion to have attacks going down both flanks. You do realise that you've just completely contradicted yourself here, right? Nope, I dont...... You've basically just criticised and taken a high ground over posters in this thread for wanting to change a system 'that saw us go 11 games unbeaten' but then just said you want to change it round in other ways, even suggesting omitting Jonas from the side. Not really. Its pretty clear Im talking about the role he has been asked to play been a problem rather than it been his fault. Doesn't matter. You've highlighted an area/system within the team you think should be changed despite by your own admission telling other people on here to not even entertain the idea of playing Ben Arfa (despite playing better against City than Best has for a number of weeks) because it's not part of the 'successful formula'. If you're listening to your own stance, then really you should have nowt to debate/complain about and you should be 100% happy with the role Jonas plays. Absolute twaddle. Comparing the lack of attacking play from Jonas to whether a recovering player should start ahead of an established performer this season is simply twaddle. A couple of flashes of potential from HBA does not equate to more than the ball retention, graft and goals that Best has contributed to get us to where we are. Best hasn't scored since September. It's been a while.

So come on then, who would you leave out? Best, Ba, Obertan? Obertan. But he has already made it clear to Pardew he doesn't want to play on the wing. Depending on the opp and the form of Obertan (mostly shit) Best (bit of a plodder but has made the most of his limitations), Afra has to start games. We haven't even seen his real top gear stuff. IMO has to be in the side from now on...HAS TO.

CT left over a matter of principle if I remember correctly... Flounce that will be rewarded at the Oscars apparently.

So come on then, who would you leave out? Best, Ba, Obertan? Obertan.

He's the best player we have by a mile. Written all over his touches and the trademark dribble which ended with hitting the post. IMO He's as good as Nasri.

Spurs went through them like butter. Could have been 5.

Must say 'niglet' had me chuckling. Look here Evra you niglet of a man. Wacko pulling out all the stops like.

Yeah think that's fair. If they win the next one or get a respectable draw against City then a goal to KD. Was pretty close to giving them a goal as they really had good spells against Chelsea.

This.

There's either something wrong with him or Pardew is dithering.

Hba played really well today and was unlucky that one didn't just bounce in off the post. Many divine touches on the ball. These are the games where a makeshift left back gets found out...Raylor completely out of his depth and not just the mistakes, his concetration, postitioning and tackling were all poor. Not idea why Santon can't get a game. Deserved win for City who dominated nearly the whole match, Sameobi some nice touches and I like the way he runs so freely with the ball.

Hba played really well today and was unlucky that one didn't just bounce in off the post. Many divine touches on the ball.

Negrito.

And there's no actual reason he should be raising the matter of Evra's size or gender, either, is there? But all you can see is that, horror of horrors, he mentioned the man's skin colour. Except it's not even clear that he did. He used a word that means "mate" or "darling" to a Uruguayan, but literally means "little black one". Demeaning and patronising, or perhaps insulting and infuriating is almost certainly what Suarez was aiming for. It generally is the goal of sledging and seems well in character (I'm in no way trying to deny that he's a cunt: I'd despise him if he played for someone else). But that's not the same as racist. Perhaps it was a calculated application of a word intended to cause offense in the knowledge that he had a pretty solid defence for using it should he get caught. But we have no way of knowing what his intention was, so we can't know whether he said "mate" or "little black man". Suarez *must* be given the benefit of the doubt. He claims he said "mate"; Evra claims he heard "little black man". And they're both correct. Think this is the most impotant point TBH. Even if Suarez didn't "mean to be racist", why is he even thinking to notice and comment on Evra's colour as the first thing to have a go at him about? And when he instinctively thought of it, why didn't he use his reason to stop himself actually saying it? At the least that terms strikes me as incredibly patronising and demeaning when used by an opponent especially. Except it's not even a point. It is not at all clear (and never will be) that he did mention Evra's colour. Everyone is claiming it must be racist word he used derives from "negro", meaning "black" (possibly with a good measure of Suarez-is-a-cunt thrown in). But that means nothing. Is "black market" racist? Or "blackmail"? What about "brownout"? Film noir? Is calling someone cowardly "yellow" a racial slur? Do they have anything at all to do with skin colour? No? But any Spanish word related to "negro" must be racist? Has nobody asked themselves why a word that means "darling" would also be a racial slur? Why play the size and gender straw man? ....and later the genric term straw man...You missed 'blackball'...

+1 Wisey's best mate an all.

I think as far as evidence goes, it's very much Evra's word against Suarez's. That said, Suarez doesn't deny that he used Spanish N-words to Evra; he denies that they are racist or offensive (which is realistically the case). http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/nov/16/luis-suarez-liverpool-fa-racism I've no idea how well Evra understands Spanish. He will certainly have got the gist of anything Suarez said, but it's unlikely that he's familiar with the nuances of South American Spanish. I think the most probable truth of it is that Suarez used a word or words that Uruguayans don't consider to have racial connotations, which Evra, for lack of familiarity with idiomatic Uruguayan, understood as racist. If that is the case (and you are not generally anti-"banter"), I think the worst you can accuse Suarez of is a poor choice of words (or perfect choice of words, depending on your attitude to him). You can't go around punishing people for using words that sound like bad words. Especially foreign words that sound like bad words in a different language. Huuuuuge can of worms. what on earth are you talking about? Racism is about making an issue of someone's skin colour/ethnic origin/other things. Suarez had no need to mention it at all on a football pitch. Wrong. Absolutely wrong. Racism is treating someone's skin colour (or other genetic race marker) as a *negative* thing. Mentioning someone's skin colour is not automatically racist. If that were the case, then Suarez should be up on charges of sexism and sizeism for mentioning Evra's height and gender, too. Absolutely. Lots of words can be offensive depending upon the context in which they are used. I've no doubt that on a football pitch, in the heat of battle, 'negrito' will not have been used affectionately. I suppose it's all a matter of perspective. Do you punish Suarez on the basis that Evra found it personally offensive, or do you punish him on the basis that he crossed a line which 9 from 10 people would find universally unacceptable? Of course it wasn't used affectionately, but that doesn't mean it was intended as a racist comment. From Wikipedia: So, it means "mate" or "darling". Suarez called Evra "nigga", Evra heard "nigger". Absolutely. Lots of words can be offensive depending upon the context in which they are used. I've no doubt that on a football pitch, in the heat of battle, 'negrito' will not have been used affectionately. I suppose it's all a matter of perspective. Do you punish Suarez on the basis that Evra found it personally offensive, or do you punish him on the basis that he crossed a line which 9 from 10 people would find universally unacceptable? And this is the heart of it. You can't accuse a person of racism for offence taken by someone else to a comment they don't fully understand. If a black person takes offense at being described as "niggardly", that's largely their problem for not understanding the word. The worst you can accuse the person using the word of is a (deliberately) bad choice of words. Not racism. Europe is not one uniform place. Racism is endemic in places like Italy and Spain (hell, they even had the national basketball team pulling slanty eyes for an official photo before the Beijing olympics). It's a big problem in East Germany, too. The UK, on the other hand, is over-sensitive to racism and sees it everywhere, often to the detriment of other forms of discrimination/prejudice. This I can understand. Quite a scheming defence you're putting up and I'm dissapointed in the way you are doing it. He said negrito as in 'my little black bitch'...No point in micing words it was a pure taunt on many levels inc racist. I'd like to see a lengthy ban and a fine.

I'd argue wether they are natural or learnt. Agree with the rest of your post.

With the current hiatus regarding racism I think a line might be drawn in the sand with this case. Hope so.