23 Dec 2011

Why Liverpool and Suarez should sue Alex Ferguson for DEFAMATION...

Man United manager Sir Alex Ferguson has finally revealed his thoughts on the FA's decision to ban Luis Suarez for 8 games, and like so many other people/media outlets, he has made the mistake of labelling Suarez racist, something that could arguably leave him open to a defamation suit.

Giving his views earlier today, Ferguson observed:

"Our support of Patrice was obvious right from the word go and that's still the same.

"The matter is over and I think we're satisfied that they [the FA's independent commission] found the right decision".

Liverpool fans may not agree that it was 'the right decision' but this part of Ferguson's statement on the issue is fair. However, the following comments are inaccurate, and arguably defamatory:

"This wasn't about Manchester United and Liverpool at all. It was nothing to do with that. This was an individual situation where one person was racially abused."

I have a lot of respect for Ferguson but Suarez did NOT 'racially abuse' Evra. As a matter of irrefutable fact:

* Suarez was NOT charged with racism.
* Suarez was NOT found guilty of racism.

The FA Panel actually found the following:

* 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 racism anywhere; just a statement of the facts, which are:

* Suarez used 'insulting words', and:
* He made a reference to Evra's colour.

A reference to someone's colour is not always racist, so using that term to describe Suarez is wrong. Additionally, 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.

If the FA believed Suarez was guilty of racism, it would've used the term 'race' not 'colour' in its charge, and in the ruling.

Furthemore, according to Liverpool's statement:

"The FA in their opening remarks accepted that Luis Suarez was not racist"

So: The FA agreed that Suarez was not racist; the FA did not charge him with racism, and he was not convicted of racism; ergo, it is WRONG to state that Suarez is racist.

If the club really wants to support Suarez then it needs to start clamping down HARD on any person or media outlet using the word 'racist' (or any derivation thereof) in relation to Suarez.

Based on the facts, and the FA ruling, it is categorically INCORRECT to state that Suarez is racist - or that he is guilty of racial abuse - and if Liverpool allow this to continue then the Uruguayan's reputation will be irreperably damaged (if it hasn't already been)

Even the so-called 'quality' newspapers are doing it. Earlier tonight, The Guardian posted the following in one of its Suarez-related stories:

"Sir Alex Ferguson has broken his silence on the Luis Suárez affair, describing the Liverpool striker's eight-match ban for racially abusing Patrice Evra as "the right decision"

Liverpool could have - and should have - addressed this issue in its statement on the issue. Instead of raving about 'racism' and telling the world about Suarez's ethnic background, the club should've made it clear that it would SUE any media outlet that incorrectly suggested that Suarez was racist.

It's not too late, and hopefully the club will get its act together and start addressing this issue. A good start would be releasing a statement that:

* Reiterates that Suarez was NOT found guilty of racism by the FA.

* Threatens to sue any newspaper, blog, website or individual that states that Suarez is racist/was found guilty of racism/racially abuse Evra.

Don't get me wrong: Suarez is not innocent by any means; he deserves punishment for breaking FA rules, but labelling someone racist is a serious issue, and no one should be publicly condemned as a racist without the existence of unambiguous proof.

Do we have that here? NO.

Jaimie Kanwar


  1. Excellent article.  I have read on certain lfc affiliated forums people calling you a manc jaimie. God know's why. I am a fan of critical analysis and debate and kudos to you. Keep it up. Great site.  

  2. Fella, you're talking through your scouse a$sehole.
    Even the KKK (king kenny's klan) believe that Suarez was found guilty of racism. That's what all the fuss is about.
    However, when the FA decides to take action about the libelous statement issued earlier in the week, LFC may be looking at a points deduction.
    Now that WILL upset the scousers.

  3. So he was rude and he made reference to Mr Evra's colour... and you think that is not racial abuse? You think a court would declare ferguson's summary of the case wrong? 
    I presume you aren't a lawyer.
    Utterly laughable, or at least it would be if it were not so ignorant.

  4. did evra also abuse suarez? if so why no FA action. also if suarez said the N word 10 times why no video evidence as in the case of john terry

  5. Get a grip you idiot - hes not been found guilty of rasicm ... absolutely not... only Suarez knows if he is truly Racist - He was fould guilty of insulting language with refereence to Evra's Colour - In ANYONES BOOKS thats racial abuse and claiming anything else is technicalities to appease your guilt...... IMO Suarez is probably not racist.... But N.....ta is not the All endearing term its been proclaimed .... its only used between friends or people close or family - anything else - especially in aggresive terms (Such as a cauldren of a Liverpool - Man UTD game) then its as offensive as it was meant - He Racially abused Evra - The punishment if anything for this is lenient - Its not like we don't know what he said - Hes told the world in his interviews (instead of keeping quiet as suggested by the FA!!). The fact is the support is misguided - to brand Suareez a 'Racist' is ridiculous - to try to defend him after he admitted using a racial term which lets be honest was meant to prompt a negative response is equally proposterous!!!!

  6. Whether you choose to accept it or not, Suarez has not been found guilty of racism.

  7. It's not as cut and dried as you make out. The FA has not considered intention or cultural differences, but a court would definitely take this into account. The question of whether Suarez is racist is complex; he may well be, but the point here is the FA has NOT FOUND HIM GUILTY OF RACISM. That is a fact. What you or I think is irrelevant.

    As a comparison: John Terry has been charged with a 'racially aggravated public order offence'.

    If he is found guilty then it would be correct to label him racist.

    This is not the case with Suarez. You cannot infer racism based on a reference to someone's colour without taking into account the context and the actual meaning of what was said.

  8. So is it racist for a black guy to call a south american a 'spic'?

  9. How do you know Suarez was rude? That's a negative inference you've made based on your personal opinion/expectations/allegiances. It's possible he was rude, but it's also possible that he said what he did in a jokey, non offensive manner. Which is right? And how do we decide which is right?

  10. Jesus will the sour grapes ever stop! Suarez was found guilty of winding evra up by referring to the colour of his skin. He deserves the ban. Hes not in Uraguay now and must respect our culture and law. End off. Move on!

  11. Jamie. I cannot believe you are so naive. This has ALWAYS BEEN about RACISM and Political bantering between the FA & FIFA. Suarez is the johhny foreigner sacrificial lamb. The statement from the FA (and Evra) is worded as such solely to avoid being sued by Suarez or LFC (ie. just to cover their arses). They left it in the hands of the media to do their business and be tough on racism in football. No facts to be released for 5-6wks while Suarez is crucified by public opinion.
    They have you convinced with their technicalities on the punishment and you're one of their BEST pawns (turning and educating the Liverpool faithful).
    You're so just, maybe you should start a legal fund for all the people and organizations that Suarez will need to sue.

  12. Suarez hasn`t been accused, let along found guilty of being a racist. He`s been found guilty of using racist languague, and that`s what Ferguson also said he was guilty of. As for suing Evra you obviously haven`t even bothered to read your own club`s statement cause if you had you would know that the United player told the FA that despite the abuse he didn`t believe that Suarez was racist. So what exactly do you think Suarez should sue Evra for?

  13. First, who said anything about suing Evra?!  Second, it is WRONG to state that Suarez has been 'found guilty of using racist language'.  That's just not true. Read FA rule E302 again: Suarez was not charged with/convicted of anything to do with race.

    It's factual inaccuracies like this that are the problem.

  14. Very desperate article.

  15. You sad individual. The issue is bigger than just 'united vs liverpool'. Take your liverpool tainted glasses off, take a good hard look at yourself in the mirror and grow up. 

  16. Sleep on it, mate! That's a fact!

  17. Liverpool  FC ,And there manager have no class at all All scousers who condone this should be ashamed,heshould be made an example off.

  18. suarez has made a mistake. he has admitted use of language which the FA deem to be unacceptable.  he should have known better having spent considerable time in europe.  he is not in uruguay and must learn to live by the customs/norms of the UK, as anyone who travels abroad will.  the paranoia and childish lack of acceptance is making liverpool look worse than it already did.  dalgliesh when discussing the case, against the advice of the FA, during the investigation suggested that if a party was found guilty then he should be severely punished.  suarez has been found guilty.  the decision is not going to be overturned.  time to accept the punishment that has been handed down. 

  19. I'd like to ask a question. Perhaps you would be so good as to answer it without reference to Suarez, Ferguson, opposition fans, the media, the FA, legal jargon & technicalities or anything else. My question is this:

    What would a Liverpool player, any player, have to do that was so bad that your conscience would not allow you to support, excuse, condone or justify it?

  20. You're asking the wrong person. I have regularly criticised Liverpool players/management etc for various things over the years. The idea that I always excuse/condone things done by the club/its players is utter nonsense, and kind of ironic given the stuff I've posted about in the past.

  21. Forgive me if I choose not to read your entire back catalogue. However, given that you "regularly criticise", you should have little problem recording for us here the answer to my question, for the record. I am curious as to where the line is drawn.

  22. Did Ferguson say explicitly the FA charged Suarez with a racism-based charge?

  23. I don't know how you want me to answer that question.  I will criticise anything that's 'bad' and I've done that repeatedly over the years.  In this case, I've already argued that Suarez was stupid to do what he did re Evra. However, labelling someone 'racist' is a serious issue, and no one should be called racist unless guilt has been unambiguously proved.

    This is not the case here.  We don't know what Suarez's intention was.  It's possible he said what he did with racist intent, but it's also possible that he DIDN'T.

    The fact remains that the FA:

    * Did not charge him with racism* Did not convict him of racism
    * Accepted at the hearing that Suarez was not racist (according to LFC's statement)

    With these facts in mind, how is it fair to label Suarez racist?

    If there was irrefutable proof of racism I would be the first to condemn Suarez, but there isn't.

    For examples of me criticising LFC players/managers in an unbiased manner, check out the following:

    Why Liverpool should not sign Suarez the cheat:

    Steven Gerrard: Still a diverhttp://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/02/steven-gerrard-still-shameless-diver.html 

    I could provide dozens of similar examples but I don't have time.

  24. You're such a puppet.

  25. Jaimie I thoroughly enjoy your research into this topic it is refreshing when someone provides some background substance and research into their article explaining their point of view it's refreshing and enjoyable to read and pick my brains over.

  26. Suarez is innocent u fuckin gobshite manc bastards!

  27. Just block that guy Jaimie, delete his comment and block any submissions from his IP address


  28. Seriously now, you lot are an absolute disgrace not only to yourselves but to the city of Liverpool. 

  29. Care to explain why? If a Man United player was labelled racist by the media, you would just accept it without unambiguous proof? Please outline the evidence that proves Suarez is racist.

  30. One more question:  Shouldn't FA charge themselves with DISCRIMINATION or CHAUVINISM?

    Is speaking a foreign language now verbotten in this country?

    As far as I understand, Suarez was speaking Spanish to Evra, therefore, he could not necessarily think how his words may be interpreted or misinterpreted in English... bearing in mind that Evra is not an English speaker either.

    So the question remains: do foreign language speakers now need to filter their vocab from the words that may potentially sound offensive in English because English people happened to give those words offensive meanings?

    In my opinion, it is a form of discrimination against other languages and chauvinism towards other cultures.

    If tomorrow an English person going to be accused of something bad(gesture, or word) when traveling abroad, without knowing that it was offensive with the locals, I am sure England will be outraged.

    In addition, see the picture attached. It is a tribute by the Argentina national team to the player who died (was shot), Fernando Caceres.
    Don't think they meant a racist slur there...

  31. The FA have really made a mess of this one

    They wait 9 weeks before releasing a judgment, but without the written reasoning behind the decision, leaving the whole situation to run and run over the entire Christmas period

    It's ridiculous

    Why announce the verdict, suspended for 14 days from the date Liverpool eventually receive relevant documentation, well before said documentation is ready?

    Now we have all the tribal bullshit kicking off..... Putting the game of football firmly back in the mob rule category

    It's not about Man Utd or Liverpool......

    What seems quite clear is that Suarez has been found guilty on his own evidence....... Why would he knowingly own up to making a discriminatory remark? He must have believed, however naiively, that what he said was ok

    It's not ok though, as the rules clearly state, so he should get some sort of reprimand, but an 8 match ban and the resulting smudge on his character is too harsh. The FA's rules could not as thorough as the law of the land so are possibly not sophisticated enough to deal with the cultural nuances in this case. When were these rules drafted, one wonders?

    How did Busquets got away with the "mono, mono" barrage to Marcelo?

  32. I understand your point but I do not believe there is a defamation case to answer. Or that one would go through the courts.

  33. Ok. To save you repeating yourself again. This is the relevant part of the FA charge, as widely reported in the media website on November 17th:

    "It is further alleged that this included a reference to the ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race of Patrice Evra."


    The FA did use the word race in the charge. Suarez was, pending appeal, found guilty of this charge, not of racism but of racial abuse (subtle yet vital difference).

    Regardless of the absence of the word race from their statement on the 20th December, the phrase "found a charge of misconduct against Luis Suarez proven" renders that irrelevant given the wording of the original statement.


    Therefore, Sir Alex Ferguson is merely stating fact.

    You may not like the facts, you may feel they are unjust facts but, until and unless an appeal is successful, facts they are and shall remain.

    This would make it rather difficult to sue anybody, including Ferguson or the media, for defamation because that would require them to have fabricated the racial abuse part, which they clearly have not.

    The other aspect here is the evidence. We haven't seen this evidence as yet, much to the FA's discredit, but that does not mean there is none. Until that evidence is released, you would be better to keep your counsel rather than enflame matters further.

  34. given that lfc are backing suarez without any acceptance that what he did was inappropriate/unnaceptable/wrong/misguided there is a very real danger that they are seen to condone this kind of behaviour what ever the intention.  lfc and the player would be much better served to accept that an unfortunate situation occurred either through ignorance or worse and attempt to inform the player in order to avoid it happening again and preserve what credibility they still have, which is very little. a failure to properly educate/integrate the player in the first place is apparently what has caused this problem. they should stop blaming everyone else and accept some responsibility. always the victim.  suarez is going to have a torrid time for the remainder of his stay in england and drawing the situation out is only going to make it worse and further inflame it.

  35. Look at the classy site Red Flag flying high, see what Liverpool fans are like?
    Do a google search.Most  will get found out bye the police.

  36. "It is further alleged that this included a reference to the ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race of Patrice Evra."
    At this stage it is merely an unproven allegation.  if a newspaper had labelled Suarez racist *at this stage* prior to the hearing, it would've been totally wrong.

    Now - the FA has delivered its verdict. It had the option of finding that Suarez made a reference to Evra's 'race', but it did not find that, which means that Suarez is not racist.

    This also retrospectively renders the original charge groundless.

    As an analogy:

    * X is charged by the Police with murder.  * The jury finds X Not Guilty of murder, but convicts him of Manslaughter instead.

    If the press then labelled X a 'murderer', would that be fair or accurate?

    NO.  irrespective of anyone's personal feelings on the matter, the truth is that X is not a murderer, therefore it is wrong to label him as such.

    Additionally, making reference to the original murder charge would be irrelevant because X was not actually found guilty of murder.

    The same principles apply to the Suarez case.  Racism was alleged, but he was not found guilty, thus he is not racist.

  37. liverpool fc an apparently 'great' football club just look so bad in all this. i am unsure how this could have been handled worse on their part.  they have not done themsleves any favours and continue to put their foot in their mouths every time they open it. they would be well advised to keep their counsel and await the details upon which the verdict has been reached. no class whatsoever. 

  38. Jamie k, you say that Suarez probably said what he did in a jokey,non offensive manner,but consider this,its arguably one of the biggest derby's in the world and in such a situation do you think its possible for Suarez to have said all that as a joke,if you are rational about it you would agree too that Suarez was out of line and said what he said(lets not get into details here) fully knowing what he was doing.

  39. ignorance is no excuse.  'when in rome, ...'.  suarez is stupid or worse.  the sooner he reaches a position where he can accept that the better it will be for him and liverpool.  what odds he will be playing in spain within 18 months?  he might like to play in a european competition.

  40. Gaurev - please don't misrepresent what I said. I Didn't state that as my position on the subject; I said that without absolute proof, we don't know Suarez's intention. He could've had racist intent, but it's equally possible he didn't. That was the point I made.
    Sent from iPhone

  41. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words ...

  42. Although the FA would have to sue Evra if they intend to be coherent about the whole issue. See the insightful comment by Daniel Edwards on goal.com:

  43. We will wait for the FA written report. And when it is out and there are words said by Evra "Don't touch me you, sudaca" and "You are only booking me because I am black" then Manchester United will find themselves in a worse situation. Because if, in Suarez's case, he may not have known that his word could be interpreted as racist, Evra's words were clearly derogatory towards Suarez's ethnicity, plus he acused the ref of racism.  And he is a guy with some education, as far as I know, so... no excuses there.
    I will enjoy observing the moral high ground taken by ManUtd fans then.

  44. Sigh.

    There is a difference between "being a racist" and committing "racial abuse" that you overlook. Ferguson uses the latter and is on safe ground in doing so as things stand.

    Genuine question: what will your opinion be if the release of the written report shows undeniable evidence of guilt where racial abuse is concerned, and the inevitable appeal is rejected?

    Because to me there is more at stake than just this one case. Football is rotten from top to bottom. The behaviour of players on the pitch, of all clubs including my own, is a disgrace and it's high time it was tackled. If that means overly harsh punishments until things change, so be it. In order for that to happen, it's important for fans to remove the blinkers that their clubs are so eager that they wear at all times.

  45. Also, please explain how a charge can be both proven and rendered groundless?

  46. Didn't Evra called Suarez "you South American". Isn't that a breach of the E3-2 rule

  47. ag people stop talking utter crap please. get a grip

  48. If I call fergie "Puki Mak" which is Malaysian for something that is concealed, do I get charge for defamation. England FA is run by a Mafia called fergie which is rotten to the core.

  49. Suarez the Angel??? "I Think not.....also should LFC not be charged with misconduct for wearing T-Shirts with "Political" remarks??? After all thats a breach of FA/UEFA/FIFA ruling??????????????/

  50. Look at Suarez's past and yet you defend him....you lot who do that are scum

  51. You know what would have been best? If Suarez just apologised to Evra
    and stated that he didn't mean to abuse him in that way. He and the club
    could have behaved in a magnanimous and conciliatory manner explaining
    the cultural differences. Evra would have been pushed into a corner not
    to be vindictive in his complaints and the FA would have taken a sincere
    apology as mitigation. 2 game fine and £5,000 fine maybe? Instead
    Liverpool have taken an aggressive, non-sensitive bull in a china shop
    approach. I think that abusing someone in reference to his colour is
    effective tantamount to racial abuse but that's just me. The real issue
    to me is not Evra's history, Suarez's admittance of Ferguson's comments
    but Liverpool's archaic, deceptive, aggressive and insenstive PR
    approach to such a hurtful and historically significant subject.

  52. Jaimie, jamie, jamie , you were doing so well with the the articles about the myths about evra, and the article pointing out the the FA didn't call luis Suarez a racist, and the problems with liverpool's response.

    The problem here is that you want to be able to come to a certain conclusion, and you're trying to use nitpicking to get there. Just take a step back. Suarez has been found guilty of winding up evra using words that are considered racist. Now that is a pretty text book definition of racial abuse. 

    There isn't a court in the land that would give a defamation suit like this the time of day. 

    No-one called him a racist. Ferguson just referred to what he'd been found guilty of, insulting evra by making reference to the colour of his skin. You know, racial abuse. 

  53. Ashfah hussain, you've just embarrassed your country and in context of that favoured word of yours you mother. Nobody in this site needs to know the existence of that word as it is abusive and out of order.

    Will you be charged for defamation? No. Most probably a punch in the face, that is, if you actually have the guts to say it to someone  right in front of him/her or even SIR ALEX. and knowing people like you, you don't.

    People who like to run their mouth with abusive language by all means deserve a punch in the face regardless of language, region, religion or race. Walk up to an african and call him the N word, and see what happens. 

  54. The only people defending Suarez are white people! You know what I'm saying right Jaimie, you know what I think you are!

  55. so much to do with semantics that no two people concur and the FA gave the wee guy a hefty ban ...... rather than the benefit of the doubt - which is massive in this case 

    I also read that JT would get a maximum of a 2500 pound fine ?? can anyone confirm this ??

    Great Article though , please do remove abusive comments ....... one at the start 

  56. because rooney terry and the like are just little angels ??????? aren't they ????????     humans commit mistakes ........ they shouldn't be hounded for life for any particular one ....... in Suarez's case he has been reprimanded each time ....... can't say the same for Rooney Terry etc. ; the matter here is totally different ...... we are right in believing what we want to till we get definitive proof to alter our judgement 

  57. wrong. many non-white people, not only Glen Johnson, defended him. as some non-white people double standards, please read: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/esl5vd

  58. agreed that FA got it all wrong... maybe it is their guilty conscience and double standards that are making them be so harsh on Luis: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/et3nas

  59. suarez has used an offensive term in the context of an argument. If he did not know the connotations of the word he was using, then why on earth did he repeat it 10 times?

    You've yet again failed to draw distinction from the statements and the facts.

    Ferguson used the term racially abused. If Suarez did not abuse Evra on the basis of his race, then why is there a guilty verdict?

    As an ethnic person imo if you're using racial words, you're a racist. Simples. There's cases of ignorance but this couldn't not have been one as he's lived in northern europe for 4 years.

    Anyone thinking that what Suarez said wasn't racially motivated, feel free to stand outside a police station and call black people walking past the same thing.....

  60. its all gone mad with this race row. All I can do is what i did the other day, when the away fans start chanting racist, racist to suarez, i join in with the rest of the liverpool fans and sing the suarez song to drain out the opposition fans, it worked at wigan and I am hoping for the same at blackburn!

  61. suarez was convicted purely on evras hearsay, no other evidence?
    why could not a lipreading expert be called to see if he could determine by studying video evidence if suarez used the N word once never mind 10.
    evra also admitted to abusing suarez although suarez was honest enough to say he didnt hear him. who esle has ever been convicted on one mans hearsay without any other evidence the f.a. has been biased in favour of a man u player 

  62. What ARE you talking about you clown ? If you want to call  Suarez a racist do it in the national press and see what happens to you

  63. Clearly you're not a lawyer either.

  64. Quite right the ignorant greasy South American must abide by the rules of this fair and honest country. 8 game ban and 40k fine not nearly enough. Nuke Montevideo that will teach the stinking foreigners

  65. Really Lol? You're gonna sue Fergie for defamation after your club released that joke of a 'statement.'

    I actually do sympathise a little with Suarez. He had to be punished but I don't think he deserved such a lengthy ban. But I've lost all respect for KD and LFC for turning Evra into a hate figure with their scandalous statement. I hope the FA throws the book at your sorry club.

  66. 1. I believe the '10 times' argument got dropped weeks back, in the end it was down to one isolated moment in the box during a corner. We'd have seen proof of of all these incidents if it happened all those times.

    2. The FA's dubious '3 white men', panel found Suarez guilty and not on the original charge, it was admitted they did not believe Suarez was a racist. They are setting an example, with a player that does not matter to them (not English), with a fiery history. Plus, they are corrupt.

    3. Evra badgered and taunted Suarez, it is obvious he started the war of words, he'd lost the plot early on, he couldn't cope with him or the pressure. Evra admitted he used abusive language to Suarez in his statement too, which is supposedly in relation to his South American nationality/latino heritage- so where is his charge? Is it not six of one and half a dozen of the other? I believe the same rule Suarez is found guilty of breaking, also states abusing a player based on their nationality?

    4. Another point: the word/phrase Suarez is alleged to have used, at least was said in his own language - Evra vindictively went out of his way to also speak Spanish to Suarez - so which is more premeditated and shows they were trying to get a rise out of the player? In the isolated case in the box, you see Evra say something in fury and Suarez, with a smile on his face, say something back - to me it looks like Evra is doing the winding up here (In Spanish - not in French?! Not in English?!) and it's quite possible that the argument (when translated as close to an English as possible, which is actually not possible as a translation doesn't exist in our vocabularly), but say it went along the lines of: (In Spanish) Evra: "**** off, you dirty South American" - Suarez, knowing Evra is trying to get a rise, smirks at him as if to say, 'that aint going to work with me, you're in my pocket this game' and says (again, in Spanish) "Shush, little black man".

    I really don't see the hooha about it, and I believe if anything, they're both idiots for resorting to anything but letting their football do the talking, but I do think Evra has got off lightly here while Suarez is getting crucified. If Suarez had knowingly, without a shadow of doubt (as in spoke at him in French, or English, so it is obvious he's gone out his way to racially abuse the guy), abused Evra, without any provocation then I'd say this charge and ban and stain on his name would be fair, but this situation is nothing like this.

  67. Keep going with all this nit-picking crap and hopefully LFC will appeal and the ban will go up to 10games or even better a points reduction for the ridiculous statement and the t shirt stunt, or just accept it like a man, get Suarez in a training programme so he's fit upon return and keep going anyway, players get injured all the time and you should take it as if Suarez is injured and stop wasting your energy on it and focus on wining something at last. Simple as that.

  68. Liverpool and Man utd kind of reminds of star wars. You had the old rebublic (liverpool), overthrown by the new empire (man utd) led by the emperor (ferguson). But the republic has started a resurgence led by these new rebels (suarez and co.) and yoda has returned (king kenny). I couldn't think of anyone to match vader since a player hasn't left liverpool for Utd forever...

  69. No offence, but  think your club could have dealt with this a hell of a lot better. Show a little class and dignity instead of trying to shift blame. Accept the decision of the independent committee (Not FA) and move on, apologise for any offence caused due to the 'misunderstanding' and re-iterate your support of the anti-racism campaign.

    The whole country is turning against you, even if you win your appeal it has been handled very very badly.

  70. I think that you are clutching at staws here old chap. For a start, Surez used a racist comment (racist in England!) against an opponent. To even try and say that he did so in a friendly manner would be ludicrous if it wasn't sad. Why continue with a comment that you think is friendly when you can see that it is upsetting your opponent. Are we really that gullible to believe that he wasn't winding Evra up.

    To say that LFC should Sue Fergie for his statement is as far fetched as your loyal support for a player who has been found guilty by an independant (not one chosen by Man Utd or Fergie, much to your chagrin) panel, of making reference to Evra's race. Fact! For whatever reason, LFC have come out with a statement that questioned Evra's  as being as someone who cannot be trusted in their character due to previous. You, your club and many others continue to reel out as fact that Evra has used the race card before when he hasn't.

    The time in which another LFC player was implicated in using racial abuse against Evra it was 2 deaf viewers who made a complaint saying that they could lip-read. The other time in the Chelsea groundsman incident, (which the FA have since admitted they handled wrongly) it wasn't Evra who made a complaint about racist abuse, but Mike Phelan the assistant manager.

    As for not being a racist, I don't think that you have to be racist to say something that could or is construed to be racist.

    We all feel that our team/club/players are victimised by the authorities when they get charged when others seem to get away with the same or similar incidents.

    We can all go on about individual cases such as when Neville was deemed to have broken FA rules when he celebrated a goal in front of LFC supporters that was inflamatory but when a LFC player (Gerrard) celebrated in front of MUFC fans by raising 5 fingers the FA did not follow it up.

    LFC as a club of their pedigree and standing, I believe have not come out of this with much dignity. The statement was poorly thought out, inflamatory. Is Surez a racist no, did he make a comment that in England is deemed racist.. yes. 

  71. I think michael Owen could do with a robotic suit of armour to carry his badly damaged corpse around, and a life support system to keep him healthy. he might even play the odd game then. 

    As for throwing fergie into a nuclear reactor, well... I think you'll be waiting. he gets injured taking a throw in. 

  72. If liverpool really did support luis Suarez, they would have done the following. 

    1. found out what he said. He says he said some form of the word negro.  so you start from there. This should have set alarmbells ringing. They should have recognized that suarez was going to be found guilty on his own admission, and acted accordingly.
    2. If He genuinely didn't know that this was offensive, the first thing he should have done is issue a full and grovelling public apology. This is what you are supposed to do if you inadvertently offend someone. it is good manners
    3. Then he could have made the case that it was accidental, and because people saw that he was apologetic, then the public in large would be a lot better disposed towards him.
    4. They should have Then based their defence strategy around a guilty plea, but their case that it was a genuine cultural misunderstanding would have been much stronger. 
    5. He would have gotten a ban, but a much shorter one, and most of it suspended, as the FA would have been able to say that from this point on there were was no excuse for a spanish speaking player to make the same mistake again.
    6. no-one would call him a racist, because his public apology, and subsequent statements that it was a terrible accident would make it clear that this was just a one off thing. 

    In other words, they should have behaved like alan hansen when he cocked up the other night. No-one believes that alan hansen is a racist, because you could see that he was desperately trying to say the right thing but messed up. But when he messed up, he apologized immediately. 

    If Alan hansen became defensive, attacked his critics in the manner liverpool have gone for evra, refused to apologize and stood by his guns, he would be unemployed right now, because it would not be behaviour consistent with someone who was genuinely sorry for their accidental mistake. 

    The way liverpool have behaved from the beginning is as though suarez didn't say anything wrong at all. And the problem is that he admits that he did. Whether he meant to or not is a different matter, and this has made a tricky situation into a full blown crisis.

  73. erm, you do know he just wrote a post about how evra didn't have previous for accusing people of racism. Also he went on to add that it was a bit embarrassing that lots of liverpool fans believe this. 

  74. Quibble over semantics all you want, but insulting someone based on the colour of their skin is racism.

    And Fergie, nor Patrice Evra or the FA have accused Suarez of being a racist. There's a distinction between him being charged with racism and him being a racist. Nobody cares what his wide-world views are. The only thing that matter is what he said and in what context. The independent body hires to decide has reached a decision having reviewed all evidence. That's all we, the wider public, know.

    So let's stop having form opinions on something we don't have all the facts on.

  75. KKK do they like mixed race South Americans how thick are you!
    KKK member you have to be white and hate every other race going!

  76. We are sending a nuclear sub to the Falkland Islands ready to nuke Argentina spreading some English culture and law so they might do Uruguay on the way!

  77. Jaimie ... As for suing Sir Alex ... Id laugh at any chance of that happening .. but technically you are correct .. Luis should not be called a racist .. it hasn't been proven. But Liverpool haven't helped themselves a great deal either. The Suarez shirt was cringeworthy. Why not go with a 'Lets kick it out T Shirt'. 

  78. This whole thing is getting out of hand now and i must admit that i thought evra had a history of playing the race card but jamie kanwar has proven otherwise and i stand corrected by that......So what are we left with......We have the fact that both players said things to each other that referred to their respective origins plus what evra said to the referee  when he was booked shortly after so neither player comes out of this with any credit.

    We also have the fact that this is one the biggest games in world football
    played in a pressure cooker atmosphere with the players of both sides hyped up to the eyeballs.

    The whole thing has not been handled well at all from the way of the F.A or Liverpools reaction however well intentioned they thought they were being towards their player nor the F.A for their part too as we all know the FA and FIFA are not exactly friends are they and i  think there was probably was an element of politics there towards blatter but the FA are totally right to come down hard on these things.....But in this case they need to be consistent and the punishment should have been the same for both players.

    What may in this case have been better as they both abused each other would be to get them both together read them the riot act fine and ban them both but not as harshly and then make a statement saying that in future acts of this nature will be dealt with much more severely....Just my two pennies worth. 

  79. Allen van Dyk   Your comments are really in very bad taste. You are clearly an uneducated plonker who should be fined Your name sounds like a "stinking foreigners" name to use your quote. Please do not post on this site read also by children, you are offensive.

  80. I have to say it is amusing in these comments to read I assume mostly Utd fans attacking the article whilst using "Scousers" as a derogotory term.  The hypocrisy is glorious.  I wonder if they will be quite as vocal in their disgust if it is infact true that Evra made insulting remarks towards Suarez's nationality?

  81. Editor of this site ....Show Red Chica's picture of the Argentine football team and their reference to NEGRO. Do all the biased Mancs think that is a racist support before thousands of people??

  82. Could you please explain to me what the difference is between being racist and racially abusing someone. Surely if you racially abuse someone you are being racist, by definition?

  83. Busquets said Mucho morro, not mono mono.

  84. Mr Ferguson is an arrogant old  tool.

  85. so evra being the nice bloke he obviously is didnt say anything to saurez did he? of course he wouldnt have.
    well said jk

  86. yes but thats in the police investigation which is also why the fa cannot act until thats all over. i believe jt will get a much bigger ban and fine than suarez once he has been fined as a result of the police investigation, it's the same reason no papers or anything are allowed to talk about him. Not an FA conspiracy like i've heard some people suggest

  87. 1994 :The latest unsavoury incident to hit football, Stuart Pearce's alleged racial abuse of Paul Ince in Saturday's Premiership match between Nottingham Forest and Manchester United, is expected to be defused by an apology.
    The player has spoken to Gordon Taylor, the head of the Professional Footballers' Association, who said: "Stuart regrets what he has done. He will be ringing Paul to apologise."

    Gordon Taylor and the FA you have been leading the War on Racism all these years! Sure you have!!!!!!!!!
    You have to laugh if it wasn't so serious that the FA and PFA allowed an ENGLISH player to get away with racism and he had admitted to it Gordon Taylor should resign.

  88. Ah, you beat me to it! I've been planning to write an article about that incident, and Taylor's response. I've been investigating to find more info. I agree, it's a joke.

  89. Hey Jaimie if it is true that Gordon Taylor knew Stuart Pearce had racially abused Paul Ince doesn't that discredit him in his role has PFA chairman and can't pass judgement on the Suarez incident and you should start a campaign to have him removed! 

  90. You still need to write it! I have said that the FA have never charged a top English player in 30 years and couldn't think of a case ,that is what I find up setting about the Suarez a foriegn player can be banned when the FA have never done it to an English player in 30 years or more.Understand Barnes feelings as well now.

  91. Then who is gonna bone your woman...

  92. hahahahahahaha....clutching at straws. 

    Go ahead. Sue.

  93. Evra is the only one that can say if he feels like he was racially bused you tool

  94. Probably..you're cronies in the FA...Devils...F@#$..shit..

  95. Judging from your name , you're not born English..either..!!!

  96. No I didn't as I was not even aware of this blog till just before I posted, so I stand corrected on that point but still stand by the rest.

  97. no, it means that if the players choose to resolve the issue between themselves, then as their trade union representative it is his job to support that. If one of his members brings an complaint against another player, it is his job to support that as well. His job is to support the player who was abused in their preferred course of action.

  98. So he wasn't found guilty of racism - but rather "colourism"?  Uhhhh....ok....good thing he doesn't see race, just colour.  What a load of crock.  We're ending up looking like pathetic little lawyers here, arguing over words, rather than trying to learn from mistakes and moving on.

  99. That's pretty obvious that referring to colour is not about race. We all know what Suarez meant was a dirty shirt of Evra - it was dark od mud and Mr Suarez didn't like it. He tried to help Mr Evra to look good in front of cameras and had no bad intentions at all. Get a grip cause you're getting seriously close to being pathetic.

  100. Gordon Taylor...now there is another topic was he not supposed to arbitrate between both players, did he speak with both players? It may also be of interest that at the time of the Suarez judgement, Mr. Taylor was avoiding speeding fines and used the legal brief of SAF "Freeman the loophole". In addition we had further revelations that Taylor had requested £1m from NOW that Murdoch had not read email and SAF had done deal with NOW not to reveal details of his medical condition in exchange for "scoops"...

  101. pj stretford ender7:42 am, January 11, 2012

    You and your club have handled the whole situation very badly and it has been a public relations disaster.
    The whole t shirt thing and dalglishs stupid behaviour for a man in his position is nothing short of stupid and he showed himself up.
    Kenny and liverpool are missing the point it has gone straight over their heads.
    Nobody said he was a rascist he used racist language all liverpool had to do was say sorry to evra and united and say the player was unaware that words like this are acceptable in this country and we have told him so and now he is aware he will not do again.
    Sorry for any offence but it was not done on purpose and that would have ended the matter.
    But liverpool and their fans are aiming all their bile at evra ...not good articles like this inflame the situation further.
    The author of this has issues with united and is obviously jealous of uniteds success and liverpools lack of it