|
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054
1st Team Squad
|
OP
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054 |
One Game Ban & £50,000 fine for Silva over the Mendy Tweet https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/50404855It's interesting, as he has been found guilty, so I would have expected a longer ban? I presume this is because the FA did not think he was being intentionally racist, as was his defense. The problem is it opens a murky area where the next racist post/message could be defended as not meant to be racist..... So he misses the Chelsea game.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
One Game Ban & £50,000 fine for Silva over the Mendy Tweet https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/50404855It's interesting, as he has been found guilty, so I would have expected a longer ban? I presume this is because the FA did not think he was being intentionally racist, as was his defense. The problem is it opens a murky area where the next racist post/message could be defended as not meant to be racist..... So he misses the Chelsea game. He has been punished nevertheless and it was a mistake out of stupidity rather than being racist. It's not the same as the Suarez incident at all where the objective was to insult Evra through intentional racist comments
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,746
Under 23 Player
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,746 |
He already had an extension. Why did FA take so long to decide ban and fine. He was guilty but what was he really guilty of?
And why has it been timed to perfection for City. Instead of missing the game v us he misses a home game v Chelsea. On paper an easier task.
The fine compared to the ban seems high. What were the FA trying to show here? After all the problems in Bulgaria and the lenient punishment for a nation our FA gives a similarly lenient sentence.
The white knight against racism, Raheem Sterling, was supportive of his fellow City player. Did this sway the FA?
And what would have happened if the ban had been longer? Would UEFA have also banned him for CL games if they were in between PL banned games? We will never know as the PL ensured that the ban only lasts one game played and that game played before CL starts up again.
Personally I saw the funny side of what Silva had tweeted and it would have been just as funny if say, Sterling, had posted something about De Bruyne looking like Tintin or The Milky Bar Kid. Realistically it would have been the same thing. But in reality nothing would have happened because De Bruyne is white. The thought police and individuals with chips on their shoulders need to wind their necks in.
The hypocrisy and media coverage over racism has reached fever pitch and the points scoring needs to stop. Every time there is an incident or an inference of wrong doing the microscopes come out and blow it up out of proportion.
The FA by giving out this punishment have in effect said that Silva is racist when it was a joke between friends. It just goes to show that the FA is run by some sort of Nanny state and is unfit for purpose.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 343
Under 16 Player
|
Under 16 Player
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 343 |
Suarez denied the allegations.
Are you saying Suarez lied and deserved his ban?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Suarez denied the allegations.
Are you saying Suarez lied and deserved his ban?
Yes
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 5,936
1st Team Squad
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 5,936 |
Suarez's defence was the same as Silva's in that it was a cultural difference. What is considered acceptable in a lot of hispanic speaking Countries regarding race banter is frowned upon here. The FA have to have zero tolerance and be clear on this.
The FA have opened an ugly can of worms on this one because they have given any racial incidents a platform for defence...
"I didn't mean it in a bad way, it was all in jest"!
The FA: "Ok, we've got to be seen to be doing something about this so here's an insignificant 1 match ban and a miniscule 50k fine (which you can make in under a week!), don't do it again"!
Nearly a decade has gone by since the Suarez incident and The FA (after all that has gone on in recent times in the Internationals arena) have chickened out because it was a Man City player, owned by rich Arabs with influence.
Nothing has been learned here other than more confusion when the next incident of a high profile PL player is involved in anything with racial overtones.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394
Liverpool Legend
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394 |
Suarez's defence was the same as Silva's in that it was a cultural difference. What is considered acceptable in a lot of hispanic speaking Countries regarding race banter is frowned upon here. The FA have to have zero tolerance and be clear on this.
The FA have opened an ugly can of worms on this one because they have given any racial incidents a platform for defence...
"I didn't mean it in a bad way, it was all in jest"!
The FA: "Ok, we've got to be seen to be doing something about this so here's an insignificant 1 match ban and a miniscule 50k fine (which you can make in under a week!), don't do it again"!
Nearly a decade has gone by since the Suarez incident and The FA (after all that has gone on in recent times in the Internationals arena) have chickened out because it was a Man City player, owned by rich Arabs with influence.
Nothing has been learned here other than more confusion when the next incident of a high profile PL player is involved in anything with racial overtones.
+1. Whether in jest or not is kind of irrelevant. It was still ‘racist’ so why so lenient?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Suarez's defence was the same as Silva's in that it was a cultural difference. What is considered acceptable in a lot of hispanic speaking Countries regarding race banter is frowned upon here. The FA have to have zero tolerance and be clear on this.
The FA have opened an ugly can of worms on this one because they have given any racial incidents a platform for defence...
"I didn't mean it in a bad way, it was all in jest"!
The FA: "Ok, we've got to be seen to be doing something about this so here's an insignificant 1 match ban and a miniscule 50k fine (which you can make in under a week!), don't do it again"!
Nearly a decade has gone by since the Suarez incident and The FA (after all that has gone on in recent times in the Internationals arena) have chickened out because it was a Man City player, owned by rich Arabs with influence.
Nothing has been learned here other than more confusion when the next incident of a high profile PL player is involved in anything with racial overtones.
+1. Whether in jest or not is kind of irrelevant. It was still ‘racist’ so why so lenient? Because one was done to knowingly insult and disturb an opponent and the other was a banter with a friend who I haven't read took offence, if it was done privately nobody would have known, but it was stupidly done in public on line. Just like Dunk says posters shouldn't swear to insult though he uses himself swear words without insulting, there is a huge difference, don't know why it's so difficult to understand the difference.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394
Liverpool Legend
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394 |
Doesn’t matter. Casual racism is still racism and should be treated accordingly.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Doesn’t matter. Casual racism is still racism and should be treated accordingly. Well he got one match ban and a fine, what else do you want for a mistake that can be perceived as racism, though Mendy didn't think it was? In Suarez's case, Evra said it was racist, big difference.
|
|
|
|
|