8-match ban for Luis Suarez racist comments

[Robert_S]

You're a Washington Redskins/Atlanta Braves fan?

No, University of Illinois.

[FBM]

You racist BASTARD!!

[Santa_Claus]

BREAKING NEWS!

Liverpool sign Diane Abbot on an 8 game loan deal from Racists United FC.

A Club spokesman said:

"We figure getting a fat nigger who hates white folks and can't keep mouth shut would add balance to the team"

[FBM]

[redunderthebed]

You actually expected a rational debate about liverpool fc with a liverpool fc supporter klr.

[klr]

...

You're the one damning Suarez as a racist on the basis of zero proof other than Evra's word.
You're the one damning Liverpool fans as racists on the basis of absolutely nothing in the way of facts.

I didn't call Suarez racist. Please prove otherwise. I've quite properly stated and commented on the fact that he's been punished for racist comments.

You on the other hand have called some of use here racist:

Subject: 8-match ban for Luis Suarez racist comments

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.

Racist and Nazis. Nice going.

I'm the only one engaging in reasoned discourse here. It's clear that your contempt for "football tribalism" is blinding you to reasoned discussion.

Your discourse is anything but reasoned, end of story. It's a case of "my player/club, right or wrong".

So does this mean you condemn all the fans who target Luis Suarez then? Perhaps you might want to put his behaviour in that context? (and pigs might fly)

Players can expect to be taunted in respect of things that they've done wrong, or even been accused of having done (and not just on the football pitch). There have to be limits to that: If what the Fulham fans chanted was over the top (one's mileage may vary), then Liverpool can of course lodge a protest, and I would support their right to do so. But hurling abuse at a player for no valid reason at all is completely out.

I've never seen that sort of taunting at rugby matches, no matter how intense the rivalry between the sides, no matter how big the stakes, no matter how big the crowd.

Rugby is shit, I'm not surprised it fails to arouse the same kind of passion.

Really? You've never been to a rugby match then?

[Strontium Dog]

You actually expected a rational debate about liverpool fc with a liverpool fc supporter klr.

Maybe you can point out the irrationality in anything I've written. I won't hold my breath.

I didn't call Suarez racist. Please prove otherwise. I've quite properly stated and commented on the fact that he's been punished for racist comments.

It's quite disingenuous to claim that someone using racist comments isn't a racist.

You on the other hand have called some of use here racist:

I didn't direct that comment at anyone in particular, nor limited it to people on the forum.

I'm the only one engaging in reasoned discourse here. It's clear that your contempt for "football tribalism" is blinding you to reasoned discussion.

Your discourse is anything but reasoned, end of story. It's a case of "my player/club, right or wrong".

Except it isn't, is it? The fact it's my club is incidental. Nobody has presented a single piece of solid evidence to demonstrate racist comments by either Suarez or any Liverpool fan.

Do you think it's reasonable to condemn people on hearsay? I don't. I believe it's rational to only judge people based on evidence. Let me know when you have some.

Really? You've never been to a rugby match then?

I've been to one rugby match, the 2000 Rugby League World Cup final at a half full Old Trafford. It was meh.

[klr]

...

I didn't call Suarez racist. Please prove otherwise. I've quite properly stated and commented on the fact that he's been punished for racist comments.

It's quite disingenuous to claim that someone using racist comments isn't a racist.

That's , complete and utter . I criticised the action, not the person. By your reasoning, if I were to accuse you of lying about some matter or other, then I would also be calling you a liar at the same time. It's your argument which is disingenuous. But I'm not actually calling you disingenuous. Get the distinction?

You on the other hand have called some of use here racist:

I didn't direct that comment at anyone in particular, nor limited it to people on the forum.

again. Even if I accepted your very much belated explanation (which I don't), the comments were still directed at me and other participants in this thread. Like Luis Suarez, you ought to be a great deal more careful about what you say.

I'm the only one engaging in reasoned discourse here. It's clear that your contempt for "football tribalism" is blinding you to reasoned discussion.

Your discourse is anything but reasoned, end of story. It's a case of "my player/club, right or wrong".

Except it isn't, is it? The fact it's my club is incidental.

for a third time. When I see you defending a player from another club in such an ill-reasoned, protracted and bellicose manner, then I might believe you.

Nobody has presented a single piece of solid evidence to demonstrate racist comments by either Suarez or any Liverpool fan.

Suarez has been convicted, despite your seemingly interminable protestations. And he/Liverpool will not appeal.

As to the other case: contrary to your bald assertions yesterday, the matter is very much ongoing, and someone has since been arrested. We are free to air our beliefs and speculation about what happened, just as you are to air yours. And if it turns out that there is no conviction ... why then we will still be free to claim that there was.

Do you think it's reasonable to condemn people on hearsay? I don't. I believe it's rational to only judge people based on evidence. Let me know when you have some.

As I've said before: Read the report. All of it, but especially pp 97-101.

Really? You've never been to a rugby match then?

I've been to one rugby match, the 2000 Rugby League World Cup final at a half full Old Trafford. It was meh.

Try Rugby Union then.

That's all I have to say to you, because I'm now placing you on my "ignore" list.

[Ronja]

Maybe you can point out the irrationality in anything I've written.

If I may:

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

Fucking sick of people attacking me vicariously and feigning ignorance.

http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 5#p1086729 (6th January 2012)

This^^ is an irrational comment, for at least these reasons:

1) There are no posts by you that contain the word "Liverpool", "football", "club", "support" or "supporter" in any of our subforums, which would have identified you as a Liverpool supporter before the one I quoted above. It is irrational to believe that other people have motives that would be based on something that they don't know.

2) Even if for some reason 1) were not true - and you are welcome to present evidence to show that - it is irrational to equate criticism of a large organization with a negative message about/for one person, who is (loosely & unofficially) connected with that organization.

[Strontium Dog]

That's , complete and utter . I criticised the action, not the person.

It's a specious distinction. People are defined by their actions.

again. Even if I accepted your very much belated explanation (which I don't), the comments were still directed at me and other participants in this thread. Like Luis Suarez, you ought to be a great deal more careful about what you say.

The comments were directed at anyone they apply to. However, they were not specifically aimed at anyone in this thread. I don't particularly care whether you think they were or not.

The fact it's my club is incidental.

for a third time. When I see you defending a player from another club in such an ill-reasoned, protracted and bellicose manner, then I might believe you.

You keep calling my argument "ill-reasoned" but still have provided ZERO evidence of this ill-reasoning. I wonder why...

Nobody has presented a single piece of solid evidence to demonstrate racist comments by either Suarez or any Liverpool fan.

Suarez has been convicted, despite your seemingly interminable protestations. And he/Liverpool will not appeal.

Yes, and? Suarez was convicted (so the panel says) on the balance of probability, on a judgement based solely on his word against someone elses. This is not solid evidence however much you would like it to be.

Do you think it's reasonable to condemn people on hearsay? I don't. I believe it's rational to only judge people based on evidence. Let me know when you have some.

As I've said before: Read the report. All of it, but especially pp 97-101.

Let me save you and anyone else the trouble of reading the report: it contains absolutely ZERO proof that Suarez said what he was accused of saying. In a crowded penalty area, not one single other player heard Suarez say anything to Evra.

That's all I have to say to you, because I'm now placing you on my "ignore" list.

Thanks for admitting you have no comeback to any of my arguments.

[Strontium Dog]

This^^ is an irrational comment, for at least these reasons:

1) There are no posts by you that contain the word "Liverpool", "football", "club", "support" or "supporter" in any of our subforums, which would have identified you as a Liverpool supporter before the one I quoted above. It is irrational to believe that other people have motives that would be based on something that they don't know.

And you know, if the location I've been using since day one of joining this forum hadn't been "Liverpool, UK", you might have a valid point.

Unfortunately for the point you were trying to make, people are able to see my location and add 2 and 2 pretty easily.

[Twoflower]

I wouldn't have assumed you to be a Liverpool fan just because you live in Liverpool. For example I live in Glasgow but am not a fan of the Rangers or the Celtics. Also not many people pay attention to the locations or even bother to look at them.

[JimC]

I wouldn't have assumed you to be a Liverpool fan just because you live in Liverpool. For example I live in Glasgow but am not a fan of the Rangers or the Celtics. Also not many people pay attention to the locations or even bother to look at them.

Which is utterly disgraceful, since they may miss that I live in simply the best city in the known universe!

[Ronja]

I wouldn't have assumed you to be a Liverpool fan just because you live in Liverpool. For example I live in Glasgow but am not a fan of the Rangers or the Celtics. Also not many people pay attention to the locations or even bother to look at them.

Which is utterly disgraceful, since they may miss that I live in simply the best city in the known universe!

Er - I would rather say that it is impossible to ignore that you live in Melbourne, seeing as 638 of your posts have included the word "Melbourne" since February 2009.

It's a pity our search does not do three-letter words, so I cannot verify that you have your priorities right - but I am thoroughly convinced that you have posted considerably more often about gin...


OT:
Whereas Strontium Dog has posted zero posts about Liverpool and only four posts about football before this thread (and no OPs in the Sport subforum). Therefore I find that his belief - that it would be clear to everyone that he is an avid supporter of Liverpool FC based on his location information only - is too big a leap of faith. It is IMO not realistic to assume that (many or most) other members here would draw such a conclusion based on so little information.

[Magicziggy]

I support spurs btw. I have mentioned this before on this site. I used to go to the games as a kid.

The issue of club loyalty is irrelevant in this discussion. Suarez is guilty of displaying racist behavior because an independent review of the evidence made that conclusion.

He should not, however, be labelled a racist. That judgement should be based on the balance of his actions over a much wider span of time and events.