|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,988
1st Team Regular
|
|
1st Team Regular
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,988 |
After a few days digesting this, I feel the 8 game ban was exccessive but Suarez did admit he said those words so at the end of the day the ban is understandable. Culrural differences or not, he is playing in England and not in his homeland so he should not have said those words. Hopefully the FA can be a bit lenient and shorten the ban to 5 games maximum but other than that, I don't think its an unfair ban as many fans put it. It really depends on how you look at it, but fact is Suarez used negrito and its not acceptable outside Uruguay. Lets take it on the chin, move on an dhopefully sign a quality striker in January. But how did you "calculate" 5 games? Shouldn't the punishment be at least a bit synchronized with some other recent cases, so that it resembles some kind of logical sense? For instance what about Rooney kicking a player and getting just a 2 game ban for it? Then saying "Negro" or "Negrito" gives you an 8 game ban and a £ 40 K fine! That just can't be said being a tiny bit justified and synchronized, can it? I really don't understand the system to be honest that was just an honest guess. I am pretty sure they will give him more than 3 game ban because 3 games is what you get in a redcard. This is more serious than a red card so they always add on to the 3 games. Just my take on it I guess.
Back to Back World Champions baby!
|
|
|
|
|
|
thundyr
Unregistered
|
|
thundyr
Unregistered
|
Negrito, meaning little black, is the racial slur buddy. Its do we let him off cause its not racist in uruguay. The answer was no. He's admitted to it. Nothing to do with lets take the black guys side. No, actually the question was whether he 'racially abused' Evra, because that is what he is charged with doing. That's far more difficult to prove. Given he used words that in his mother tongue are not racist, nor is he a racist (both the commission and Evra admitted as much), how can he be guilty of racial abuse? He may certainly be found guilty of using speech that may create a misunderstanding of racial undertones, and should he fined and perhaps banned for a few games on those grounds, but he is in no way guilty of racial abuse (which by inference suggests he is a racist). And THAT is what everyone is so angry about. The punishment must fit the crime, and while ignorance is no excuse the law does not permit the lawmakers the power to take sides. Although there's no disagreement on what was said, it's still one man's word over another, because Evra felt that what Suarez said was racist, and Suarez disagreed. Who is actually right here? Neither of them! An 8 match ban and a racist label is FAR too strict a punishment for that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
thundyr
Unregistered
|
|
thundyr
Unregistered
|
I think the great irony in this case is that Suarez comes from a culture where people are not sensitive about the colour of their skin (or so it would seem at first glance anyway). The average Uruguayan probably wouldn't understand racism even if you sat him down and explained it to him. Isn't that kind of culture what everyone wants? Doesn't that suggest that they are more advanced as a society? Yet we punish them? Shouldn't we be looking up at them instead?
If you can't say that a black guy is black, then society has a lot to answer for. You can't call him a slave etc, because that is a) discriminatory, and b) not true. So one needs to be fairly definite which side of the line such language was used when the speaker is not speaking English, and since there can never be such proof (outside perhaps a proven racist using the terms again, when there is *still* an element of doubt) Suarez can never be found guilty of this charge at this time. There is too much doubt, and although it's not a court hearing he does not need to prove his innocence.
The point remains. Suarez said he called him 'pal' (or some such, the kind of word you wouldn't think 'oh no I can't say that' in the moment before it leaves your lips), and most of the Spanish-speaking world seemed to agree. Evra (the only person who heard anything unusual) said it was racial abuse [but didn't seem so upset about it that he told the referee after any of the ten plus occasions during the game - the official complaint took the intervention of Fergie]. Therefore Suarez is guilty of racial abuse? Sorry, that doesn't wash.
As I've said before, by all means ban Suarez for using words that may lead to misunderstanding in a racial context, but make it much more clear that it's not racial abuse than tossing off a "he's not racist" line so easily ignored by the press. Clear case of trial by media - they gave us what the majority wanted to hear, rather than sticking to the facts (of which there are essentially none) as they are supposed to do as an objective panel.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 218
Under 16 Player
|
|
Under 16 Player
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 218 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,988
1st Team Regular
|
|
1st Team Regular
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,988 |
Basically what kenny said in his conference about the FA regarding rooney.
Back to Back World Champions baby!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,542
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,542 |
A great article. All that needs to be said really.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
Yes good article demonstrating how South American people are low down on the current hierarchy of victim status when compared to black or Asian people (excluding Far East). White people of course have no rights at all in this circus of grievance. It may be a stupid comment but why can’t we all just be equal instead of dividing us up into this league table of grievance rights and who has more rights than who.
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,381
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,381 |
Negrito, meaning little black, is the racial slur buddy. Its do we let him off cause its not racist in uruguay. The answer was no. He's admitted to it. Nothing to do with lets take the black guys side. No, actually the question was whether he 'racially abused' Evra, because that is what he is charged with doing. Exactly, does the fact that its okay to say it in south america mean we should let him off with what england considers racial abuse. If you read what little info we have about the deliberation process you'll find that that is in fact the question mate. Cultural differences is what keeps cropping up, and that is in reference to the question I outlined. The FA, or at least those 3 judges, deemed that cultural differences should not be taken into account, either in general or particularly for this case. At this point it becomes how do we sentence racial abuse, well our line is tough on it so lets be tough on it. Has Suarez fallen victim to a need to be tough on racism in football? Yes. Absolutely, as Suarez isn't a racist, it is an over the top ban as I'm sure suarez didn't mean to use racist language, but at the end of the day he did, and I'm happy for the FA to be tough on racism as it sets a precedent, something which is essential in English law. But like I said, it is really upsetting and unfortunate that suarez is getting tarred with the racist brush, ajnd he had to be the first when in fact he isn't racist at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,381
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,381 |
I think the great irony in this case is that Suarez comes from a culture where people are not sensitive about the colour of their skin (or so it would seem at first glance anyway). The average Uruguayan probably wouldn't understand racism even if you sat him down and explained it to him. Isn't that kind of culture what everyone wants? Doesn't that suggest that they are more advanced as a society? Yet we punish them? Shouldn't we be looking up at them instead?
If you can't say that a black guy is black, then society has a lot to answer for. You can't call him a slave etc, because that is a) discriminatory, and b) not true. So one needs to be fairly definite which side of the line such language was used when the speaker is not speaking English, and since there can never be such proof (outside perhaps a proven racist using the terms again, when there is *still* an element of doubt) Suarez can never be found guilty of this charge at this time. There is too much doubt, and although it's not a court hearing he does not need to prove his innocence.
The point remains. Suarez said he called him 'pal' (or some such, the kind of word you wouldn't think 'oh no I can't say that' in the moment before it leaves your lips), and most of the Spanish-speaking world seemed to agree. Evra (the only person who heard anything unusual) said it was racial abuse [but didn't seem so upset about it that he told the referee after any of the ten plus occasions during the game - the official complaint took the intervention of Fergie]. Therefore Suarez is guilty of racial abuse? Sorry, that doesn't wash.
As I've said before, by all means ban Suarez for using words that may lead to misunderstanding in a racial context, but make it much more clear that it's not racial abuse than tossing off a "he's not racist" line so easily ignored by the press. Clear case of trial by media - they gave us what the majority wanted to hear, rather than sticking to the facts (of which there are essentially none) as they are supposed to do as an objective panel. Fully agree with the last paragraph, but I think the ones preceding are far too simplistic. There are many things to look at, like it means 'pal' when people actually know each other, in uruguay you wouldn't use that to someone you just met, so to consider it being the word pal would require you to look at how close evra and suarez were. I don't think you can claim it's the word pal. Also, racism is rife in south america, and in fact spain, the term yellow fever is readily used in spain for example, I think you live in china if I remember correctly? Well I can speak japanese and for work often go to japan and they find that term offensive but in spain its fine. Its not just that race is less of a sensitive issue, it's as much as there is institutionalized racism running throughout the culture and language.
|
|
|
|
|
