7_Kewell wrote:Greavesie wrote:think you need to start by removing the plural. Suarez admitted to using the word in question ONCE and only ONCE.
The referee's match notes went missing, he also didn't say anything at the time. I can't remember reading much about the referee's input but I'm pretty sure the ref said nothing on the matter
Evra said he was abuse at least 10 times, then said 5, the explained 7. Suarez admitted once and then used that cultural thing as his defence (whether you adhere to it or not it's still one instance of racial abuse). The FA didn't believe Suarez' account and decided to believe every one of Evra's as a result, meaning Suarez gets done for 7 different accounts of racial abuse with evidence of only one instance
Better?
really? After the match Kuyt AND Comolli gave evidence to the ref after the match and their evidence supported Suarez saying "it's because you're black"...yet both of them back tracked when it came to the FA's report.
HEnce the following was found against Suarez...
388. Our findings of fact which are directly relevant to the Charge are as follows: (1) In response to Mr Evra's question "Concha de tu hermana, porque me diste in golpe" ("f**king hell, why did you kick me"), Mr Suarez said "Porque tu eres negro" ("Because you are black"). (2) In response to Mr Evra's comment "Habla otra vez asi, te voy a dar una porrada" ("say it to me again, I'm going to punch you"), Mr Suarez said "No hablo con los negros" ("I don't speak to blacks"). (3) In response to Mr Evra's comment "Ahora te voy a dar realmente una porrada" ("okay, now I think I'm going to punch you"), Mr Suarez said "Dale, negro, negro, negro" ("okay, blackie, blackie, blackie). 98 (4) When the referee blew his whistle to stop the corner being taken, Mr Suarez used the word "negro" to Mr Evra. (5) After the referee had spoken to the players for a second time, and Mr Evra had said that he did not want Mr Suarez to touch him, Mr Suarez said "Por que, negro?".
We remind ourselves that the test for a breach of Rule E3(1) is an objective test. That means that it is for us to form our own view as to whether Mr Suarez's words or behaviour were abusive or insulting. It is not necessary for the FA to prove that Mr Suarez intended his words or behaviour to be abusive or insulting. We are concerned with whether the words or behaviour were abusive or insulting when used in a football match played in England under the FA Rules. Mr McCormick accepted that we should apply standards that we consider should be applicable to games played under the jurisdiction of the FA. We are not deciding whether the words or behaviour would have been abusive or insulting if used in a match in Uruguay. Nevertheless, we have taken account of the fact that the words were said in Spanish by a Uruguayan player to a French player who speaks Spanish. We have also had regard to the Spanish language expert evidence about how particular uses of "negro" and comments using "negro" would or might be understood in Uruguay. However, ultimately our task is to decide whether in our view the words or behaviour were abusive or insulting in the circumstances in which they took place in this match played in England under the FA Rules. 390. Mr Suarez used the word "negro" in his comments to Mr Evra because Mr Evra's skin colour is black. In our judgment, Mr Suarez's words were insulting when he used the word "negro" in each of the comments to Mr Evra which we have identified in paragraph 388 above. 391. Taking each of these comments in turn, and referring to the English translation only in this paragraph (the full Spanish comment being set out in paragraph 388 above): (1) Mr Suarez used insulting words in telling Mr Evra that he kicked him because he was black. We do not believe this requires any elaboration. The Spanish language experts, whose evidence was accepted by Mr Suarez, said that this comment 99 would be interpreted in Uruguay and other regions of Latin America as racially offensive. (2) Mr Suarez used insulting words in telling Mr Evra that he did not speak to blacks. Again, this requires no elaboration. The Spanish language experts said effectively the same about this comment as they did about the previous comment. (3) Mr Suarez used insulting words in saying to Mr Evra "okay, blackie, blackie, blackie". Here, Mr Suarez was using the word "negro" as part of their argument in which he was trying to wind up Mr Evra. The Spanish language experts said that in the context of the previous usages of "negro" and "negros", this usage would retain its provocative and offensive connotations, even though, in a different context, the phrase "Dale, negro" could easily be inoffensive in Uruguay. (4) Mr Suarez used insulting words when he used the word "negro" when speaking to Mr Evra just before they were spoken to by the referee for the first time. We do not know what Mr Suarez said to which he attached the word "negro". However, given that it was said as part of the continuing confrontation and argument between the two players, and following the three previous comments when the word was used in an insulting way, we find that it was also insulting on this fourth occasion. For a Uruguayan to address a black opponent who understands Spanish as "negro" in a football match in England, in the context in which the word was used, is insulting. (5) Mr Suarez used insulting words when he said to Mr Evra "Why, black?" after the referee had spoken to them for the second time and Mr Evra had said that he did not want Mr Suarez to touch him. Again, given that this was said as part of the continuing confrontation and argument between the two players, it followed the four previous comments using the word “negro” and, furthermore, given that Mr Evra had made clear that he did not want Mr Suarez to touch him, in all the circumstances the use of the word was insulting on this occasion also. 100 392. In total, Mr Suarez used the word "negro" or "negros" seven times in the penalty area. On each occasion, the words were insulting. On each occasion, Mr Suarez breached Rule E3(1). Accordingly, the Charge is proved. 393. Having found the Charge proved in that Mr Suarez's use of the word "negro" or "negros" was insulting, we did not find it necessary to consider whether they were also abusive. 394. We make clear that the Charge was not proved in respect of Mr Suarez pinching Mr Evra's skin. Whilst we considered that action to be reprehensible, we were not persuaded that it amounted to abusive or insulting behaviour within the meaning of those words in Rule E3(1). Accordingly, no issue arose as to whether any breach of Rule E3(1) by pinching included a reference to Mr Evra's ethnic origin, colour or race. In the event, this decision made no difference to our finding that the Charge was proved. It might conceivably have made a difference to penalty had we found a breach of Rule E3(1) by pinching and that this included a reference to Mr Evra's ethnic origin, colour or race. However, that situation did not arise.
I have no problem with Suarez, he made a mistake and he'll learn from it. However, i do have a problem with people making out racism is nothing more than "banter".
It's not about backing Evra...it's about making clear what is and what is not acceptable
so the man u fans look bad, in fact the only only thing that has happend this weekend is that the name of liverpool fans has got worse.
