The Liverpool Thread

[Frazzle]

If Suarez was nipping him and that at the same time he was calling him a negro its pretty obvious its wasn't used in a friendly way, why would you be trying to wind him up and calm him down at the same time...

[Dave]

Here's the summary. All you need to read really:

 

IX Summary

 

452.  The length of these Reasons reflects the complexity of this case, the detailed arguments

that have been put before us, and the entitlement of those involved to know why we

reached the decision that we did. 

 

453. It may be helpful if we summarise our Reasons, which we do as follows:

 

(1) Whether a player has used abusive or insulting words or behaviour is a matter

for us to decide as a Regulatory Commission, having regard to all the

circumstances of the case. These circumstances include the fact that many players

playing in England come from overseas, with a different language and culture.

However, we apply the standards that we consider appropriate to games played

in England under the FA Rules. Whether the words or behaviour are abusive or

insulting is an objective matter; it does not depend on whether the alleged

offender intended his words to be abusive or insulting (paragraphs 50 to 73

above).

 

(2) The burden of proof in this case is on the FA. The standard of proof is the flexible

civil standard of the balance of probability. The more serious the allegation,

taking into account the nature of the misconduct alleged and the content of the

case, the greater the burden of evidence required to prove the matter. The FA

accepted that the allegation against Mr Suarez was serious, as do we (paragraphs

74 to 80 above).

 

(3) We received expert evidence as to the use of the word "negro" in Uruguay and

other areas of Latin America. It is often used as a noun to address people,

whether family, friends or passers-by, and is widely seen as inoffensive.

However, its use can also be offensive. It depends on the context. It is inoffensive

when its use implies a sense of rapport or the attempt to create such rapport.

However, if it were used, for example, with a sneer, then it might carry negative

connotations. The Spanish language experts told us  that if Mr Suarez said the

things that Mr Evra alleged, they would be considered racially offensive in

Uruguay and other regions of Latin America (paragraphs 162 to 202 above).

 

(4) Mr Evra was a credible witness. He gave his evidence in a calm, composed and

clear way. It was, for the most part, consistent, although both he and Mr Suarez

were understandably unable to remember every detail of the exchanges between

them (paragraphs 229 to 234 above).

 

(5) Mr Suarez's evidence was unreliable in relation to matters of critical importance.

It was, in part, inconsistent with the contemporaneous evidence, especially the

video footage. For example, Mr Suarez said that he pinched Mr Evra's skin in an

attempt to defuse the situation. He also said that his use of the word "negro" to

address Mr Evra was conciliatory and friendly. We rejected that evidence. To 

describe his own behaviour in that way was unsustainable and simply incredible

given that the players were engaged in an acrimonious argument. That this was

put forward by Mr Suarez was surprising and seriously undermined the

reliability of his evidence on other matters (paragraphs 235 to 267 above). There

were also inconsistencies between his accounts given at different times as to

what happened (paragraphs 282 to 318).

 

(6) It was argued for Mr Suarez that Mr Evra invented the allegations to exact

vengeance for Mr Suarez's refusal to apologise for  the foul on Mr Evra; that he

did so knowing that the allegations were false and that the complaint, if upheld,

would be damaging to a fellow professional, who Mr Evra did not think was a

racist. We rejected this argument as implausible and inconsistent with our

assessment of Mr Evra as a witness. No alternative explanation was suggested to

us as to why Mr Evra would make the allegations if untrue (paragraphs 323 to

337).

 

(7) Mr Suarez fouled Mr Evra in the 58th minute of the game. In the 63rd minute, Mr

Evra challenged Mr Suarez about the foul. Mr Evra used an offensive phrase,

which did not have any racial element and which Mr Suarez did not hear. An

acrimonious argument ensued in which both players had a go at each other. In

the course of this confrontation, Mr Suarez used the words "negro" or "negros"

seven times. He did so both before and after the referee had spoken to them and

told them to calm down. Mr Suarez addressed Mr Evra as "negro". He also made

other derogatory comments using the word. In the course of the argument, Mr

Suarez also pinched Mr Evra's skin (which was not in itself insulting behaviour

nor did it refer to Mr Evra's colour) and put his hand on the back of his head,

which were part of Mr Suarez's attempts to wind up Mr Evra (paragraphs 346 to

384 above).

 

(8) Mr Suarez's comments were made in the heat of the moment in response to being

confronted by Mr Evra about the foul. He did not use the word "negro" in a way

that could reasonably be translated as "nigger". He used the word “negro”

because Mr Evra is black (paragraphs 383, 274 above).

 

(9) Mr Suarez's words, which included a reference to Mr Evra's colour, were

insulting. The use of insulting words which include a reference to another

person's colour on a football pitch are wholly unacceptable (paragraphs 385 to

399 above). 

 

(10) Had Mr Suarez been sent off for using insulting words (not including reference

to a person's colour), he would have received an automatic two-match

suspension. The guidance in the FA Rules suggested  that our starting-point

should be to double that sanction, ie a four-match  suspension. However, we

were entitled to increase or reduce the penalty further. We took account of

various aggravating and mitigating factors. As for  the aggravating factors, Mr

Suarez used the word "negro" or "negros" seven times, in the course of an

acrimonious argument, and went beyond simply addressing Mr Evra as "negro".

Mr Suarez knew or ought to have known that these words were unacceptable,

particularly in view of the FA-supported campaigns against all forms of racism

in football. The words were targeted directly at Mr Evra, as part of Mr Suarez's

attempts to wind him up. As for the mitigating factors, Mr Suarez had a clean

record in relations to charges of this type. Mr Evra started the confrontation in

the goalmouth, in response to which Mr Suarez used  the insulting words. Mr

Suarez is likely to suffer personal embarrassment as a result of his behaviour

coming to light through this decision. He has in the past supported, and

continues to support, a charitable project in South Africa designed to promote

multi-racial football. He is likely to have learned a lesson through the experience

of these proceedings, and said that he would not use the word "negro" on a

football pitch in England in the future (paragraphs 401 to 440 above).

 

(11) Balancing all these factors, we imposed an eight-match ban, a £40,000 fine and

gave Mr Suarez a warning as to his future conduct. We considered this to be an

appropriate and proportionate penalty in all the circumstances (paragraphs 441

to 446 above).

[Aphrodite]

Feel sorry for the panel reading all this, two totally different versions of events

[Fugazi]

Mr Suarez's claim to be acting in a conciliatory and friendly way

253.  Mr Suarez claimed that when he used the word "negro" in speaking to Mr Evra, he was

doing so in a conciliatory and friendly way.

 

Good luck with that.

 

http://emotibot.net/pix/2690.jpg

[Ishmael]

Mr Evra did not use any words which referred to Mr Suarez's ethnic origin, colour, race or nationality

 

 

We would also like to know when the FA intend to charge Patrice Evra with making abusive remarks to an opponent after he admitted himself in his evidence to insulting Luis Suarez in Spanish in the most objectionable of terms

 

OH FUCKING DEAR LIVERPOOL

[jdckelly]

yeah good luck appealing that Liverpools lawyers

[Guest VegasToon]

What a fucking joke.  I really hate Liverpool now.  How the fuck can you defend him?

[ponsaelius]

Suarez is a cunt of the highest order. Hope he's all but chased out of the country within a couple of years.

[healthyaddiction]

Does it make it clear as to the evidence?  Was it just one word against the other or were there recordings or other testimony?

[Guest Heneage]

Suarez is a c*** of the highest order. Hope he's all but chased out of the country within a couple of years.

This

[M4]

Honest mistake by LFC and Dalglish. I'm sure they'll realise they were wrong and duly apologise to the nation for their actions.

[Dave]

Does it make it clear as to the evidence?  Was it just one word against the other or were there recordings or other testimony?

 

Ultimately it was one word against another, but they used Spanish experts and looked at the video evidence. Read that summary I posted.

 

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,70035.msg3421881.html#msg3421881

[Guest bimpy474]

On Rawk, the facts were released today because Man Utd lost.

 

Evra lied obviously.

 

They believe Suarez used the term "Negro" only once and in a term of affection.

 

Deluded and mongified beyond belief.

[Parky]

Suarez is a cunt of the highest order. Hope he's all but chased out of the country within a couple of years.

[healthyaddiction]

Does it make it clear as to the evidence?  Was it just one word against the other or were there recordings or other testimony?

 

Ultimately it was one word against another, but they used Spanish experts and looked at the video evidence. Read that summary I posted.

 

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,70035.msg3421881.html#msg3421881

 

I did, it's just what Suarez said he said was still racist however what Evra said Suarez said was vilely racist and he deserves much worse.

[jdckelly]

what an absolute cunt Dogleg is

 

phil dowd: dalglish's reaction on being told by marriner that evra alleged suarez had used the word n*gger was "hasn't he done this before?"

 

[Guest bimpy474]

Does it make it clear as to the evidence?  Was it just one word against the other or were there recordings or other testimony?

 

Ultimately it was one word against another, but they used Spanish experts and looked at the video evidence. Read that summary I posted.

 

http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,70035.msg3421881.html#msg3421881

 

Ahh but on RAWK they reckon the two Spanish experts were based in Manchester.......hahahaha they are mental like.

[Dave]

I've been actively avoiding RAWK after last night's result. Fuck that.

[Skirge]

We should applaud Evra onto the pitch on Wednesday night, he deserves credit for not decking the racist scumbag

[Dave]

We should applaud Evra onto the pitch on Wednesday night, he deserves credit for not decking the racist scumbag

 

Don't be daft.

[David Icke - Son of God]

Mr Evra and Mr Suarez spoke to each other in Spanish. Mr Evra asked Mr Suarez why he had kicked him, referring to the foul five minutes previously. Mr Suarez replied "Porque tu eres negro", meaning "Because you are black". Mr Evra then said to Mr Suarez “say it to me again, I’m going to punch you”. Mr Suarez replied "No hablo con los negros", meaning "I don't speak to blacks". Mr Evra continued by saying that he now thought he was going to punch Mr Suarez. Mr Suarez replied "Dale, negro, negro, negro", which meant "okay, blackie, blackie, blackie". As Mr Suarez said this, he reached out to touch Mr Evra's arm, gesturing at his skin. Mr Kuyt then intervened. When the referee blew his whistle and called the players over to him shortly after the exchanges in the goalmouth, Mr Evra said to the referee "ref, ref, he just called me a fucking black".

 

He sounds like a racist to me, LFC fans.

 

That was the charge. Not read as to what they found yet.

 

They accept Evra's evidence in full. It also emerges that Comolli and Kuyt translated for Suarez in the very early stages and Suarez said that he used the phrase "because you're a black", a story which he then changed when he realised it was a bit racist

[Guest bimpy474]

I've been actively avoiding RAWK after last night's result. Fuck that.

 

Honestly its brilliant, some of them are saying he's lucky to just get 8 games if Evra's story is to be believed, but the rest are like drooling mongaloids, its so funny seeing them trying to defend him using the word "Negro" as a term of affection

[Dave]

Mr Evra and Mr Suarez spoke to each other in Spanish. Mr Evra asked Mr Suarez why he had kicked him, referring to the foul five minutes previously. Mr Suarez replied "Porque tu eres negro", meaning "Because you are black". Mr Evra then said to Mr Suarez “say it to me again, I’m going to punch you”. Mr Suarez replied "No hablo con los negros", meaning "I don't speak to blacks". Mr Evra continued by saying that he now thought he was going to punch Mr Suarez. Mr Suarez replied "Dale, negro, negro, negro", which meant "okay, blackie, blackie, blackie". As Mr Suarez said this, he reached out to touch Mr Evra's arm, gesturing at his skin. Mr Kuyt then intervened. When the referee blew his whistle and called the players over to him shortly after the exchanges in the goalmouth, Mr Evra said to the referee "ref, ref, he just called me a fucking black".

 

He sounds like a racist to me, LFC fans.

 

That was the charge. Not read as to what they found yet.

 

They accept Evra's evidence in full. It also emerges that Comolli and Kuyt translated for Suarez in the very early stages and Suarez said that he used the phrase "because you're a black", a story which he then changed when he realised it was a bit racist

 

Not according to the summary, unless I'm reading it wrong.

[jdckelly]

I've been actively avoiding RAWK after last night's result. Fuck that.

 

Honestly its brilliant, some of them are saying he's lucky to just get 8 games if Evra's story is to be believed, but the rest are like drooling mongaloids, its so funny seeing them trying to defend him using the word "Negro" as a term of affection

its rather unbelievable and yet they still claim its an FA stitch up despite it being from an independent body

[wormy]

I'm confused. Has this argument against Suarez been classed as fact or what?

 

On a sidenote, I don't know if it'd be against any copyright or what, so I'll just say search 'Evra's lies' into a well-known video website. Fucking cringeworthy.