Liverpool FC Forum

by **crim cram** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 3:07 pm

The whole thing has been shambolic, time to move on.

by **crim cram** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 3:10 pm

Thommo's perm wrote:I see Suarez has made an apology.
I dont think he should have because I never apologise.
Sorry, but thats just the way I am

ISWYDT

by **lakes10** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 3:20 pm

Benny The Noon wrote:Be prepared for Terry to get off the police charges then watch the FA do nothing

yes that looks like the way its going to run.
I can not see Terry going to court over it and if he did he would get off, once that is done the FA will say they have no case.

by **Raoul** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 3:23 pm

crim cram wrote:
Thommo's perm wrote:I see Suarez has made an apology.
I dont think he should have because I never apologise.
Sorry, but thats just the way I am

ISWYDT

Yeah, me too. :grinning:

by **jacdaniel** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 3:24 pm

In a nutshell, the FA completely make an example of Suarez based on Pat Evra's word alone.. we're urged not to appeal, we don't appeal, Suarez apologises and now the apology is not good enough

Blown way out of proportion!

by **Thommo's perm** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 3:51 pm

SouthCoastShankly wrote:
Thommo's perm wrote:I see Suarez has made an apology.
I dont think he should have because I never apologise.
Sorry, but thats just the way I am

You never apologise, ever?

Even if you have made a mistake?

NEVER!!!!!!

Sorry

:rasp

by **stmichael** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:00 pm

crim cram wrote:The whole thing has been shambolic, time to move on.

the whole affair seriously made me doubt my love of football somewhat. i love the club more than anything but the game itself just disillusions me thesedays. it had got to the stage by the blackburn game that as a fan i just couldn't get up for the game at all.

by **jacdaniel** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 5:06 pm

stmichael wrote:
crim cram wrote:The whole thing has been shambolic, time to move on.

the whole affair seriously made me doubt my love of football somewhat. i love the club more than anything but the game itself just disillusions me thesedays. it had got to the stage by the blackburn game that as a fan i just couldn't get up for the game at all.

These days, the rules have just become so inconsistent. Think everyone would be happy if the rules were even a little more consistent.

by **stmichael** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 5:20 pm

How that

Maddock hasn't been banned from Anfield yet is beyond me. Check out this beaut :glare:

Why Liverpool owners' silence during racism row suggests they might not be here for the long haul

By David Maddock

Published 15:24 05/01/12

So many questions, so few answers. The Suarez affair - or debacle, to apply a more appropriate description - has raised such serious issues, yet few people seem prepared to address them.

Chief amongst those avoiding their responsibilities during the months of raging controversy, have been the owners of Liverpool Football Club, and in particular, their chairman Tom Werner and principle owner, John Henry.

Between them, the pair have ultimate management responsibility for one of the highest profile, biggest reaching multi-national corporate businesses across the globe. Let us get this straight, Liverpool FC is not a corner shop. It is no longer a business restricted to customers who live within walking distance of L4, as much as I would personally still love to subscribe to that romantic notion.

Liverpool are up there alongside Coca Cola, Apple Inc and the BBC when it comes to their name, brand awareness and global reach, and I can guarantee the executives of not one of those corporations would have allowed a situation to have developed over several agonising months that can have so damaged the integrity of their business.

Lord Ouseley, the highly respected former head of the Commission for Racial Equality, perhaps put it most succinctly this week when he suggested Liverpool as a global business have failed spectacularly in their duty to their worldwide stakeholders.

"In any other sector, if someone makes a claim of racially motivated or abusive behaviour (against an employee of your organisation), an employer has to investigate if they are competent because this may be damaging to the business," he wrote.

Quite clearly, the owners of Liverpool have failed in their duty to properly investigate such a serious claim against their organisation, and more pertinently, have failed to offer the moral leadership the position of their company as a world renowned leader demands. As Lord Ouseley added:

Surely the new owners, with their experiences of equality and inclusion in the US, can see how their brand is being devalued, and if they sanction this sort of lack of professionalism and moral leadership, we may as well pack up and go home and forget about anti-racism.

Would Apple Inc have left themselves open to such claims, or the BBC? Of course not. And let me add this question: would the Boston Red Sox? I don't believe they would. Yet the owners of that American sports franchise Werner and Henry have hidden behind a ridiculous notion of team spirit and closing ranks that seems only to apply to football, to justify their appalling lack of judgement in this case.

And let us get this straight, it is an appalling lack of judgement. Liverpool defended Suarez vehemently - and repeatedly, aggressively, almost dementedly, attacked Patrice Evra and the FA to the extent of entering slanderous territory because they believed his use of the word "negro" was not offensive in any way. The repeated incendiary statements released in the name of their owners were appalling, but justified apparently, because their man was innocent.

Their explanation was that in South America, it can be used as a term of endearment, which is in fact true. South Americans can use the term in a friendly way when referring to people with black hair and dark skin, as the entire Argentina squad did when they sent a message of support to their team-mate Fernando Cacero, when they were pictured in front of a banner reading 'Vamos Negro'�.

However, it is also true that in South America to refer to a person of African descent using the same term can still be considered racist. Very racist. South Americans with any sensitivity are aware that to use the phrase towards a person of African descent can be highly inadvisable, and should be avoided.

And Werner and Henry, being liberal Americans in touch with the subtleties of racial issues within sport - as their positions at the Red Sox demand - will be aware of that.

Werner works in the TV and film industries and is based in California, where there are sizable South American and African-American communities. I would ask him this question: in California, if a South American referred to an African-American as 'negro' during a heated exchange, would he consider it offensive?

And I would ask him a further question: if one of his American companies had an employee accused of a serious offence that involved alleged racist taunts, would he allow his company to pursue the individual who made the accusation - and who has potentially been gravely insulted with a vehemence bordering on the slanderous?

As I said at the start of this column, many questions have been raised, and so few answers have been given, due in part to the refusal of Liverpool Football Club's American owners to open any sort of dialogue with their stakeholders through the media.

Liverpool have been damaged globally. Two of the most senior figures at the club in England dismissed this suggestion when I made it this week, but it is true. In Europe outside the Spanish-speaking companies, and in the rest of the world outside the Spanish-speaking countries, there is a newly-formed suspicion of the football club.

In Asia, in Africa, where allegiances are not so tribal as they are in the north of England, many fans are openly questioning their support of the club, and that is damaging to the core business.

Which leads us to one final question of Messers Henry and Werner. How serious is their stewardship of Liverpool Football Club?

When they arrived as the saviours of Anfield, following the disastrous regime of Tom Hicks and George Gillett, they made no bones about their intentions. They switched continents, and sports, they admitted, not because of their allegiance to Liverpool or football, but because they saw the bigger picture of a global franchise, with a name that is one of the biggest and most respected within its field or any other. They wanted to maintain that name and image, and develop it sensitively and carefully to put the club in the position its history and gravitas deserved.

Yet their conduct over the past few months, in preaching to the converted and playing to the gallery of insular fans (and in employing people with a similar approach), does not speak of a commitment to developing the Liverpool brand in a wider context, and making the club a truly great global business.

In allowing this mess to develop, in putting back the cause of anti-racism so violently and in firmly anchoring Liverpool Football Club in prehistoric practices that have no place in 21st century business, are they really committed to developing the club as they suggested in the long term, to rival the likes of Coca Cola or Apple Inc?

Or did they spot a short term business opportunity to buy cheaply and sell swiftly, making a quick buck? It may seem a harsh judgement, but their behaviour and subsequent silence only lends credence to such a theory.

:sleep

by **damjan193** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 5:24 pm

*read title* *skip the whole thing* :laugh:

by **Greavesie** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 5:48 pm

It's dark days. I can't even discuss this issue from a political, legal or precedent stand point without accusations of my bias towards Liverpool being a factor. I was genuinely told today 'if he played for anyone else you wouldn't have a problem'. While three minutes earlier his words were 'I don't like Luis Suarez, because he plays for Liverpool.' The mind really does boggle

by **Ola Mr Benitez** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 6:04 pm

Luis Suarez is not a racist

I suppose the problem is he used the word "negro". He shouldnt of, even if he didnt mean it to be offensive.

Unfortunately, its not the way the word is used that is important in cases like this, it is the way the word is received.

Now there are loads of dodgy dealings that have gone on, but at the end of the day, the word should not have been used. Never, Ever. The fact that nobody agrees with the way Liverpool have handled this maybe points to the fact that we may have got it wrong.

Luis Suarez is not a racist

by **Thommo's perm** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 6:27 pm

Greavesie wrote:It's dark days. I can't even discuss this issue from a political, legal or precedent stand point without accusations of my bias towards Liverpool being a factor. I was genuinely told today 'if he played for anyone else you wouldn't have a problem'. While three minutes earlier his words were 'I don't like Luis Suarez, because he plays for Liverpool.' The mind really does boggle

If we werent as big, or high profile as we are then none of this would have happened. People all over the world, at all times in history are guilty of ignorance and bias. Every country, African ones included have at some time had knobheads in charge spreading rumours and lies and thousands if not millions believing them. It is human nature to be gullible and brainwashed. This is just another example of self righteous, arrogant and hypocritical tw@ts picking on someone to prove that they are somehow "superior". It is, ironically, discrimination and bullying at its finest. It is a sad example of how people behave, but it is a true reflection of how a "free press" can actually be harmful, not just to the individual, but to society in general. The witch hunt and consequential public demonisation of Suarez is shocking and disgusting, considering that the truth is there for all to see regarding Evra and his motives. Add on to this the unbelievable incompetence, bias and cowardice of the FA, it is beyond doubt one of the darkest times in modern football.
However, I would say to those who are fretting or concerned about our good name and reputation, dont worry. We are big and strong enough to come through this. Let the inferiors, the jealous, the ignorant, the inconsequential carry on trying to make this into something its not. I have no fear whatsoever that the owners have been kept fully up to date with the situation and will have had no compunction whatsoever in getting rid of Suarez if they had any inclination he was guilty of what he has been accused of.
We must move on, together and in unity. Its a siege mentality now and a firm belief that we have done nothing wrong. Let them snipe and accuse, insinuate and obsess. We are and always have been Liverpool Football Club, known throughout the world for our history, heritage and achievements, and no matter what these insects say, no fu'cker can take that away from us.
Tomorrows chip paper methinks
:nod

by **Greavesie** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 6:30 pm

Thommo's perm wrote:
Greavesie wrote:It's dark days. I can't even discuss this issue from a political, legal or precedent stand point without accusations of my bias towards Liverpool being a factor. I was genuinely told today 'if he played for anyone else you wouldn't have a problem'. While three minutes earlier his words were 'I don't like Luis Suarez, because he plays for Liverpool.' The mind really does boggle

If we werent as big, or high profile as we are then none of this would have happened. People all over the world, at all times in history are guilty of ignorance and bias. Every country, African ones included have at some time had knobheads in charge spreading rumours and lies and thousands if not millions believing them. It is human nature to be gullible and brainwashed. This is just another example of self righteous, arrogant and hypocritical tw@ts picking on someone to prove that they are somehow "superior". It is, ironically, discrimination and bullying at its finest. It is a sad example of how people behave, but it is a true reflection of how a "free press" can actually be harmful, not just to the individual, but to society in general. The witch hunt and consequential public demonisation of Suarez is shocking and disgusting, considering that the truth is there for all to see regarding Evra and his motives. Add on to this the unbelievable incompetence, bias and cowardice of the FA, it is beyond doubt one of the darkest times in modern football.
However, I would say to those who are fretting or concerned about our good name and reputation, dont worry. We are big and strong enough to come through this. Let the inferiors, the jealous, the ignorant, the inconsequential carry on trying to make this into something its not. I have no fear whatsoever that the owners have been kept fully up to date with the situation and will have had no compunction whatsoever in getting rid of Suarez if they had any inclination he was guilty of what he has been accused of.
We must move on, together and in unity. Its a siege mentality now and a firm belief that we have done nothing wrong. Let them snipe and accuse, insinuate and obsess. We are and always have been Liverpool Football Club, known throughout the world for our history, heritage and achievements, and no matter what these insects say, no fu'cker can take that away from us.
Tomorrows chip paper methinks

by **LFC2007** » Thu Jan 05, 2012 6:38 pm

stmichael wrote:In allowing this mess to develop, in putting back the cause of anti-racism so violently and in firmly anchoring Liverpool Football Club in prehistoric practices that have no place in 21st century business, are they really committed to developing the club as they suggested in the long term, to rival the likes of Coca Cola or Apple Inc?

How much more hyperbole can you cram into one article?

The club backed Suarez because they don't believe Evra's account and they don't believe he is a racist, and with good reason. There just isn't enough evidence to bear it out. That doesn't necessarily mean they defend his using of the word as a cultural oversight. Most reasonable people realise the risks inherent in using that word, something I'm sure the club would also recognise. If the club suffers 'globally' from its handling of this affair then it will be because people haven't taken the opportunity -- or perhaps they haven't had the opportunity -- to form their own opinions about the case and Suarez's character more generally. If they did, they would probably see that it's not nearly as clear-cut as many in the media would have them believe.

Liverpool FC Forum

Luis Suarez signs for Barcelona

Who is online