23 Dec 2011

SUAREZ: Why it's Liverpool FC's fault if people label him 'RACIST'...

I'm aware that this will be an unpopular opinion, but for me, Liverpool's reaction to Luis Suarez's 8-match ban has been an embarrassment, and what makes it worse is the club's overwrought 'us against the world' approach is clearly predicated upon a fundamental misunderstanding of FA's ruling.

The club's ill-advised, amateur 'statement' in response to the FA was clearly driven by emotion, and it demonstrated to the world that Liverpool had totally misunderstood the most important (and obvious) parts of the FA's ruling. Consider the following sentences from the LFC statement:

"LFC considers racism in any form to be unacceptable – without compromise. It is our strong-held belief, having gone over the facts of the case, that Luis Suárez did not commit any racist act".

"It is key to note that Patrice Evra himself in his written statement in this case said: 'I don't think that Luis Suárez is racist.' The FA in their opening remarks accepted that Luis Suárez was not racist.


The key word here is 'racist'; the entire statement reads like the club is outraged at Luis Suarez being banned for racism.

The problem is, the FA did NOT accuse or convict Suarez of being racist. In its ruling, the FA stated:

* Mr Suarez used insulting words towards Mr Evra during the match contrary to FA Rule E3(1);

* The insulting words used by Mr Suarez included a reference to Mr Evra's colour within the meaning of Rule E3(2)


No mention of the word racist anywhere; just a statement of the facts: Suarez DID use 'insulting words', and he DID make a reference to Evra's colour. If the FA believed Suarez was guilty of racism, it would've used the term 'race' not 'colour' in its ruling. FA Rule E3-2 states:

In the event of any breach of Rule E 3(1) including a reference to any one or more of a person’s ethnic origin, colour, race, nationality, faith, gender, sexual orientation or disability (an "aggravating factor"), a Regulatory Commission shall consider the imposition of an increased sanction.

The FA deliberately and specifically chose to use the term 'colour', and in doing this, provided Liverpool with an opportunity to accept a ruling that did NOT label Suarez a racist.

The club totally wasted that opportunity.

Liverpool FC is the only party to the incident using the term 'racist', and they did so in a widely publicised statement that has almost certainly been read by millions of people, all of whom will now have the word 'racist' imprinted in their minds.

Liverpool's outrage is totally misplaced and unnecessary, and by releasing that statement, the club has probably made it MORE likely that Suarez will be labelled a racist.

What Liverpool should've done was quietly and humbly accept that Suarez used a word that made reference to Evra's colour (which, by his own admission, he DID!). The club still could've supported him by highlighting exactly what I have above (i.e. use of the word 'colour', not 'race') but by going off the deep end and defensively raving about racism, Liverpool just made things infinitely worse.

The club is fighting a battle that doesn't exist. The FA has not called Suarez racist; he has not been convicted of being racist; he has not even been convicted of using a word relating to race!

As I've proved recently, I am no fan of the FA (!) but all it has done here is affirm what Suarez himself admitted in the press, i.e. he used an insulting words that made a reference to Evra's skin colour. Is the FA wrong? I wish I could say yes, but the answer is no.

The Media response is a different story, and I will be posting another article relating to that later.

Ultimately, whoever sanctioned that Liverpool statement should be fired IMO. It has made a mockery of everything Liverpool FC stands for, and it has turned the club into a laughing stock.

Jaimie Kanwar


156 comments:

  1. you idiot
    'negrito' isnt an offensive term in south america
    so he didnt,as you,and the rule say ,'insult' him

    thats a bit of an embarrassing mistake you wrote a who article about,no?

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is case is indeed about racism, and therefore it was important for LFC to write that Luis is absolutely not a racist. The club never claimed that FA judged him as a racist, but this is unfortunatelty what the media and other supporters have done a long time ago.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Are we in south America or England?

    Why don't you try being objective instead of being over-emotional.

    The word 'Negrito' IS a reference to someone's ski colour. End of story. it doesn't matter whether it's offensive or not; it's a reference to skin colour, and in the UK, it is an offensive reference.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 8-match ban for 'insulting words' to a troublemaker like Evra? FA is a joke, Suarez is the victim in all this.

    ReplyDelete
  5. JK I agree technically you appear correct. But if you are then SSN, many news papers and also all Anti Racsim groups are going to look stupid.

    Also why ban a player for 8 games offer an argument especially when it apears to be tit for tat as i am informed that Evra admitted to using insulting words towards Suarez in particluar a derogatory Spanish phrase that refers to a south american.

    What were the sky sports news headlines? - i am sure they included racist or racisit comments etc, so they wrongly mislead millions of people in the UK. 

    By the FA not realeasing their reasons behind the judgement they must have known that even using 'colour' would spark a media witch hunt with RACIAL Headlines being written and Suarez rep damaged. 

    ReplyDelete
  6. Why is the case about racism? Was Suarez charged with racism? NO. Was he convicted of racism? NO.

    With it's repeated used of the word 'racist', the club has played right into the media's hands.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hello Jamie,

    I agree with your article to an extent. Definitely the club should have not used the word racism so many times. And also highlighting Suarez's 'black' background is like Sepp Blatter and Tokyo Sexwale taking a picture together. "Hey I have black friends, I couldn't possibly be racist, look here's a picture to prove it"!

    By highlighting using Suarez's ethnic ancestry, it's basically saying the same thing, or even excusing it. Would it be okay if a black player abused  another black player racially?

    So overall, Liverpool should have been very careful about their choice of words, especially on such a delicate subject.

    However I do think Liverpool's intentions were/are good. And I definitely agree that Liverpool's outrage is "misplaced and unnecessary". I wrote here saying that Liverpool should wear Suarez t-shirts but after thinking, I retract that comment. What if Suarez did in fact racially abuse Evra?

    How would that look on Liverpool? Just because he is one of our own does not mean he is any different from anyone? At end of the day it's Suarez word against Evras.

    Liverpool should get their facts as much as they can, evaluate, work out a plan, proceed, instead of leaping in defence for something they don't know for sure.

    But as I said in my previous comment, Negro and Negrito although similar have different meanings so if it was vocab/cultural unawareness then fine.

    But don't "crucify" or "blind defend" someone when all the facts are not there. The FA has acted disgustingly and so has (surprise surprise) english Media.

    All I want to see is JT's verdict, like you Jamie, now the case is in the Polices hand ( good move by the FA -_- ) the FA can't technically do anything about it (0_-).

    Football politics is so flawed that it makes me lose the love for football.

    ReplyDelete
  8. You're right - the media is the problem here, but what the club should've said in their statement IMO is that anyone who labelled Suarez racist would be sued for defamation.

    As a matter of irrefutable fact, he has NOT been convicted of racism, thus anyone saying that in a headline is being defamatory.

    Using the statement to say that would've been far more supportive IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think the media have a larger role to play in his being labeled a racist.

    ReplyDelete
  10. And the club should sue each and every news provide that labels Suarez a racist.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I doubt Liverpool's statement was composed by anyone in an emotional state

    There would have been multiple statements, for each possible eventuality, drafted by their lawyers, with approval obtained from the highest levels in the club

    The main aim is to avoid a situation where Suarez is deemed a racist, because then John W Henry would have to sack Suarez

    Also, they can't have *understood* the ruling as they have not received it in full yet

    I think it was important for Liverpool to categorically state that he is not a racist..

    ReplyDelete
  12. Not every reference to skin colour is offensive though....

    ReplyDelete
  13. *mr suarez used insulting words towards evra contrary to fa rule E3(1)

    no he didnt

    nor did he intend to

    thats like someone getting sent off for an accidental hand ball in the penalty and getting a 5 match ban for malicious intent

    ReplyDelete
  14. With all due respect, you're wrong. Suarez did use an insulting word, and he admitted as much himself. You're in denial.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I think you'll find the reason is Liverpool fans, going around calling Evra a nigger and Stan Collymore. 

    Sorry but the whole Negrito thing, Evra just has to grow up. Negro is the word Martin Luther King used in reference to black people.Onto the word "coloured", all of the Hansen haters have to strap on a pair and learn some history. One of the earliest and biggest anti racism groups is called the Nation Association for the Advancement of COLOURED People. Not black.On a final note, who does Mcgrath think he is? Glenno knows much more than him about Suarez and he goes out, basically calling Glen spineless, it's a disgrace. 

    ReplyDelete
  16. I think the club should have stressed the fact that he was NOT convicted of racism, and that any media outlet that used the word in relation to Suarez would be sued for defamation.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Negrito is not an offensive term?  The mere act of referring to someone's skin colour in the context of an insult is offensive and wreaks of racism.  How is skin colour ever relevant in an insult otherwise? I know it's difficult to criticize a culture you love, respect, or grew up in, but maybe, just maybe, "negrito" derived from racist attitudes. 

    ReplyDelete
  18. I think you'll find the reason is Liverpool fans, going around calling Evra a nigger and Stan Collymore. 
    Sorry but the whole Negrito thing, Evra just has to grow up. Negro is the word Martin Luther King used in reference to black people.Onto the word "coloured", all of the Hansen haters have to strap on a pair and learn some history. One of the earliest and biggest anti racism groups is called the Nation Association for the Advancement of COLOURED People. Not black.On a final note, who does Mcgrath think he is? Glenno knows much more than him about Suarez and he goes out, basically calling Glen spineless, it's a disgrace. 

    ReplyDelete
  19. you must be well learned in south american culture?
    its is not considered an abusive term there

    the same hand gestures in europe and asia can be offensive, or the opposite.

    i think youd be shouting your cause for getting 40 lashes in a middle eastern country for shaking hands with your left,not right

    ReplyDelete
  20. if luis suarez was a black civil rights leader like martin luther king, then he could refer to black people any way he wanted to. he's not, so he has to watch his mouth. It's also not the 1960's anymore, and anyone calling an african american a negro nowadays, would want to be doing it from the safety of an anonymous internet username.

    ReplyDelete
  21. There's no point discussing this with you because you're clearly incapable of understanding:

    1. Suarez called a black player 'Negrito' (or a variation of that)

    2. Suarez ADMITTED in public that he did this.

    3. Negrito is a reference to a person's skin colour

    4. FA rule E3-2 outlaws any reference to a person's skin colour.

    5. The *intent* is irrelevant - it's a strict liability issue: if you make a reference to a player's skin colour, you will fall foul of that rule.

    What the word means in South America is irrelevant. I don't dispute that it's okay to say it in SA, but it wasn't said in SA, was it?! The word has negative connotations in England, and that's all that matters.

    ReplyDelete
  22. congrats on a very clear sighted article. all of this fuss about luis suarez not being a racist is completely irrelevant. he was never accused of such. It seems as though the liverpool statement wasn't aimed towards winning back popular opinion, but aimed more at their more excitable fans. 

    From what we do know about the case, Suarez was convicted not on the word of evra, but because of what he admitted doing. so as you suggest liverpool's response should be geared towards dealing with and explaining that, and pointing out that it has nothing to do with being a racist. 

    This response just makes it worse.

    ReplyDelete
  23. suarez is a black his grand father was a black

    ReplyDelete
  24.  Let me understand. The rule tell: "In the event of any breach of Rule E 3(1) including a reference to any one or more of a person's ethnic origin, colour, race, nationality, gender, sexual orientation or disability (an "aggravating factor"), a Regulatory Commission shall consider the imposition of an increased sanction." Suarez respond (this is why he said por que? why) to an offence wich refered to his "ethnic origin" or nationality - "you, South American ...". And after that, person who made that chauvinistic offence is considered insulted? Is he credible after that?

    ReplyDelete
  25. I understand your argument but frankly the weight of the media had already swung in favour of Evra claiming racism against Suarez, therefore Liverpool FC had no option but to reply to these racism claims even if the FA do not actually fault Suarez with racism. This needs to be pointed out to the press vehemently. It also proves that an 8 match ban and 40 grand fine is outrageously over-the-top. Also Evra should be punished in some way. People forget that he was violent towards Suarez pushing and shoving when he was claiming being insulted. Whether justified or not it is still retaliation!

    ReplyDelete
  26. That's hipocrasy. That's like when black people call each other nigger but for me to say it is a criminal offence. 
    If MLK said it, then I would deem it unoffensive. Add to that he grew up using that word as part of everyday life, in his first language, and he's part black himself, and I think that makes it stupid for him to be charged with anything. I noticed you didn't comment on my bit about Alan Hansen? 

    ReplyDelete
  27. you are against Suarez and that's it, more I read you more I am convinced 

    ReplyDelete
  28. Yes, that's why I vehemently argued that the FA disciplinary panel was biased.

    Sorry, but that's nonsense; you are just another in a long line of people who has tunnel vision, and is incapable of being objective.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I am white, if someone called me "whitey" and I complained about it (not that I would because I don't give a f@ck!) I would be laughed at. Get the f@ck over it, the whole thing as a joke, Evra is a princess, suarez used words that are natural to him, you don't just switch that shit off, when you move to another country, when you have been using them naturally for years. The FA should understand that, they have over reacted to appease the media hype and anti racism outcry. Bunch of pansy wingers. This article just continues the farce even more. BORING!

    ReplyDelete
  30. Hopper I am English who happens to be caucasian. Frankly, Evra is a negro, I make no apologies for using that term because it is a totally valid and correct description of his origin. I don't mean it has an insult and any taking offence at that description needs to go back to school and get an education. So if someone called me a Causacian I would shrug my shoulders like Suarez and say So What!!! This is precisely what Evra should have done and not been so precious!! Remember he insulted Suarez first, and Suarez used a term that his own teammates call him. So to sum up the FA need to stop acting like idiots and start acting with the wisdom of Solomon not the prejudice of Hitler!!

    ReplyDelete
  31. What really irks me is, that Suarez spoke in spanish to Evra and therefore it can only be understood as such !!!!

    You can't take words out of context and then translate them to fit the cause ...... 

    If that's the case, then you shouldn't be allowed to speak in any other language than the country's native one !!!!

    ReplyDelete
  32. Haha have to edit the comment. Lame

    ReplyDelete
  33. I listen all the time around me to black tell other black : nigga. Are they racist? In my country every redhead is The Red, and every black : Babaye. And we are not a racists. 

    ReplyDelete
  34. The fact that the word 'negrito' might have a non-insulting meaning in South America does not free him of responsibility in England, especially as it was directed to a non-South American person, who has no idea what meaning that word has in Suarez's country of origin.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Just add your full name and address here ... that will be enough.

    ReplyDelete
  36. God knows who needs to 'grow up' in all of this. Please tell me you are 13.

    ReplyDelete
  37. what a load of crap.....its a literal translation of a word used freely.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Gotta love caucasians (in this instance, scouse caucasians) telling the rest of the world to grow up and ignore racist abuse. I'd imagine these same people would also advise the jews to laugh off holocaust jokes.

    ReplyDelete
  39. exactly. there is no obligation for Suarez to learn the customs of the country he doesn't belong to. whats the point, its the English and the French who need to sort themselves out. 

    ReplyDelete
  40. If you post any further comments containing personal insults you'll be banned. Read the comment policy. Your views are welcome, but if you can't debate without resorting to insults then don't bother in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  41. How amazing is it that only black people can get racially abused??????? Fucking love it. I also fucking love the Liverpool statement. It shows that they are behind a player they dont think racially abused Evra. I fucking love it too that they havent sold their souls and gone with the drivel the Maddocks and Mcgrath's have spouted. Fucking love the shirts supporting Luis. I fucking love Liverpool Football Club. I fucking dont give a shit if you think different either.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Spot on Derick...Are these guys actually men or children? What the hell is this? You abuse the shit out of each other on the field- do what you can to try to get up your opponents nose -and to win the game for your team.. 
    If it gets too heated or too intense for some one -- either give as much as you get physically or verbally or wimp off with your tail between your legs.. 
    And then leave it on the field when the game is done and shake hands and have a laugh about it all .. like grown men !!
    What the f#$k is all this ??
    Evra cant take Suarez calling him a blacky after he has called him a South american slimeball?? Oh my .. the poor little boy... maybe he can go and cry to his mummy !
    Jesus grow up mate!!
    For the life of me for the FA to take this on and for it to get to where it has is an absolute joke and has made them and Mr Evra lose ALL respect ALL over the world.. 
    Kick Out Racism is the call .. sure yes do that by all means .. but if 2 grown men ,, strong football players,, cant even put up with small verbal garbage -- and i dont care what was said -- then they shouldnt be playing a MANS game..
    Sorry Mr EVRA .. YOU are a complete joke . and the FA is not far behind you .. 
    Dont worry Mr Evra... your mummy is there for you to have a good cry to next time somebody calls you a negrito or a blacky . after all you are black arent you ? Somebody can call me a whitey thats fine ... I am in fact white .. its just a statement of FACT!!

    ReplyDelete
  43. do you know the song "you'll never walk alone"? it is exactly what Liverpool FC are doing, making sure he does not walk alone, because Suarez is innocent.

    so please it's been 2 days that you're acting as the fair headed liverpool fan. Liverpool fans stick together and defend their players, it is the liverpool way.

    i'm not trying to bellitle your support to LFC, but Suarez needs us behind him.

    He's not guilty, end of the story. (i'm not saying he's not guilty just because he's a liverpool player)

    ReplyDelete
  44. the conversation took place 
    in spanish...to use the word negrito 
    in a spanish conversation 
    is not offensive or 
    insulting..to the translate that conversation 
    into english just because the game was played here makes no sense whatsoever...

    i get what your saying that the fa didnt mention racism but by charging him they effectively told everyone he is a racist which is why liverpool came out in his defence. what your suggesting is that had LFC not issued that statement then the media, ex-pro's and experts and football fans across the country wouldnt have called suarez a racist....get real jaimie 

    and why havent the fa or the media or anybody else for that matter brought up what evra said to Luis Suarez. He called him a south american, going back to the rule you stated in your article then you cannot say anything about anyone's *nationality* either...as this is under the same rule and evra admitted to saying it just like you stated suarez admitted to saying negrito then surely evra should get 8 games too...am i right??  

    ReplyDelete
  45. this is the same "disgusted" paul mcgrath who stuck up for ron atkinson...everyone's got their own agenda's

    ReplyDelete
  46. @ JK-Well... all in all ,maybe the word is offensive but definitely not racist.

    ReplyDelete
  47. the conversation took place 
    in spanish....
    if evra can hurl abuse 
    in spanish at suarez 
    i'm pretty sure he has a decent grasp of the language....secondly, evra's own teammates call him the same thing so he knew what 
    it meant.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Hi,
    There has been a lot said about the words said by the Liverpool player in the press but No comfirmaton from any of the partys that this is correct.
    Untill the official rulling is made available for viewing its all speculation.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Sure thing :) My full name is Daniel Miller. I don't know who you think you are but you're obviously an idiot. I have many black friends and they think Suarez has had a harsh deal.

    ReplyDelete
  50. No, I'm nearly 17. And your silly one liners don't add anything to this discussion nor make you look clever.

    ReplyDelete
  51. You are absolutely right.. it is so simple that for the FA to have actually gone ahead and charged Suarez AND then Prosecuted him- there is a clear cut motive behind all of this -- which will come out .. as it is now becoming so.
    Of course as you say the conversation was in spanish - hence ALL the meanings of each term must be taken from the SPANISH meaning NOT after being translated into English - ALL of Uruguay IS coming out and saying quite clearly that the word he used is not a racist, or insulting word and it does not REFER to someone by their skin colour - hence there should have been NO CHARGE.. 
    However, Mr EVRA has admitted to calling Suarez a South American .. now that is clearly offensive AND it also is labelling someone according to their nationality - which is no doubt a punishable offence.. 
    Why has he not been charged yet???/?

    ReplyDelete
  52. 'I'm not saying he's not guilty just because he's a liverpool player' - and yet you so obviously are. Hilarious!

    ReplyDelete
  53. you have no idea what Suarez said or didn't say or what his intentions where.Everything you have gleaned is second hand through the media and who trusts them ???

    ReplyDelete
  54. The problem is the FA are getting involved in matters of Law that they should not be getting involved with IMO.

    Racism is a crime in this country and is dealt with by the courts. The whole campaign "Kick racism out of football" should be dealt with by the courts not the FA.

    The possibility of getting a criminal conviction and being labeled a racist should be enough to deter the majority of players and supporters from racist actions.

    Why should an organisation like the FA be allowed to Police its self and be judge and jury? 

    In such an emotive issue as this, this should be left to the courts. 

    We all know how the media works, and regardless of the facts, suarez will be classed as a racist even though he has not been convicted of being one. 

    This could not only ruin his reputation, but hit him and the club in terms of revenue. 

    After all players are assets to the club. Man city could of sacked tevez for refusing to play, warm up or what ever, but even for a mega rich club, losing potentially £40mill was not an option. 

    The decision by the FA could be financially damaging to the club and to suarez.

    Now if JT is found not guilty by the courts, the FA could turn round and say there is no case to answer as the law has found him not guilty. which could happen. 

    this is why it is all becoming a farce.

    ReplyDelete
  55. How do you know the people posting comments on here are scousers ??? they could be and probably are from anywhere and everywhere. No section of society suffers from worse negative stereotyping and prejudice than Merseysiders btw and that includes blacks and jews. If we complain about what do you call a scouser in a tie?  so called jokes we are told we have no humour. We have humour in plenty we have just had it up to HERE

    ReplyDelete
  56. You moron Jamie - as usual

    ReplyDelete
  57. It has been a embarassing, unprofessional and immature the way Liverpool have gone about this, in the past few months.The likes of Warnock and Ferguson have kept their comments to a minimum throughout their respective players' 'cases' but Dalglish just kept on drip feeding comments here and there to intensify the situation even more. Than comes along the club statement after it was announced Suarez would be banned. I expected better overall, i expected some form of restraint and professionalism because the full report hasn't been published. But no, the statement was full of anger, potentially slanderous comments and simply, lack of class. It was like something from a forum posted by a angry tribal football fan.The t-shirts? Come on! The full report isn't even out and yet, the players act like they knows in the ins and outs, when they don't as very few outside of the panel know the reasoning. Yes, its not nice to have your own player being dragged through the mud but that doesn't mean you have to be irrational and unprofessional. Yes, the media will play their usual games but be calm and play the waiting game for the report. Very disappointed. Expected better from a institution like Liverpool.

    ReplyDelete
  58. However, in Spanish-speaking countries such as Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay where there are few people of African origin and appearance, negro (negra for females) is commonly used to refer to partners, close friends[13] or people in general independent of skin color.

    Note: independent of skin color.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negro

    ReplyDelete
  59. the FA and Evra both said that Suarez is not a racist. the hypocrisy is hilarious.

    ReplyDelete
  60. The problem is that you and the FA are assuming the word was spoken in English. But it was spoke in Spanish. Negro translates to "black". So is it racist in England to call a black person black?

    You cannot interpret what someone is saying in another language by taking what it "sounds" like in English.

    Furthermore in Latin America the word negro is used as a greeting for "mate".  A photo of a bunch of other racists for you.http://s2.11x2.com/media/12/com/6150000/6153348-1_0.jpgBTW that's Messi on the right there.

    ReplyDelete
  61. You are officially a bigot. Just like the folks at the FA.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Maybe you didn't  see the back cover of the Daily Mirror.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Negrito is NOT a reference to a person's skin colour. I (and many others) call my wife negra , and she is white. That's the problem. You and the FA don't understand (or want to ) how the word is used.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Absolutly spot on Jamie!

    ReplyDelete
  65. No, you are seriously in denial, and just plan wrong. Negrito IS a reference to skin colour. Gustavo Puyet - who is Uruguayan - stated the following recently:

    "In Uruguay. Negrito is a nickname for someone whose skin is darker than the rest

    Now ou're going to tell me that Poyet has it wrong too?

    It is a reference to skin colour. End of story.

    Intention has nothing to do with it; the question is: Did Suarez make a reference to Evra's skin colour? The answer is yes.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Then why is it culturally accepted and non racist for black people to call each other "n*ggers". They do it all the time. It's in their music lyrics FFS.

    ReplyDelete
  67. What does this have to do with Suarez and Evra? Absolutely nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  68. That's the real cherry of it all. Evra is being taken as an honorable and truthful person. How people forget what this guy has done. He started a mutiny on his national side in the middle of the world cup FFS.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Who is taking Evra as 'honorable and truthful? Evra's version of events is irrelevant because *Suarez admitted insulting him*. There's nothing to prove; Suarez said what he did, and that's why he was found guilty.

    If Suarez was convicted without admitting anything then it would be a scandalous decision, but that's not what happened.

    ReplyDelete
  70. My wife's skin color is not any darker than mine. She's white as a ghost.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Didn't the FA declare MLK a racist. You know, when they were going around supporting Apartheid.

    ReplyDelete
  72. i really dont get you
    if i say to someone: i dont like you because u r black im not racist but if i tell him i dont like you becaise you belong to the black race im racist ?? where this nonsense comes from
    no one claim Suarez was all right. the only thing is many claim that FA was way too harsh and ignored the fact that there was no motivation and no intent to be a racist. even worst the admit that no motivation and intent to be racist so what left ? he was wrong in using bad mouth on the pitch? wow a footballer using bad mouth on the pitch ...i never seen something like that before

    the basic fact is that every newspaper in the country understood the FA as a statement for Suarez racism.
    now u want him to go around and say please undersrand i was refering to his colour not his race...what did u drink today?

    ReplyDelete
  73. But Evra is European and Suarez is just an immigrant South American. That settles it all doesn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  74. NO. He said that what he said WAS NOT insulting. Look at his quote. He said "his (Evra's) own team mates call him that".

    ReplyDelete
  75. This is getting stupid, some of the comments are pretty stupid. I agree totally to what this article says.

    You compare yourselves to these players. Yeahh so if you're white and someone called you whitey and you complained you would be laughed at. But wait, are you representing an anti racism campaign? Are you playing infront of millions of viewers all over the world? NO, i guess you're not.

    Yeahh the conversation happend in spanish right? So to most of my english speaking counterparts, if i have never seen you in my life and not knw any of your bloodline, i come up and call you a dirty cun* would you be agitated? However if i did know you and say that, i'd doubt there would be any problems since we're jking around.

    I mean evra simply did what was 'smarter' to me. I mean how do we know evra started it first? Suarez admitted openly to saying what he said after evra's claim. How do we know his teamates called him that too? All of our rumours are just rumours and all the hard evidence against suarez is there unfortunately. The way our players have taken to the situaition is also getting abit out of hand.

    Other fans using the N word and all are also showing no class at all, i mean what are we representing fr the club? We say no to racism but when one of us commits a racist act we protect him? And to top it all off most of you here were the ones cursing blatter for the 'a handshake can solve racism problems' claim.

    I mean come onn, let him serve his time for his mistakes, he'll learn and accept it like a man if i were him. We'll never let him walk alone but for now he has to learn from his mistakes alone.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Negro is used to refer to "people in general independent of skin colour".
    Reference: Wikipedia

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negro 

    ReplyDelete
  77. Yes, the same Paul McGrath who said of Ron Atkinson the following:

    "It was out of order. I was shocked because I had not heard
    Ron use that word before. I heard him call some black players a c**n during training.
    It didn't happen very often, it was occasional.

    I'm not going to defend him to the hilt. He
    treated me brilliantly. Ron is one of the most decent managers, but I
    can't condone what he said."

    Atkinson resigned from his job and apologised.

    Had Atkinson insisted that in his day, the word "n****r" was commonplace and it was all down to cultural misunderstandings, and it is a term of affection on some other planets and that his great uncle once went on safari in Kenya, while the ITV crew all presented the news in Ron Atkinson t-shirts then McGrath may well have found that found that "in bad taste" as well. He commented about the reaction of Liverpool to the ruling, not about Suarez' original offence.

    ReplyDelete
  78. saurez is racist end of. watch ur back. u immagrant he should be kicked out. KICK RACISM OUT OF FOOTBALL.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Sorry, I thought Evra took offense to being racially abused.

    ReplyDelete
  80. LIVERPOOL FC RACIST CLUB. what does glen johnson have to say, well he aint black anyway. bounty

    ReplyDelete
  81. The problem seems to be that you have not read the article. The FA have not attempted to prove what is considered "racist in England". They have decided that Suarez contravened the rules about using insulting words with reference to another player's skin colour.

    In Latin America, "negro" or "negrito" might mean mate, but in what universe is Evra one of Luis Suarez's mates? How many other Liverpool players were chasing oposition players around whispering sweet nothings in their ears?

    ReplyDelete
  82. John Barnes has come out in support of Suarez this man was racially abused for years playing in England and for England and the FA did nothing no fans or players ever charged or did it never happen!
    The FA wait until a FORIEGN player to make a comment and then they throw the book at the player, 30 years to late and now the FA think they are at the forefront against the war on racism I don't think so 30/40/50 years to late.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Not only European, but from a country with colonial past and mentality, and was adressed to a person from "undeveloped country". And it's doesn't matter from which one of the five subspecies or geographic races of "Homo erectus" this arrogant attitude comes.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Jaimie, I totally agree with you when you say that the club's reaction (the statement) was very amateurish and embarrassing at some points, as well as damaging to the club, and perhaps to the player who the club wants to protect until they are given the proof that he indeed used racial slur. There were things in the statement that sounded more like a blog post of a die-hard fan, rather than a professional lawyer or a PR specialist.
     
    I also recommend, if you haven't done so yet, to read Rory Smith's excellent piece on the Anfield Wrap.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Actually Evra had run ins with Kuyt as well, and Kuyt had a verbal go at him when he was rolling around after being clipped by Suarez. Evra was carded after another incident with Kuyt. Evra had a go at the people in the stands (with the kissing of the badge). Evra had a go at the ref. Come to think of it lots of players were having a go at eachother. Maybe you should watch the game again mate.
    I guess you never called anyone mate that you didn't know.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Negro is used as a reference to "people in general independent of skin colour".

    Reference: Wikipedia

    ReplyDelete
  87. I'm stuggling to understand why the points you have just made make it any more likely that after those incidents Suarez would then start using a "term of affection" towards Evra. Quite the opposite.

    ReplyDelete
  88. I call my son negrito all the time. I also call him negro, same thing I call my black friends. Am I insulting my son? no. am I insulting my friends? no.
    If "mate" or "bloke" (which are, I believe, words used widely by the british) were offensive somewhere else and you used it unconsciously on a place where it is offensive, would you like to be given a chance to explain, be corrected and accepting the mistake, or would you rather have the full weight of the law thrown at you for something you at no point considered was offensive to begin with? Also, Evra admitted calling Luis a south american, isn´t that a reference to someone`s nationality? isn´t that against the rules? dont be so quick on your words, Jaimie, you are shitting outside the can. Evra did the same thing Luis did, the FA was aware of it, yet they charged Luis, FA = bullshit. done.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Because it happened after the talk from the referee when Suarez went to tap Evra on the head as a gesture of peace (the ref should have made them shake hands). Evra pushes Suarez's hand away saying "don't touch me you South American". Suarez replies "Por que? Negro" (why? mate.). Suarez was trying to bury the hatchet, but Evra wanted to escalate the conflict.

    ReplyDelete
  90. The investigation wasn't into whether Evra is a "troublemaker" (of course, Luis Suarez has never been involved in any trouble at all during his footballing career), it was into whether Suarez - freely and voluntarily - used an insulting term in reference to Evra's skin colour during a football match. If Suarez is a "victim" it is due entirely to his own stupidity and poor judgment both in his initial row with Evra and the statements he made about it afterwards. He has figuratively dug his own grave and Liverpool FC have made a good job digging their own in the aftermath. This pathetic campaign for "justice for Suarez" really detracts from the wider picture about what we should tollerate in society and sits at odds with campaigns about issues where all the country are behind Liverpool in their calls for justice that I need not go into.

    ReplyDelete
  91. In Latin America Negro is used as a reference to "people in general independent of skin colour". 

    Reference: Wikipedia

    ReplyDelete
  92. You immagrant (IMMIGRANT)? So you are a racist you should be banned and locked up!

    ReplyDelete
  93. My because Suarez is isolated in a foreign country being accused of being a racist !Kenny and the club have supported him fully in writing and vocally. The FA told Fergie to shut it in October (Sir Alex Ferguson has revealed his frustration after effectively being gagged by the Football Association over the Patrice Evra-Luis Suarez affair. ESPN STORY)
    Why did the FA tell Fergie to be quiet but no warning to Kenny and Liverpool

    ReplyDelete
  94. Glad to see some common sense prevailing here Jamie. I know some will disagree, but I feel that so much of this animosity and anger from both Liverpool and MUFC fans could have been avoided if our club were to have looked at this from Evra's position. He heard what he may have determined to be a racially based comment and reported it. Rather than taking a more aggressive stance on the subject as we have done, the club/Suarez could perhaps have apologised for any confusion (IF Suarez had meant to use 'negro/negrito' as a term of endearment) but in not doing so, this has only escalated the problem! 

    ReplyDelete
  95. When will Evra apologize for insulting suarez calling him a Southamerican? dude please, its obvious, Suarez reacted to an insult. hes the victim no matter how you want to look at it

    ReplyDelete
  96. Stop these controversial articles, and focus on LFC. Whose side are you on by the way? What's your aim?

    ReplyDelete
  97. Jaimie why haven't you wrote a piece on what John Barnes has had to say and the anger he must feel in that the FA did nothing when he was abused playing for England and the FA's rubbish on being at the forefront of racism?

    ReplyDelete
  98. Do you have anything to actually add to the debate, or are you just another person with extreme tunnel vision?

    ReplyDelete
  99. http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20111223/cleisure/cleisure4.html?
    What a Jamaican newspaper is making of our stance on racism,Suarez and Evra.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Are you serious!?

    Have you been ignoring the John Terry scandal?

    Astonishing bias on show here from some of you.

    ReplyDelete
  101. The guy has lived in Europe for several years. People like you seem to forget that. He's lived in a culture that makes it clear that abusing someone for the colour of their skin is not OK. No excuses.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Laughable that you call him a victim. Truly laughable.

    Maybe Evra is in the wrong too, but that doesn't make Suarez completely innocent.

    ReplyDelete
  103. THAT WAS (more or less) DECADES AGO. 

    Why even bring it up? What has that got to do with anything? How does it support Suarez or LFC?

    ReplyDelete
  104. worth reading

    http://www.goal.com/en/news/1717/editorial/2011/12/22/2813532/whats-in-a-word-the-furore-over-luis-suarezs-racism-ban

    ReplyDelete
  105. A dreadful, factually incorrect piece.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Maybe Dalglish and Liverpool were warned but they chose to ignore it by trying to be clever with drip feeding comments. Secondly, Dalglish says things here and there at the end of each blast on the Suarez thing that seem to indicate he is not supposed to be talking much about the Suarez situation. But I am speculating, so i will leave it there and acknowledge the lack of certainty on my behalf.

    But regardless of warning or no warning, Liverpool should have kept things to a minimum until the full report came out. Instead they reacted like some over-eager angry teenage poster on a forum, who didn't think before they posted. 

    All they had to do was wait until the report came out but they just couldn't do it. 

    With their statement, they could have instead, said simply 'To make it clear, he has not been charged for racism. Any media outlet who suggests so, may face ejection from club conferences as well as legal action, etc.

    We shall wait until the full report has come out, before disclosing our stance regarding the judgment, reasoning, the punishment and probability of appeal. Until then, we shall keep our own counsel. '

    Have gone about it in a really bad manner, Liverpool have. Right from the very beginning, when Suarez got charged. 

    Yes, the media doesn't need any help in stirring trouble but Liverpool and Suarez's reps haven't helped themselves and have given the media plenty to feed on, with the shirts, statement (the bit about the FA interview was so childish, when they haven't even published the report), video/pictures of Suarez with black people, etc.

    Keep comments and actions to a minimum is the most effective thing to do at times like this, sometimes.

    ReplyDelete
  107. No it's not worth reading.

    Full of insinuations, quotes to suit an agenda and a woefully misjudged anecdote to start it off which completely misses the point.

    ReplyDelete
  108. JK, you must be enjoying your moment in the limelight! A few days ago, reputable papers were
    making reference to your piece on the autonomy or otherwise of the panel
    that handled the case. That must have felt good, right? I'd advise that
    you maintain a focus instead of courting controversy, or worst still,
    instead of insulting LFC fans who are beginning to take you serious.


    Just an advice young visioneer....

    ReplyDelete
  109. well done JK. when KK and the whole football club is behind suarez. I was personnally in the crown against wigan and we sang for suarez fro the first 10 minutes non stop. This liverpool stance was not embarrasing it was simply 'YOU WILL NEVER WALK ALONE'. remeber them words as whatever others think or feel, when your at,in, or connected to liverpool you have the backing of everyone. There has been so many rumours and mixed stories, but when it comes down to it , it was evra v suarez. and who are you backing??? it looks like evra!!! well done JK, you own a web site with the words kop in and you will let one of your own walk alone when he needs you most!!!

    ReplyDelete
  110. Why is it ?Seems most Black countries are having a right laugh at this country and its dealings with racism and how it went unpunished for years until a foriegn player opens his mouth!

    ReplyDelete
  111. John Barnes has brought it up in his support of Suarez that the FA can't sit in judgement when they did nothing in the past. 

    ReplyDelete
  112. The FA did nothing over Terry even though it is as clear as any racist abuse ever seen on TV did they charge him the next day no they waited for the police to get involved and even they didn't straight away  ! I have read a piece on a antiracism site questioning why have there been 2 high profile cases on racism in one month!

    ReplyDelete
  113. Bounty? another racist comment!

    ReplyDelete
  114. Dixie, with the greatest respect, I think you need to grow up.

    ReplyDelete
  115. You are giving your self away - because you have heard some gangsta lyrics and watched The Wire you think "they" all accept the use of the N word? Patrice Evra has nothing whatsoever in common with Puff Daddy or Stringer Bell other than the colour of his skin - which means you have made a generalisation based on the colour of his skin - I think there is a term for that.

    ReplyDelete
  116. That is all speculative and nothing other than conjecture at this point jj.

    ReplyDelete
  117. Whereas Suarez is an Angel? Isn't he up before the FA again later this month for something? How did Suarez go in the World Cup? Whatever Evra is like as a man or whatever form he has in the past is irrelevant. 

    ReplyDelete
  118. Well said. If Suarez had admitted it and apologised straight away using the cultural significance of the word to explain his mistake this would have all gone away. All the noise since does neither him or Liverpool any favours. Just take the medicine.

    ReplyDelete
  119. In Australia they still call Southern Europeans Wogs. Does that mean they can use the term in the UK? I sometimes call my kids little sh!ts. Does that mean I can call my colleagues the same thing? Mate or Bloke do not explicitly relate to the colour of your skin or ethnicity so cannot be classified as racial in nature. Suarez insulted an opponent with reference to his race - that is what he has admitted to and been charged with. Simple as that. The rest is just noise.

    ReplyDelete
  120. Then its about time they started taking it seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  121. with the greatest respect JK, you issue a statement and either people will agree or disagree, on this one I disagree with your comments!

    ReplyDelete
  122. I've looked at it Damian... Going to have to disagree with you on that one.

    ReplyDelete
  123. Jesus Christ man, there's 'being objective' and there's 'being sensational'.
    You're wrong here Jaimie. You always go on about the whole 'I've got a right to an opinion' but this time what you're saying is potentially dangerous and actually offensive.
    You're reading far too deeply into the statement which was essentially a message that, without any proof, LFC weren't going to just allow one of its players to be insulted in this way - say what you want, the implications of this for Suarez are far worse than anything that Evra would have felt even if he WAS called the specific word that he's alleging he was called.


    And the reason it's far worse is because of sensationalist bollocks in the media which whip the issue of racial abuse into a horribly myopic frenzy. And with this article, you're not helping I'm afraid.

    ReplyDelete
  124. That won't stop the crowds chanting 'Racist!' at him wherever he goes from now on. People are essentially twats and they love scandal. That's all this is - just another stick to beat Luis Suarez with. And I'm sorry, but until the proof comes out from the FA, then I think we're well within our rights to defend Luis Suarez.

    So you're wrong in this case Jaimie, as is Paul McGrath who has embarrassed himself again here.

    ReplyDelete
  125. That won't stop the crowds chanting 'Racist!' at him wherever he goes from now on. People are essentially twats and they love scandal. That's all this is - just another stick to beat Luis Suarez with. And I'm sorry, but until the proof comes out from the FA, then I think we're well within our rights to defend Luis Suarez.

    So you're wrong in this case Jaimie, as is Paul McGrath who has embarrassed himself again here.

    ReplyDelete
  126. Patrice Evra isn't a rapper.

    ReplyDelete
  127. For reasons almost too complicated to explain because it involves HUNDREDS of years of history, you are wrong. However to make a simple analogy, if you called your wife or girlfriend a 'silly cow' does that give everyone the right to do the same? Life just doesn't work like that and I'm sure you know that.

    ReplyDelete
  128. My thoughts exactly. Liverpool could have apologised for any offence caused but stressed that cultural differences were at play here and Suarez never intend to abuse Evra on the basis of his colour. They could have hired a bunch of linguistic and cultural experts to explain the point in a calm and rational manner. Then firmed up Liverpool's commitment to anti-racism by having Suarez work closely with Howard Gayle's LFC community work and donating a fee to kick It Out. It would have been an Obama style 'Beer Summit' and I strongly believe that either the charges would have been dropped or an apology and honest explanation would have led to a significantly reduced punishment. If I had said something to offend someone my first recourse would be to explain my actions and apologise for any misunderstandings or misjudgements. Liverpool's reaction was to blame Evra, complain about the process, claim black relatives of Suarez, show him with 'lil ol' black babies' and wear t-shirts in support. What next? A We Are The World record with the money going to pay Suarez's fine? Terrible PR and a clear sign that there are ZERO black people behind the scenes at the club that could have provided some considered direction.

    ReplyDelete
  129. What is a fact is that you're a stupid c**t. I'd love to see you call me blacky to my face and see what colour your eye goes.

    ReplyDelete
  130. Actually, Evra's African, he represents France but he's Senegalese.

    ReplyDelete
  131. A lot of people still believe the whole 'negrito means friend in South America' bullshit. There's a difference between calling a friend Negro, Negrito, Negri or any other variation, and calling someone you have absolutely no relation whatsoever with 'Negro', 'Negrito', etc. As a matter of fact, in large parts of SA the word Negro (Usually, but not necessarily, followed by other pejorative terms such as 'catango', 'de mierda', among others) is a very common (If not the most common) insult.

    One could draw a parallel with the word 'Nigga', which has pretty much the same meaning. If you call a black friend of yours 'Nigga', I doubt he'll take it as an insult, now if you pick a random black man from the street and call him a nigga, he'll most likely feel insulted.

    The context has to be taken into account here - Patrice Evra is for all intents and purposes a stranger to Luis Suarez, and they were competing against each other in one of the most heated rivalries in the world. If you were in his shoes, how would you feel if someone made a reference to your race?

    ReplyDelete
  132. The fact that in England a person cant make reference to something so normal like someones skin colour its racims itself. Im not talking about the people of England but how apparently the issue is politically managed and how that wrong managment creates a very sad confusion on the people. If you are black, white, asian, man, woman or whatever, is what you are, and theres nothing wrong nor good with that, its just something that describes a part of you. If you cant make any reference to a person skins colour because it could be taked like an ofence you are stigmatizing the word that describes that feature and taken the fact of having that skin colour like if it was someting wrong, and thats a way of discrimitation too..sorry for my english, im from Uruguay.

    ReplyDelete
  133. Why do you need to talk about anybody's race (sexuality, religion or any other component that makes up who they are) in a situation where that is totally irrelevant? Unless it is to insult, belittle or otherwise discriminate against them based on that one feature?

    ReplyDelete
  134. That's exactly the same position as all of you that are experts on South American nuances all of a sudden

    ReplyDelete
  135. LFC were reacting to the FA, not the Daily Mirror

    ReplyDelete
  136. Thoughtful and informative post Jaimie but I do take issue with your (and the FA's) conclusion that Suarez was using 'insulting words' against Evra.  No doubt whatsoever Suarez made reference to Evra's colour but exactly where is the insult? As I understand it, 'negrito' is mainly used as a friendly, non-offensive term in Uruguay and several other south-American countries. It's all about interpretation and if Evra and the FA consider reference to someone's colour alone to be enough to warrant an 8 game suspension, then quite frankly, we might as well all pack up and go home. I can foresee a situtation in the non too distant future where no words will ever be uttered for fear of causing offence. We will all be speaking in soundbites and officially approved slogans.  Terrifying. 

    ReplyDelete
  137. Mr. Jamie K,Its good of you to not comment to comments that you think you won't be able to make much about.Its great of you to think in a very noble manner, and say that people would never have interpreted things differently if Liverpool didn't say this or that. Tell me one thing using common sense, how is it possible for one to abuse another about one's color without any connection to the race ? See, men only come in black and white..or more correctly fairer and darker. Now unless an American calls another white Hispanic etc..a white doesn't feel insulted. Now since Evra is of the darker complexion, anything Suarez states would be the same as racially abusing him.I know you have the law book, most people would use common sense and the haters wouldn't bother visiting the Liverpool website.Yes, the club  statement was emotional, but then it was not wrong in supporting Suarez.They have a point, the abuse is not an abuse not even in Spain. Sometimes just google translation won't give you a proper sense in which a word is said. The same FA which lessened James Mackie's 8 match ban to 3 because he admitted it, has already set an example of how it works. Well, Mackie was English of course.

    ReplyDelete
  138. Wait - you actually need it explaining?

    Look up the word 'context' in the dictionary. Then compare the context of both 'negra/o/ito' occurrences mentioned in that anecdote.
    It's rather simple. If you struggle, it's been cleared up for you many times in the comments of that article.

    ReplyDelete
  139. Jaimie, thank you for this intelligent and well argued article. I'm a solicitor and I don't think I'd enjoy having you as an opponent in a litigation!

    However, my understanding of the FA regulations is that they a) prohibit the use of insulting words and b) consider the use of insulting words that refer (amongst other possibilities) to skin colour to be an aggravating factor. That is, it is a condition precedent that the words used must be insulting for the reference to skin colour to be a relevant factor.

    None of us know exactly what exchanges took place, but as far as I am aware, the utterance that has given rise to the punishment was 'Porque negro (or negrito)'. We have all seen dozens of statements by Spanish speakers to the effect that the word 'negro' is not pejorative (still less 'negrito') and when used vocatively does not refer per se to ethnicity or skin colour. In all the circumstances I cannot see how it can be reasonably argued that the words are in any way insulting, particularly as Patrice Evra speaks Spanish and it was therefore reasonable for Luis Suarez to assume that he was aware that the utterance was innocuous (of course it could well be that Patrice's understanding of Spanish was not in fact good enough for him to realize this, but that is a different matter).

    It seems to me that Luis is not 'guilty' of anything at all. Certainly, as you impliedly concede, he has not done anything morally wrong, but also he has not breached FA regulations, and unless there is evidence that we are unaware of, the 'verdict' of the panel and the 'sentence' of the FA seem perverse and irrational.

    Your suggestions as to how the club should have handled the situation are very sensible if the aim is to do what is expedient in PR terms. You are right to argue that LFC have dealt with things in a cack handed way. It was cringeworthy to repeat the myth that Patrice has made false allegations of racial abuse when it was senior management figures at Manchester United who circulated those lies and Patrice actually lied about quite different matters.

    However, if the aim is to do what is just and moral and to stand up for a principle, then despite its clumsiness, the response of the club, the players and the manager has been magnificent. Also, the response has not been uniformly clumsy. Glen Johnson's pithy comeback to Paul McGrath's hypocritical nonsense about the t-shirts (check out his reaction to the Ron Atkinson affair) was dignified but razor sharp. Perhaps he should handle the club's PR!

    I think you are wasting your talent on considering how best LFC can bend over for the FA and Sir Alex and limit the damage and our 'isolation'. I would love to see you developing a strategy for taking the fight to the FA and making them see that they should be guided by morals and not politics.

    ReplyDelete
  140. Technically you're correct Jaimie. But 99% don't know or care about the technical difference between race and colour. Whether the Liverpool statement was written or not, the vast majority would be labelling Suarez a racist.

    The Liverpool statement could have taken the technicality into account and satisfied 1% of the people. Rather they correctly assumed that the majority of people would leap to the racist conclusion and aimed their statement towards this end.

    The words used by the FA are in one sense smart, protecting themselves - as they are entitled to do. However, "insulting words" about another man's "colour" spells racism to any reasonable audience. The Liverpool statement addresses the implication a reasonable man would make. 

    ReplyDelete
  141. I observed many EPL players like to use 
    'F*** Off', 'Stupid', 'Suck', 'Bastard' etc to shout at the referee, linesman and opponent during the game.... Are these words less 'offensive' or 'insulting' than 'yellow', 'black', 'white'...? Have these words been legalised in FA rules? If not, why no action was taken?
    Please don't forget that in this case, FA didn't convict Suarez of being racist but only using of 'insulting' word. So, why there is double standard when implementing of their rules?
    Therefore, I strongly believe that this issue is an conspiracy of LFC's rival to pull the club down and there is why 'he' is the only manager who quickly step up and back FA's action...

    ReplyDelete
  142. Suarez to beat the ban4:39 pm, December 25, 2011

    Jaimie, Suarez did use a word in reference to Evra's skin colour, but how do you know that it was used to insult?  Did Suarez admit to using the word to insult?  I haven't read any official quote suggesting he did.  If he didn't use it to insult then logically there should be no sanctions put against him.

    ReplyDelete
  143. Or yeah, sure, you could ignore all this I suppose. What was that you were saying about 'people with tunnel-vision'?

    ReplyDelete
  144. Jamie u seem to be getting bogged down and refusing to see anyone's point of view because u r determined to win an argument. Btw u r clearly not a lawyer so do not try to make grand statements about strict liability. The offence is not one of strict liabiity btw.
    U r wrong about rule E3-2. That rule says that IF insulting behaviour is established (under E1), and that insulting behaviour included reference to race/colour, then the punishment should be considered so that it may be increased.
    The point is that there was NO insulting behaviour in the first place. Reference to colour/race is not necessarily insulting.

    ReplyDelete
  145. I didn't use the term 'strict liability' in its general legal sense, and I think that's obvious. In this context, it *is* a strict liability issue; your interpretation of E3-2 is irrelevant, as is mine, and anyone else's; in the minds of the FA, there *was* insulting behaviour that included a reference to colour, which automatically triggered E3-2 liability, which is is why Suarez has been banned.

    ReplyDelete
  146. Negro is the spanish word for black... in every place where spanish is spoken.
    Imposible to change that. The word has no racial meaning by itself.
    Why are you talking about a language you don't know?

    ReplyDelete
  147. "That word" has exactly the same meaning in every spanish speaking country, not just in Suarez's country of origin.
    And it refers not only to the colour of skin but to the colour as yellow, blue, etc. It's the spanish word for black colour.
    Apart from that, many important artists, who happen to be fighters against racial discrimination, love to use the word "Negro" as his/her moniker.

    ReplyDelete
  148. Suarez did not admitt to insult Evra. He admitted to use a word. (and not 10 times as Evra said)
    But you, who love to pose as a neutral and strict analyzer, don't say that.


    That word is used daily, and with no racial connotations, from Spain to Mexico and from Cuba to Peru, in every place where spanish is spoken.
    It's not about Suarez's origins, it's about different languages. The colour of the fonts you see in your pc screen is black (in english). In spanish is "negro". That's the word, like it or not.
    Will you deny that, Sherlock?

    And that same spanish satanized word, is the word chosen for several spanish and latin american artists. For example the cuban singer Celia "la Negra" Cruz, one of the most important singers of the spanish world. (and not only her)
    Just look for her lyrics and her use of "negrito", "negro", etc. It's common,  accepted... and not racist.
    I will repeat it for you: Not racist.
    She's not the only one, not an exception.
    But do your research, instead of saying that people are in serious denial when they say the famous N word it's widely used with no racial meanings in spanish.

    Again, will you deny that?

    ReplyDelete
  149. Celia "la Negra" Cruz (the most famous cuban singer and one of the most loved singers in spanish), Mercedes "la Negra" Sosa (the most important argentinian singer), Ruben "el Negro" Rada (the most important uruguayan singer), Salvador "el Negro" Ojeda (popular mexican singer), el "Negro" Patiño de la Sonora Morena (colombian singer), Eduardo "el Negro" Sosa (argentinian singer), Oscar "el Negro" González Oro (one of the most important argentinian journalists) and a long etc.

    Maybe they are proud of being known as Negros "from the safety of an anonymous internet username".
    And all of them are contemporary, well known, and fighters against all forms of discrimination.

    Hopper: why are you talking about things you don't know?

    You better search and listen Celia Cruz and her use of words negro and negrito. Because those words are accepted in spanish.

    And try to say "black shoes" in spanish. Just try.

    ReplyDelete
  150. You are having a laugh aren't you? Merseysiders suffer worse stereoptyping than blacks or Jews?? And your basis for this frankly outrageous claim is what?

    ReplyDelete
  151. I'd love to know why John Terry has not had the same reprimands by the FA and the Football following country/world?
     He has been caught out time and again for using derogatory foul language to opposing players (even his own team mates) and England captain no less.........

    The only real point here is, why did Luis Suarez feel the need to mention Patrice Evras skin colour to him in anyway, shape or form if not to try and antagonise or insult? I am sure Patrice Evra owns a mirror and is aware of his family history/colour/creed without the need for anyone else to shout it at him in a football match.

    He knows what he said, he knows what he said was wrong, it was a heat of the moment thing with emotions running high (ala Mr Wayne Rooney's winning goal). At least Suarez had the balls to admit it and apologise.

    Case closed imo

    ReplyDelete
  152. I don't fully understand that because when someone makes a disparaging or rude comment about the 'color' of someones skin that straight away makes it a racism comment, and that was what luis was being accused of and even if that werent true, the club had to state clearly and reaffirm the notion that they believe he isnt 'racist'or used 'racism' because those exact words were the words being used to describe Luis continuously from all angles through the public, media, and another players, so he had already become a racist in the publics eyes BEFORE Lfc's statement which came out not long ago, so lfc weren't 'fighting a losing battle' they were wareleased the statement BECAUSE there was a battle between luis/lfc and public opinion alreadycalling him specifically racist..

    ReplyDelete