Park Life 71 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 As an aside, if the ban stands, it might just be the making of Carroll this. Or possibly the end of his career. Has he got a black grandad though? Fuck knows who drafted LFC's response but parts of it were as ill advised as Suarez's 'defence' in the case. Mixed race people are amongst the worst offenders for using racist language in my personal experience so who gives a fuck if Suarez has got a black granddad I know mixed race lads who'll happily slag whites despite the fact their own mothers are white. Thick as fuck. Not racists in the pure sense I spose but twatful in exactly the same way as Suarez nonetheless. Actually there is some scientific data lying around somewhere that mixed race people have the best of both gene sets or summink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brock Manson 0 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 You mean the end of his LFC career surely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Having not followed this bollocks at all, I was convinved by their statement. If no other players (on either side) saw or heard anything and the cameras picked up nowt, isn't it Nani's word against the horrid little racist bastards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Carroll just looks confused these days if the ball goes near him and his ponytail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Having not followed this bollocks at all, I was convinved by their statement. If no other players (on either side) saw or heard anything and the cameras picked up nowt, isn't it Nani's word against the horrid little racist bastards? It's Suarez man. No-one at the FA was really looking for proof. Nice meal a couple of brandies and as an afterthought a 8 match smackdown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc-mag 1 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Having not followed this bollocks at all, I was convinved by their statement. If no other players (on either side) saw or heard anything and the cameras picked up nowt, isn't it Nani's word against the horrid little racist bastards? Reported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 When i say nani i mean evra of course...they all look the same to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 When i say nani i mean evra of course...they all look the same to me. We need negrito Baggio's ruling on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 2 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Read my post HF. If Suarez completely denied calling Evra anything it would be their respective words against each other. But seeing as he admitted abusing Evra with reference to his skin colour but hid behind cultural/ethnic differences then he's dug his own grave. Evra insisting that the cameras would pick it up probably pushed Suarez down this route rather than complete denial. That the cameras subsequently didn't puts Evra up there with the detectives off The Wire as experts in tricking perps into gifting a confession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc-mag 1 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Read my post HF. If Suarez completely denied calling Evra anything it would be their respective words against each other. But seeing as he admitted abusing Evra with reference to his skin colour but hid behind cultural/ethnic differences then he's dug his own grave. Evra insisting that the cameras would pick it up probably pushed Suarez down this route rather than complete denial. That the cameras subsequently didn't puts Evra up there with the detectives off The Wire as experts in tricking perps into gifting a confession. Aye, basically what I was thinking. If he'd just denied it outright I don't think they could have arrived at their outcome. Sounds like he tried to come up with some sort of exculpatory 'explanation' though in an attempt to cover all bases in case it transpired there was some additional evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 So he said he was just talking street? Like Snoop Dogg? Fo shizzle ma n!gg@! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 shocking behaviour all round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Black man wins white people think he was sneaky about it. KUNTE KINTE WON LIVE WID IT!!!1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 JT ruling this afternoon from CPS. Nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 19807 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 I listened to TalkShite on the way back from a meeting earlier and a staggering (IMO) 70% said the ban was harsh?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 staggering? You not know the Talksport demographic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 19807 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 staggering? You not know the Talksport demographic? Aye, true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaythesouthernmag 0 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Well if that's what he got then I hope that cunt Terry is hung out to dry The law didn't get involved in Suarez case did it? Hate Terry with a passion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 2 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Few people on twitter/football365 making the valid point that if you or I were find guilty of racism at work we'd be sacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 19807 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Its Few people on twitter/football365 making the valid point that if you or I were find guilty of racism at work we'd be sacked. If I went to a meeting, didnt like someone and called them whats been said, I would be sacked. Davies is saying its complex, how the fuck is it. Its pretty black and white for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaythesouthernmag 0 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Its Few people on twitter/football365 making the valid point that if you or I were find guilty of racism at work we'd be sacked. If I went to a meeting, didnt like someone and called them whats been said, I would be sacked. Davies is saying its complex, how the fuck is it. Its pretty black and white for me. Couldn't care about Chelsea but don't want to see him at the euros Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 19807 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Its Few people on twitter/football365 making the valid point that if you or I were find guilty of racism at work we'd be sacked. If I went to a meeting, didnt like someone and called them whats been said, I would be sacked. Davies is saying its complex, how the fuck is it. Its pretty black and white for me. Couldn't care about Chelsea but don't want to see him at the euros Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil 6 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Its Few people on twitter/football365 making the valid point that if you or I were find guilty of racism at work we'd be sacked. If I went to a meeting, didnt like someone and called them whats been said, I would be sacked. Davies is saying its complex, how the fuck is it. Its pretty black and white for me. The context is completely different. Had he said it in the tunnel it would be similar, but it wasn't its was said on the pitch in a heated conversation to a player who isn't exactly a saint. clicky Saying "shut up little black man" repeatedly is unacceptable and he's been fined and given a 8 game ban. It's not racism. Not even close tbh. Culturally its akin to saying "shut up ginge". Context and intent is everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 (edited) Liverpool's statement last night was truly extraordinary in both its tone and content, taking furious shots at Evra and the FA. Their man has been found guilty of a very serious offence, so they might just want to wind their necks in a little bit. Support Suarez, by all means. Appeal, as you have a right to do. But show some restraint and some dignity. Act in a manner befitting a club of Liverpool's stature. As the statement itself pointed out, Liverpool have done more than their share to combat injustice and discrimination. That is why it is so uncomfortable to see them in such a frenzy, and to see Kenny Dalglish use the phrase forever associated with the club in his message of support: 'Let's not let him walk alone.' Liverpool should think very carefully before attempting to turn Suarez into a great, modern-day martyr. They might want to say: "Much as we love Luis, and much as he's our best player, and much as his offence came against our most hated rivals, the FA thinks he has committed a very serious breach of discipline and we should probably reflect that." There is so much in Liverpool's statement that can be picked apart, but ED will focus on just a few bits: "It is also our opinion that the accusation by this particular player was not credible - certainly no more credible than his prior unfounded accusations." This is a disgrace. The mention of "prior unfounded accusations" refers to two other cases in which claims of racial abuse against Evra have been made. To paraphrase - Evra plays the race card. The thing is, on neither occasion did Evra make the accusation. In 2006, a deaf fan claimed to lip-read abuse of Evra by Steve Finnan, and in 2008 United coaches Mike Phelan and Richard Hartis said they heard a Chelsea groundsman insult Evra. Neither claim was proven. And neither claim was made by Evra. This point is outlined in this excellent blog post (yes, it's a United blog, but it makes a very good point). For Liverpool to themselves make a false claim about Evra is lamentable. "It is key to note that Patrice Evra himself in his written statement in this case said 'I don't think that Luis Suarez is racist'. The FA in their opening remarks accepted that Luis Suarez was not racist." It is not key. It is irrelevant. Being a racist and committing a racist act are not the same thing. When Ron Atkinson made his disgusting remarks about Marcel Desailly, a large number of his former players came out and said Atkinson was not a racist. Did any of these people say that he should not be punished? Of course not. Nobody said: "It is accepted that Ron is not a racist, therefore he cannot be guilty." People are nuanced, inconsistent, unpredictable. It is perfectly possible to commit an isolated racist act in an otherwise tolerant life. "Luis himself is of a mixed race family background as his grandfather was black." Really? 'Some of my best grandparents are black'? "It appears to us that the FA were determined to bring charges against Luis Suarez, even before interviewing him at the beginning of November. " "We would also like to know when the FA intend to charge Patrice Evra with making abusive remarks to an opponent after he admitted himself in his evidence to insulting Luis Suarez in Spanish in the most objectionable of terms. " Utterly depressing remarks, which try to make the case about Liverpool versus Manchester United (and the FA), when it should be a serious examination of what one man said to another man. "Luis, to his credit, actually told the FA he had not heard the insult." To his credit? Maybe he genuinely didn't hear the insult. And Liverpool's wording suggests that he did hear the insult, but decided to say otherwise. If that were indeed the case, then ED is not sure how lying to an FA enquiry is to anybody's credit. - - - This is a difficult, unprecedented case that needs to be looked at carefully and sensitively. The argument centred less around what Suarez said as what he meant, and that is a thorny issue of deep cultural nuances. It would seem the FA have decided that, though 'Negrito' might be a term of utmost endearment in Uruguay, they cannot allow any language with racial connotations. ED sees their point, though it can also accept the argument that the punishment is heavy-handed. Maybe the FA's process was flawed, though it is hard to see anything for all the mud-slinging. Frankly, ED doesn't know exactly what happened in that goalmouth, and it doesn't know what the appropriate sanction should be for a player found guilty. Looking at the reaction of Liverpool, the media and the fans, ED is virtually alone in this uncertainty. But that's football, where everybody knows everything all the time, even when they actually know nothing. Edited December 21, 2011 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 2 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Where's that from Parky? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now