8-match ban for Luis Suarez racist comments

[klr]

Er no, Suarez is Latino.

His grandfather is black, which makes Suarez black under whatever racial classification you want to employ.

I stand corrected on the particulars of his ancestry, but that still doesn't make him black, except under antiquated white-centric classification systems that termed someone "black" if they weren't obviously "pure" white. It would make him "mixed race", for want of a better term. FWIW, Tiger Wood's isn't "black" either, something which he himself has pointed out.

But he's apparently upholding the Liverpool FC tradition of racism ...

The "Liverpool FC tradition of racism" is comments by one old man?

I think you don't know what tradition means.

Good grief. Maybe I need a "tongue in cheek" smiley.

Liverpool and Suarez have chosen ... not to appeal:

I completely understand why. Even though there isn't a shred of real evidence against Luis, and Evra has form for false accusations of racial abuse, I think the club recognise that the FA is as corrupt an organisation as you could ever encounter and that an appeal is doomed to failure. They've seen that Surez has been well and truly stitched up and decided to draw a line under it.

Hyperbole much? There's no evidence at all that the English FA is institutionally corrupt, and certainly not in the way FIFA is. If Liverpool and Suarez they felt they had a realistic case for appeal, they'd have readily taken up the option of appealing to the FA, and beyond that maybe even to CAS.

The official report is here:

http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/Disciplinary ... ssion.ashx

[redunderthebed]

Liverpool's Luis Suarez has been reported as saying that he's happy with the decision not to appeal on his 8-match ban, forcing him to sit out over the next month or so.

He says it'll give him a chance to enjoy a break from football with a trip to watch the African Cup of Nations, where he can laugh at all of the silly coons running about like monkeys.

[Strontium Dog]

The Truth starts to slowly emerge...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... utube.html

A clip is on YouTube showing Manchester United defender Patrice Evra making an obscene outburst using a similar n-word to the one at the centre of his racism case against Luis Suarez.

The footage is from Canal+ documentary Le Periple Rouge about his former club Monaco's march to the 2004 Champions League final.

Evra appears making a foul-mouthed rant in his hotel room before the semi-final against Chelsea.

The programme is in French but Evra, after subtitles for Chelsea players Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink and Frank Lampard appear on screen, says in clear English, 'Mother-f****** n******', along with other muffled profanities.

[klr]

What "truth"? Since when does something that one of the parties may have done happened years ago have any material bearing on the particulars of this current case?

And it's not as if Evra did not readily admit to insulting Suarez in this case. What apparently matters far more is what Suarez did. Addressing someone by the same racial label repeatedly in the space of a couple of minutes is not the done thing, regardless of the context or provocation. If someone repeatedly addressed me as "Paddy" over the space of a few minutes, I'd have every right to feel offended.

If Liverpool thought that what Evra said in this case was beyond the pale, they could have made a counter-complaint against him. I'm no fan of bad language myself, but it's not in the same ballpark IMHO. I'd have given Evra a ban of a match or two for his transgressions myself, except that then the same standard would have had to be applied immediately across the board. Nonetheless, I am in favour of tightening up acceptable standards of player behaviour in the future.

[Strontium Dog]

What "truth"? Since when does something that one of the parties may have done happened years ago have any material bearing on the particulars of this current case?

It shines a light on the character of the accuser.

Given that there's no proof that Suarez said the things he's accused of saying, and that the case is built entirely on one person's word against another's, the character of the participants is of paramount importance.

I find it nothing short of disgusting that one of the best footballers in the world has been labelled a racist based solely on one person's accusation. Anything that discredits the piece of shit who made the baseless accusation is to be warmly welcomed.

[klr]

What "truth"? Since when does something that one of the parties may have done happened years ago have any material bearing on the particulars of this current case?

It shines a light on the character of the accuser.

Thankfully, justice in this case was decided on the direct facts. But if you want to bring character and past behaviour into the equation, try this. Luis Suarez: When with Ajax, suspended for seven games for biting an opponent on the shoulder during a Dutch league game. He was also suspended for a game at Ajax after a half-time altercation with a team-mate over a free kick. At Liverpool, he was suspended for a game after making an obscene hand gesture towards Fulham fans only last month. And let's not forget the last-minute handball in the 2010 World Cup quarter final, something which he has never apologised for, but rather protested his "innocence" about, and even boasted about.

A great player, but not exactly the sort of person I would hold up as a role-model.

[Strontium Dog]

Thankfully, justice in this case was decided on the direct facts.

No it wasn't, it was an arbitrary judgement that Evra's version of events was true and Suarez's wasn't.

"Direct facts" don't come into it at all.

But if you want to bring character and past behaviour into the equation, try this.

None of those things have anything to do with racial slurs.

And you're off your rocker if you think I'm holding Suarez up as some kind of role model.

Merely that, being a rational person, I'm unprepared to make the enormous leaps of faith required to believe that Luis Suarez is a racist.

[klr]

Thankfully, justice in this case was decided on the direct facts.

No it wasn't, it was an arbitrary judgement that Evra's version of events was true and Suarez's wasn't.

"Direct facts" don't come into it at all.

But if you want to bring character and past behaviour into the equation, try this.

None of those things have anything to do with racial slurs.

They have to do with general character. Lack of discipline. Poor judgement. Questionable moral compass.

And you're off your rocker if you think I'm holding Suarez up as some kind of role model.

Merely that, being a rational person, I'm unprepared to make the enormous leaps of faith required to believe that Luis Suarez is a racist.

Thanks for descending into personal invective. Apologies if I decide not to respond in kind.

[Magicziggy]

The judgement that the comments were made, and that they were racist, does not convince me that Suarez is a racist. That's far too simple.

He should not have made the comments. He'll do the time. I'm glad the club stood by him. They know what he did was wrong but they also know he is not a racist. That's my take.

[Strontium Dog]

They have to do with general character. Lack of discipline. Poor judgement. Questionable moral compass.

I don't think reacting to provocation (disgusting comments from Fulham fans, a stamp on the foot from an opponent) demonstrates "questionable morals", just a short temper. I don't believe a short temper is associated with a propensity to racism, but I of course welcome any study that backs up your assertion.

And don't try to pretend that any footballer in Suarez's situation wouldn't have handled a goalbound shot if it meant keeping his team in the World Cup.

Thanks for descending into personal invective. Apologies if I decide not to respond in kind.

It was a conditional comment, I'm sure you understand the meaning of the word if, don't you?

You started any invective with snide comments about my football club.

Fucking sick of people attacking me vicariously and feigning ignorance.

They know what he did was wrong but they also know he is not a racist. That's my take.

No. The club is standing by him because there's no proof he's done anything wrong.

If he's done the things he's accused of, then an 8 match ban is the minimum he should be looking at. If he said what he's supposed to have said, then he should be in front of a real court, let alone the kangaroo court of a corrupt FA. There's no way the club, players or fans would be standing behind him if there was real evidence that he'd said what the FA says he said.

[Magicziggy]

He is guilty of what he is accused of. However the club knows the player. They know his heart. The rules, however, are the rules. Case closed.

Imho.

[HomerJay]

No. The club is standing by him because there's no proof he's done anything wrong.

If he's done the things he's accused of, then an 8 match ban is the minimum he should be looking at. If he said what he's supposed to have said, then he should be in front of a real court, let alone the kangaroo court of a corrupt FA. There's no way the club, players or fans would be standing behind him if there was real evidence that he'd said what the FA says he said.

Just his own evidence and admissions, then?

Does seem a tad harsh to judge someone according to a freely offered confession.

Generally Liverpool FC, Dalglish and Suárez have handled the situation poorly.

They haven't appealed because the lawyers will have said claiming it was only a little teeny bit racist isn't the best defense.

[Strontium Dog]

Does seem a tad harsh to judge someone according to a freely offered confession.

Confession to what? He used the non-offensive Spanish word negro once. A term Suarez's wife uses to describe him. A term that some of Evra's team-mates use themselves.

They haven't appealed because the lawyers will have said claiming it was only a little teeny bit racist isn't the best defense.

It's not racist at all.

The only racists here are the cultural supremacists applying English standards to a speaker of Rioplatense Spanish. Fucking Nazi cunts.

[Magicziggy]

Does seem a tad harsh to judge someone according to a freely offered confession.

Confession to what? He used the non-offensive Spanish word negro once. A term Suarez's wife uses to describe him. A term that some of Evra's team-mates use themselves.

They haven't appealed because the lawyers will have said claiming it was only a little teeny bit racist isn't the best defense.

It's not racist at all.

The only racists here are the cultural supremacists applying English standards to a speaker of Rioplatense Spanish. Fucking Nazi cunts.

In context... a game between two of the fiercest rivals in english club football ... it does seem unlikely that Suarez was using the term in an affectionate way.

However ... there is something in what you say... The problem for Suarez is that he should have known better... heat of the moment or not.

The Game is better off without this type of on field behaviour. ...once again...imo

I don't think John Terry's name has come up in this thread yet.

[HomerJay]

Adeyemi, centre, is restrained by Dirk Kuyt, left and match referee after receiving a tirade of racial abuse from the Anfield crowd

Liverpool have been thrust into another race hate controversy, after fans were accused of racially abusing Oldham player Tom Adeyemi.

Police launched an immediate investigation into the incident, which occurred towards the end of the FA Cup tie, when the young full-back turned to confront the supporter after becoming visibly upset at comments hurled from the terraces.

Immediately following the game, the 20-year-old Norwich-born defender gave a statement to police, in which it is understood he claimed to have been the subject of racist comments.

Adeyemi was visibly upset, and seemed to be in tears. Liverpool skipper Steven Gerrard moved across to the Kop End of the ground where the incident occurred, and comforted him.

Eyewitnesses saw two fans wearing Luis Suarez t-shirts, and heard one of them clearly shout “You f***ing black b***ard”.

Police immediately moved in to restrain the two suspects, and later confirmed a formal investigation.

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Li ... 49913.html