|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,304
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,304 |
Vital have you read it? i havnt yet but if you have does it mention what Evra called Suarez?
Life is beautiful when you find Love when you find the place your meant to be when you find the one to give your heart to as for me this is you this is Love 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,215
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,215 |
I skimmed through the report and it's a complete disgrace. Totally biased and one-sided.
Why?
They basically took Evra's words as truth simply because "he seemed more impressive as a witness". And dissed Suarez's evidence because he claimed that his account seems unreliable.
WTF.
It's totally subjective and you can't prove beyond reasonable doubt that what evra said was true.
A complete sham. Those 3 names on the report have just destroyed their own reputations in this sham.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,552
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,552 |
robbohuyton Gareth Roberts
Evra started the key exchange with Suarez by saying "Concha de tu hermana" which literally means "Your sister's pussy".
Andrew_Heaton Andy Heaton
This is the same Patrice Evra who was labelled previously by the FA as an unreliable witness
JenChang88 Jen Chang
Evra denied using the word "South American". Also says he didn't mean "10 times" in literal sense, that it's just a French figure of speech.
RobGutmann Robert G
Amazing how forgiving FA were in Evras inconsistencies & aggressive behaviour. Falling over themselves to stress his credibility
robbohuyton Gareth Roberts
'Kuyt said he was "absolutely certain" that he heard Mr Evra say that the referee was only booking him because he was black.'
RobGutmann Robert G
FA seem to place emphasis on probability of motives. 'Non racist' Suarez's motives all likely to be'racist' though, apparently. Go figure
RobGutmann Robert G
@robbohuyton FA selectively ignoring that bit and taking other bits of Kuyt's evidence as proof of inconsistency from Suarez.
RobGutmann Robert G
FA big on witness credibility. OK, so is Suarez a racist ? No, they accept he isn't. Why then is he then likely to insult a man racially ?
Last edited by BarLennon; 31/12/11 11:29 PM.
*RODGERS *SKRTEL *JONJO
'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?'
'If there is hope, it lies in the proles'
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,554
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,554 |
Suarez evidence is getting hammered in the tabloids....they stitched him up badly. I think he/we'll have to go to court to clear his name!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,930
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,930 |
sky sports chief football no-mark says that the FA considered Evra to be a good witness and they believed him yet they didnt feel the same way about Suarez.(one plays for man u while the other plays for liverpool).Liverpool will again back their man but i think any apeal will only lead to an increase in the length of ban.the statement also says that if Saurez was sent off for foul and abusive lanuage then the ban would be 2 games,but because of the racial issue it would be doubled to 4.but then becasue they believe he used the word negro more than once they decided it should be 8 matches.basicly they have plucked a figure out of the air.what a bunch of fergie loving wankers the FA are.
BOYCOTT THE FA CUP!.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,930
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,930 |
the name of the spanish language expert the FA have used is called Alexi Fergusonchez.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,304
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,304 |
Check this bit out We now turn to consider the exchanges individually. We remind ourselves that Mr Evra started the conversation with an offensive phrase. Although the literal translation is
particularly offensive, Mr Evra's use of the phrase should be understood in the sense of "[oops] hell" or "you son of a bitch", as the Spanish language experts suggest. So Evra started it with a very offensive remark, but not so offensive because we believe Evra, yet 'negro' which might perhaps be literally offensive, but inoffensive as used in Uruguay is going to be treated as incredibly offensive. Amazing. I'm speechless.  thats unbelievable! surely LFC lawywers are going to have a field day?
Life is beautiful when you find Love when you find the place your meant to be when you find the one to give your heart to as for me this is you this is Love
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 620
Under 18 Player
|
|
Under 18 Player
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 620 |
complete stitch up.
To say Suarez is not a racist yet called someone negro 7 times in 3 sentences is confusing.
Either they believe Evra and he said it 7 times which in my eyes is unacceptable and a longer ban would be deserved or they don't belive he said it and Evra lied and should be punished!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,215
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,215 |
Check this bit out We now turn to consider the exchanges individually. We remind ourselves that Mr Evra started the conversation with an offensive phrase. Although the literal translation is
particularly offensive, Mr Evra's use of the phrase should be understood in the sense of "[oops] hell" or "you son of a bitch", as the Spanish language experts suggest. So Evra started it with a very offensive remark, but not so offensive because we believe Evra, yet 'negro' which might perhaps be literally offensive, but inoffensive as used in Uruguay is going to be treated as incredibly offensive. Amazing. I'm speechless. Precisely. I'm [oops] speachless as well when I read that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 620
Under 18 Player
|
|
Under 18 Player
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 620 |
They advise the commission not to read a biased view in a paper, the chairman admits he already has and it will not affect his view course not........ At one point during the course of the hearing, both parties asked the Commission not to
read a particular newspaper article lest it influence our thinking in any way. The
Chairman disclosed that he had already read the article before being asked not to do so,
but did not consider that it contained anything of note affecting the task before the
Commission. The other Commission members did not read the article. The Commission
assured the parties that it was confident that it could put out of its mind anything that it
might have read or heard at any stage about the dispute, and decide the case solely on the
basis of the evidence and submissions which it received at the hearing.
Last edited by YNWA1892; 31/12/11 11:46 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
