Topic: Suarez: Why We Must Stand By Our Man

[Scribble8]

Fuck the FA. No consistency and completely overreacting. A fine for the "sign" should be enough. Too many punks making decisions.

[bepoq]

This is a fan forum, there are fucking potshots going off all over the place. You can't stop that. There have also been many - this op included- decent, well drawn posts that could not fail to convince the neutral that there is a huge injustice being perpetrated here by fools and vagabonds.

Agreed, just a bit disappointing when some of the snidey stuff is coming from posters who I respect and whose posts I usually enjoy. Also, I confess, I think we are walking a difficult line here. I think we're in the right in our defence of Suarez (I even consulted a friend who's an expert on Uruguayan culture), but I'm not enthusiastic about becoming "racist FC" in the public's view because we get fast and loose in our defence of him. Would rather not alienate some of our own fans by getting fast and loose either. Just saying we should watch our step while attempting to take the moral high ground (with good reason I think) on this.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Chris Kamara highlighted what he interpreted Evra was saying to the ref - "he's calling me names, hes's calling me names". Maybe since then its been established that isnt what Evra was saying.

If he had told the referee then the referee would have included it in his match report. He didn't.

If he had included it in his match report then the FA would have referenced it in their statement. They certainly would have mentioned it in charging the player in question that the referee had noted it. This would have been the proof they needed. I've seen reports saying the referee was only aware once Ferguson and Evra barreled into his room 30 minutes after the game had concluded (And Evra had crashed into Canal +)

[john_mac]

.........................but I not enthusiastic about becoming "racist FC" because we get fast and loose in our defence of him.

Not sure what you mean. Are you suggesting that you should not express your belief if you think it may give others a negative and incorrect opinion of yourself?

[John C]

It will be interesting to see if they mention it on the next episode Andy.
I'm actually shocked that I seem to be the only person on here that either watched it the next day or remembers it anyway.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

It will be interesting to see if they mention it on the next episode Andy.
I'm actually shocked that I seem to be the only person on here that either watched it the next day or remembers it anyway.

I've been reading up everything I can on this from every source and you saying it just then was the first claim I've heard thus far that says he mentioned it to the referee.

In fact everything else I've written directly contradicts that mate.

I don't watch Goals on Sunday because it's made by c*nts for c*nts on a channel full of c*nts.

(Not calling you a c*nt though mate - but perhaps you'd be better off selecting a better channel for repeats of the games)

[Sevo]

Chris Kamara highlighted what he interpreted Evra was saying to the ref - "he's calling me names, hes's calling me names". Maybe since then its been established that isnt what Evra was saying.

Kamara is a joke figure on SKY - and you can't get much lower than that. He must be the thickest guy on sports tv after Merson.

[Alan_X]

Although I don't neccessarily disagree with some in here, I hardly think that petty point scoring against the SBL is either helpful or needed.

Judge them on their statement(s), not on what they are. (an organisation to promote the interests and advancement of Ethnic Minorities)

Exactly. Can people drop the PC gone mad bollocks - it makes us look like the letters page of the Daily Mail for fuck's sake. The Society of Black Lawyers is not a racist organisation and if you aren't bright enough to understand why you'd be better off staying out of this discussion.

And can we all fuck off with the blackboard and coloured pencils shite as well.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Exactly. Can people drop the PC gone mad bollocks - it makes us look like the letters page of the Daily Mail for fuck's sake. The Society of Black Lawyers is not a racist organisation and if you aren't bright enough to understand why you'd be better off staying out of this discussion.

And can we all fuck off with the blackboard and coloured pencils shite as well.

Fair enough - they clearly aren't racist.

But I'm uncomfortable with any association based on race. Eventually you would hope we'll end up with a world where race, sex, religion, cultural aspect and age just aren't a fucking issue.

[bepoq]

Not sure what you mean. Are you suggesting that you should not express your belief if you think it may give others a negative and incorrect opinion of yourself?

hmmm... fair enough question... I think I mean something a bit more complicated than that though(and sorry I edited that a bit right while you were replying). I'm working from the starting assumption (which I know is a dubious one in some cases) that our fans are good people, but like most, we get annoyed and say ill-considered things that may well be understood as offensive... things that we might not say if fully considered, say, in the same nuanced way we are considering Suarez's alleged words. So I think I'm questioning the belief part in your question above (as beliefs may change with consideration). In my opinion, if we can avoid that in this situation—applying the same sort of simplistic thinking that the media are applying to this case any time we don't like what a group has said—we are better in the right ourselves, we avoid charges of hypocrisy (and perhaps avoid being hypocritical), we don't alienate some of our fans, and we avoid falling into the same racist/ignorance of culture trap that the press is currently wallowing around in.

Is that clearer? It might not be—the whole thing is tricky to write about and make your thoughts clear on. And, by the way, I'm not really meaning to come across as heavily having a go at anyone. I just have to think about this stuff a lot in my gig and work through various understandings of culture etc. Honestly not that sure if I'm any better at it for all that.

[Alan_X]

Fair enough - they clearly aren't racist.

But I'm uncomfortable with any association based on race. Eventually you would hope we'll end up with a world where race, sex, religion, cultural aspect and age just aren't a fucking issue.

They're an organisation set up to counter the institutional racism that still exists within the legal profession. Same as organisations for black policemen and others. I agree that in an ideal world there would be no need for them but England still as a lot of prejudice bubbling away under he surface.

[bepoq]

Fair enough - they clearly aren't racist.

But I'm uncomfortable with any association based on race. Eventually you would hope we'll end up with a world where race, sex, religion, cultural aspect and age just aren't a fucking issue.

Aye Andy, no doubt, but we're a long way between now and then eh? And what do groups on the wrong end of power imbalances do until then? If there are no such groups/efforts to change, then all the power balances remain and existing racism and all the rest of it stays.

don't worry lads, that's my last word on this part of things unless someone directly questions me on something. back to slagging the journos (completely warranted in my view)

[TH]

Just imagine Mancs signed this lad.. He'd never ever get any punishment. Fuck you Alex

[John C]

I've been reading up everything I can on this from every source and you saying it just then was the first claim I've heard thus far that says he mentioned it to the referee.

I've tweeted him Andy, lets see what he says tomorrow.

[Alf]

Thats the point for me now.

It's gone way beyond football, and the ban is a secondary concern now. Even if they double the tarriff to 16 game, who cares. We'll get by.

This is no longer about the ban, but more importantly defending a mans name and reputation.  He's now been branded a racist for the rest of his carreer, so Liverpool Football Club now need to draw aline in the sand, and say, NO MORE!

That is exactly why LFC need to completely by-pass the F.A. and take it to CAS, or the highest court in the land if needed.

I'm not an edvocate or lover of taking things outside of football, and into the courts, but in this instance I feel that Liverpool and Suarez himself have no option if they want to clear his name.

My sentiments entirely. I've not seen Brian Reade's article but was disappointed with Tony Evans. But you don't know whether or not it's what they genuinely think or if they have been told to tow the party line.

[KiNki]

we'll all find out soon enough.
=====

The judgement on Liverpool's Luis Suarez's eight-match ban for racially abusing the Manchester United defender Patrice Evra promises to be the biggest and most comprehensive in the Football Association's history as the independent commission that came to the decision prepares to release its "written reasons" this week.

The document, which is being put together by the commission chairman, Paul Goulding QC, is thought to run to more pages than the 28-page commission report into the "Battle of Stamford Bridge" involving Manchester United players and Chelsea groundstaff that was released three years ago – and eight months after the original incident.

The commission is hopeful that the Suarez document, which could run to more than 50 pages, will be released by the end of the week to Liverpool and Manchester United, and made public on the FA's website. Only then will the 14 days in which Liverpool have to make a decision whether or not to appeal begin. Given their response thus far, it seems inevitable that they will do so.

The high level of scrutiny on the decision made by Goulding, former manager Dennis Smith and FA councillor Brian Jones, means that the commission – and the FA – cannot afford for there to be any flaws or loopholes in their reasoning. The governing body is well aware that every word will be pored over. Some FA officials have already been the subject of threats on social media.

Liverpool would not comment yesterday on the decision by Suarez to accept a charge of improper conduct for giving Fulham fans the finger after Liverpool's game at Craven Cottage this month. It means he will be suspended for one game, ruling him out of the Newcastle match tomorrow – he was also given a £20,000 fine.

The FA was surprised Liverpool appealed over the size of a £20,000 fine for failing to ensure the conduct of their players in the same game. The club had accepted the charge but disputed the fine. An independent commission rejected the appeal.

Suarez's one-match ban was identical to that given to Birmingham's Stephen Carr for a "w*****" gesture made to Aston Villa fans last year.
====

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/suarez-judgement-to-be-most-detailed-in-the-fas-history-6282427.html

[Chakan]

What really fucks me off is they keep referring to it as an "Independent Panel" They have an FA Councillor on the panel. How can it be independent when there is a representative of the people bringing the fine/ban against the player?

50 page document is laughable.

Cover our asses, cover our asses, cover our asses.

[DoogyRev]

My sentiments entirely. I've not seen Brian Reade's article but was disappointed with Tony Evans. But you don't know whether or not it's what they genuinely think or if they have been told to tow the party line.

Possibly both. I'm surprised people are surprised at what Evans has written. The headline was clear that Suarez isnt a racist as was the FA and also Evra. He was found to have made a racially offensive remark. Not the same as being 'racist'. Evans was being realistic in his article. Sure, he could have written an article on the debate, but whats the point in that? A verdict was made. The guy is paid to fill space with opinion, for this story he has no sources, and had to deliver a few hundred words. People were quoting Tim Vickery left right and center in support of the 'negrito' argument, but then the guy did a massive reverse when you heard him on the phone ins after the FA's judgement. No one who has a career in journalism is going to risk their careers on an issue as sensitive as race regardless of the mitigating circumstances.

[Trada]

thought to run to more pages than the 28-page

You can just imagine they will have every angle covered, why will it be that long?

[Fanxxxxtastic]

Why am I not fucking surprised.  It was as obvious as the day is long.  The reason they'd set such a delay on releasing the documentation was because they didn't foresee such an emotive statement being released by the club the day after they'd given their judgement.

Then, when viewing what the club had said, they had to ensure they went through everything with a fine tooth comb.  Probably checking and double checking.

I hope if they mention unseen video evidence, they release that to the public domain.

[Armand9]

When Tony Evans said that we were standing beside Suarez because of tribal issues, I began to maybe question things.

Very disappointed in Tony Evans, of all the football writers out there he was the one I respected the most and one of the few decent ones that exist.

I don't like the fact he is categorically saying I'm (as a Liverpool supporter for over 40 years) happy to turn a blind eye to racism as the case in point negatively effects my team - I've said from the start that if Suarez was genuinely racist they should throw the book at him.

He gives no leeway, and doesn't even entertain, that someone's cultural linguistics has any bearing on what a person says (which is ridiculous) and unless he's privvy to the written judgement that not even the club has seen has said all this without any hard evidence whatsoever.

In short, I support our player until proven guilty - which he has not as the FA are a complete fuckup handing down a sentence without supplying the evidence of a guilty charge - and the weight of the statement by the club, who have heard the evidence (again, Evans has not), is obviously going to be influential to fans as we trust the club and individuals involved (primarily kenny) that they wouldn't try to dilute a blatant racist remark from one of our players.

He's entitled to his opinion of the affair of course but remarkably seems unable to take an objective view and has jumped on the journalistic holier-than-tho bandwagon regardless of the facts of the case that only a few have been privvy to and certainly not him or any other journo.

He's tarred the fans with a very broad brush with an arrogant and ignorant mindset.

[mark82]

What really fucks me off is they keep referring to it as an "Independent Panel" They have an FA Councillor on the panel. How can it be independent when there is a representative of the people bringing the fine/ban against the player?

50 page document is laughable.

Cover our asses, cover our asses, cover our asses.

The problem I believe with that being something to argue against is the fact we apparently had a right to veto any of the panel before the hearing. Dropped ball by the looks of things, we should have pushed for a cultural expert on the panel, such as the guy from the link working at Leeds Uni.

[mark82]

The fact that the club attacks Evra in such a way, suggest that the club know that the verdict was based on not what Suarez has allegedly admitted to but something that Evra accuses him of which Suarez disputes.
The report should be extremely interesting.

[Trada]

I imagine even after the judgement is released it will still all be in the air.

If the report is as big as being reported people will cherry pick from it saying this proves the FA was right and others saying but this part proves they were wrong.

It will be all down to how the club reacts to it hopefully our stance will not change.

[kaz1983]

Just debating this with my mate, will the FA make every key page of the whole report available to the general public?

Or just what they want us to hear?

Does anybody know....

[nellyp]

You can just imagine they will have every angle covered, why will it be that long?

I have wondered about this for a while now. Don't they need the report to come to their own conclusion? Or did they just make notes, and discuss?. Can they put anything extra into the report, or are they only allowed to use what has already been discussed? I am honestly worried that the report has been put together in such a way as to preclude any appeal, and not just have the things they actually considered. There have been a lot of compelling arguments put forward since the inquiry and I am fearful that they have spent some time figuring out arguments again't these, that they had not considered before.
    Forgive my ignorance but I do not know how these things work, and so do not know if they can alter something that; was obviously not written before the judgement was passed.

[bclfc]

I'm glad they are releasing the report this week, because as someone who has transcribed and therefore read hundreds of court transcripts from England, it surprises me that it has taken this long in such a high-profile case.  Let's see what the rationale for the penalty is, where the evidence leads, and how the conclusions were reached.  Only then can we fully understand how in the world they came to the decision they did.  There is sufficient intellect on this board to dissect their judgment appropriately.

[bclfc]

Btw, the judgment should be released publicly in full, if not then many questions will be asked.

[kaz1983]

.... I am honestly worried that the report has been put together in such a way as to preclude any appeal, and not just have the things they actually considered..

Same here, bitch of a situation.

[Alan_X]

Why not wait until it's released before deciding what it says or what it means? 

[Alan_X]

Just debating this with my mate, will the FA make every key page of the whole report available to the general public?

Or just what they want us to hear?

Does anybody know....

They publish the full report.

[Timbo's Goals]

Possibly both. I'm surprised people are surprised at what Evans has written. The headline was clear that Suarez isnt a racist as was the FA and also Evra. He was found to have made a racially offensive remark. Not the same as being 'racist'. Evans was being realistic in his article. Sure, he could have written an article on the debate, but whats the point in that? A verdict was made. The guy is paid to fill space with opinion, for this story he has no sources, and had to deliver a few hundred words. People were quoting Tim Vickery left right and center in support of the 'negrito' argument, but then the guy did a massive reverse when you heard him on the phone ins after the FA's judgement. No one who has a career in journalism is going to risk their careers on an issue as sensitive as race regardless of the mitigating circumstances.

Are you actually serious or simply playing devil's advocate? Or haven't you actually read the utter tripe Evans has written?

[iiqae]

For the FA it seems that any reference to a player’s skin colour is, regardless of the context, a form of racial abuse. Suarez is no saint but in the context of a conversation held in Spanish, the word “negro”, in its Spanish pronunciation, probably would have not borne a racist connotation by him or to any other Latin American since, according to the Real Diccionario de la Lengua Española, in some South American countries (including Uruguay), the word “negro” is commonly used to refer to partners and close friends.

It is true that Suarez should have known that he is not playing in Uruguay but in England. However, at the same time, the FA should be looking at educating and integrating foreign players who have recently arrived, instead of throwing the book at them as they have done with the Uruguayan.

More importantly, the FA may be missing the point that racial discrimination refers not only to someone’s skin colour, but also to race, descent, ethnicity and nationality. If, as Henry Winter and others have claimed, Evra told Suarez “don’t touch me, you South American” in a pejorative way, then he should have been charged right away, too. Abuse based on an individual’s skin colour is no worse than abuse based on an individual’s country of origin. In neither case does the individual have a choice; and, just for the record, Latin Americans have been discriminated against and abused throughout history, just as African and African-descendants have been.

what else needs to be said?
the argument that suarez should've known better because he has been living in holland for an extended period is devoid of substance. it is tantamount to arguing you could understand kenyan culture/race relations by living in the drc.

[redrockydennis]

we'll all find out soon enough.
=====

The judgement on Liverpool's Luis Suarez's eight-match ban for racially abusing the Manchester United defender Patrice Evra promises to be the biggest and most comprehensive in the Football Association's history as the independent commission that came to the decision prepares to release its "written reasons" this week.

The document, which is being put together by the commission chairman, Paul Goulding QC, is thought to run to more pages than the 28-page commission report into the "Battle of Stamford Bridge" involving Manchester United players and Chelsea groundstaff that was released three years ago – and eight months after the original incident.

The commission is hopeful that the Suarez document, which could run to more than 50 pages, will be released by the end of the week to Liverpool and Manchester United, and made public on the FA's website. Only then will the 14 days in which Liverpool have to make a decision whether or not to appeal begin. Given their response thus far, it seems inevitable that they will do so.

The high level of scrutiny on the decision made by Goulding, former manager Dennis Smith and FA councillor Brian Jones, means that the commission – and the FA – cannot afford for there to be any flaws or loopholes in their reasoning. The governing body is well aware that every word will be pored over. Some FA officials have already been the subject of threats on social media.

Liverpool would not comment yesterday on the decision by Suarez to accept a charge of improper conduct for giving Fulham fans the finger after Liverpool's game at Craven Cottage this month. It means he will be suspended for one game, ruling him out of the Newcastle match tomorrow – he was also given a £20,000 fine.

The FA was surprised Liverpool appealed over the size of a £20,000 fine for failing to ensure the conduct of their players in the same game. The club had accepted the charge but disputed the fine. An independent commission rejected the appeal.

Suarez's one-match ban was identical to that given to Birmingham's Stephen Carr for a "w*****" gesture made to Aston Villa fans last year.
====

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/suarez-judgement-to-be-most-detailed-in-the-fas-history-6282427.html

50 pages? Possibly the biggest exercise in arse covering in FA history? This is going to be fascinating stuff.

Will the clubs get their copies before its released to the public?

[Timbo's Goals]

the argument that suarez should've known better because he has been living in holland for an extended period is devoid of substance.

For the likes of Tony Evans substance is not required. Posturing is where it's at.

I know his article never actually referrred to Suarez's Dutch sojourn - probably ran out of word space because of all the other multiple posturing - but many have. A primary objective is to appear as 'right on' anti-racist as it is possible to be, gaining as many brownie points as they can.

I know a lot on here will already be aware of this but for those who aren't one thing I haven't mentioned which for the sake of balance I should is that one journalist [Rory Smith] - who is not a Red but has been based in the region for the Daily Telegraph - has written a superb piece on the subject for The Anfield Wrap I believe.

Perhaps someone might be able to link it in this thread to demonstrate to our friend Doogy Rev - who [if he's not actually winding us all up] seems to believe the Tony Evans school of tripe posturing to be the only way of writing about this subject - that a considered, unbiased and sensitively handled scrutiny and analysis of the situation is actually a possibility in the hands of a true journalist. 

[kaz1983]

They publish the full report.

One more question as this is the first time I've been awaiting the FA to release a report etc etc...

Will they release the whole report on their website, so anybody with the internet can read the whole thing or by other means that I would not have a clue about? I tried search for the 28-page commission report into the "Battle of Stamford Bridge" involving Manchester United players and Chelsea groundstaff but only found a 3 paragraph report on it.. :/

[Red number seven]

I thought this was interesting, I'd love to see the case sent to the CPS.


Lawyers accuse Liverpool and Chelsea Football Clubs of condoning Suarez and Terry Racism

The Society of Black Lawyers (SBL) has condemned Liverpool and Chelsea Football Clubs for appearing to condone the alleged racism of Luis Suarez and John Terry. The organisation is urging the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to treat the Suarez affair as a racist incident and argues that there should be no difference in the treatment of the two players.

The Society of Black Lawyers (SBL), has condemned as indefensible, the stance of Chelsea and Liverpool Football Clubs for appearing to endorse the alleged acts of racism perpetuated by John Terry and Luis Suarez respectively.

Chelsea F.C. issued a statement, expressing their unconditional support after captain John Terry was charged with a racially aggravated public order offence relating to alleged remarks to Queens Park Rangers (QPR) defender Anton Ferdinand. Meanwhile, Liverpool F.C. has continued to defend the behaviour of Luis Suarez following the eight-match ban given to the Uruguayan who was found guilty of racially abusing Manchester United’s Patrice Evra.

The SBL was one of the main organisations that successfully campaigned for racism to be criminalised and recognised as a hate crime in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The organisation intends to make a formal complaint to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) about the racist and offensive language used by Luis Suarez and will urge the CPS to treat the matter as a racist incident requiring a full and proper investigation. The SBL will also urge the CPS to prosecute Mr Suarez if the outcome of the investigation evinces a reasonable prospect of a conviction according to the public interest test contained within the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

The SBL contends that there should be no difference in the treatment of the two players and as both football clubs are the players’ respective employers, such instances of racism ought to have been treated as allegations of gross misconduct by the clubs and not simply denied as being completely unfounded.

SBL Co-Chair, Peter Herbert OBE commented:

“To our knowledge, neither club has bothered to conduct its own independent investigation or hold a disciplinary hearing. If such serious allegations of racism had been made in the workplace, any reasonable employer would consider itself to be under a strict duty to conduct a full, detailed and impartial investigation into the allegations, and not simply to state that they stand behind the denials of the player concerned.

The punitive effects of racism are felt by thousands of people in Britain each day. The response of the Footbaall Association (FA) and the CPS must be robust to protect others from the humiliation, pain and suffering that this type of hate crime inflicts. There is no reason why Suarez should not face criminal charges. When individual football clubs and fellow players – both black and white – endorse this kind of behaviour, they themselves become part of the problem because they stand in the way of the total eradication of racism from the sport. Their denial and appeasement reflects an abdication of their role as responsible players or employers.”


http://www.blacklawyer.org/?post=lawyers-accuse-liverpool-and-chelsea-football-clubs-of-condoning-suarez-and-terry-racism

Why is the society for black lawyers in existence? Why is it allowed to use the word "black" as an adjective in its very name? Can my brother, a white lawyer, join the society for black lawyers? Is the society for black lawyers racist?

The irony is that this society is something Uruguayans would not recognise a need for, as the paranoia about "being black" that still (understandably) exists in the UK, damaged as we are by the African slave trade and the 50s immigration "rivers of blood," does not exist in Uruguay.

This is a country that is miles ahead of us in terms of black-white relations. This is a country that fought FIFA to lead the world in playing a black player a full 63 years before Viv Anderson pulled on an England shirt. This is a country where "blackie" and "whitie" are equally inoffensive nicknames and we are trying to teach one of theirs a lesson?

We are a nation of fucking hypocrites.

[Zlen]

Fifty pages you say.
Someone is creating a vacuum to contain their fart.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

50 pages? Possibly the biggest exercise in arse covering in FA history? This is going to be fascinating stuff.

Will the clubs get their copies before its released to the public?

It's clear that they'll be cross referencing everything to just bog down any appeal process. You can expect clarifications to be responded to several weeks later via carefully worded letters.

'Bogged down' and 'Red Tape' will be in evidence throughout methinks.

[Kidspen]

I have grave misgivings about on organisation which cannot see the use of the word "sudaca" to be just as bad if not worse than "negrito" in the language the alleged conversation was conducted. One is definitely abusive the other can in most circumstances be more friendly.
Can anyone else see the irony when this same organisation changes the name of its new training complex from the "National Training Centre" to the "St George's Field" to reflect the pride with which "Ingerland" supporters have in the team and the project.
In a multi cultural society which should be trying to be inclusve, how can pandering to the xenophobic element within the game convince anybody that they have a full grasp of all the issues involved. Try asking the "Society of Black Lawyers" whether the choice of that name has their full backing and is likely to fill black England players with the same sense of pride as the "St George's " flag wavers.