Chelski

EastStandBlue said:

I think you might want to go and read the FA report on the incident again. Suarez admitted to using racist terms and told both Dirk Kuyt and Ian Ayre what he said to Evra after the game. He spoke to Evra in Spanish, to Kuyt in Dutch and to Ayre in English, and then tried to claim that he was being misquoted. By three different people, in three different languages? I do love it when Liverpool fans bring up the "oh, but it's normal in South America", as if that makes his behaviour more palatable. Even without what Evra alleges Suarez to have said, what Suarez admitted to saying was racist. Evra was offended. It's as simple as that.

They morally bankrupted themselves to defend their only player of genuine world class at the time despite what he had been convicted of. Most football clubs would do the same and I'm not disputing that, what I'm disputing is claims that a Liverpool title win would be the moral victory. Would it ****.


This is a bit off the thread title so this will be my last comment on this subject but having read your reply I do feel obliged to do that.

Firstly I am not suggesting Suarez was totally blameless or when he used the term he was anything other than very p!ssed off with Evra. But I do maintain as did Suarez when using it it was not meant to be racist even though it was interpreted that way. At that time his English was not as good as it is now so obviously he spoke to various people in the most suitable language. Whilst Suarez told people afterwards what he said maybe that was because he thought he had done nothing wrong it was not heard by other players and the case was based on both players statements.

Suarez did not think he did anything wrong as despite what you suggest it is a widely used term in South America this has been confirmed by various people including Gus Poyet said: 'In Uruguay it is a nickname for someone whose skin is darker than the rest. It is not offensive. Such people are part of society. We will defend them, go to war with them, share everything with them and at the same time use that word.'

Also Evra has previous for making similar allegations as in at Stamford Bridge. Patrice Evra was damned by an FA regulatory commission for supplying “exaggerated and unreliable” evidence following allegations of racism during the infamous ‘Battle of the Bridge’ with Chelsea ground staff in April 2008. On that occasion, Evra was fined £15,000 and hit with a four-match suspension as punishment for his part in the post-match brawl at Stamford Bridge, following United’s defeat against Chelsea, which in him claiming he was called a “------- migrant” by Chelsea groundsman Sam Bethell.

They did probably make an error of judgment with the T-shirts worn pre-match supporting Suarez but to suggest that or the way they backed him makes them morally bankrupt is just not the comments of either a rational or fair man. We can at least agree on the fact most clubs would have backed there player though as United did when Evra was found guilty.

Click to expand...

Uncle Leo said:

Chelsea and Chelsea roughly the same, Man City a little more.

Click to expand...

johnlattimerssponge said:

EastStandBlue said:

I think you might want to go and read the FA report on the incident again. Suarez admitted to using racist terms and told both Dirk Kuyt and Ian Ayre what he said to Evra after the game. He spoke to Evra in Spanish, to Kuyt in Dutch and to Ayre in English, and then tried to claim that he was being misquoted. By three different people, in three different languages? I do love it when Liverpool fans bring up the "oh, but it's normal in South America", as if that makes his behaviour more palatable. Even without what Evra alleges Suarez to have said, what Suarez admitted to saying was racist. Evra was offended. It's as simple as that.

They morally bankrupted themselves to defend their only player of genuine world class at the time despite what he had been convicted of. Most football clubs would do the same and I'm not disputing that, what I'm disputing is claims that a Liverpool title win would be the moral victory. Would it ****.


This is a bit off the thread title so this will be my last comment on this subject but having read your reply I do feel obliged to do that.

Firstly I am not suggesting Suarez was totally blameless or when he used the term he was anything other than very p!ssed off with Evra. But I do maintain as did Suarez when using it it was not meant to be racist even though it was interpreted that way. At that time his English was not as good as it is now so obviously he spoke to various people in the most suitable language. Whilst Suarez told people afterwards what he said maybe that was because he thought he had done nothing wrong it was not heard by other players and the case was based on both players statements.

Suarez did not think he did anything wrong as despite what you suggest it is a widely used term in South America this has been confirmed by various people including Gus Poyet said: 'In Uruguay it is a nickname for someone whose skin is darker than the rest. It is not offensive. Such people are part of society. We will defend them, go to war with them, share everything with them and at the same time use that word.'

Also Evra has previous for making similar allegations as in at Stamford Bridge. Patrice Evra was damned by an FA regulatory commission for supplying “exaggerated and unreliable” evidence following allegations of racism during the infamous ‘Battle of the Bridge’ with Chelsea ground staff in April 2008. On that occasion, Evra was fined £15,000 and hit with a four-match suspension as punishment for his part in the post-match brawl at Stamford Bridge, following United’s defeat against Chelsea, which in him claiming he was called a “------- migrant” by Chelsea groundsman Sam Bethell.

They did probably make an error of judgment with the T-shirts worn pre-match supporting Suarez but to suggest that or the way they backed him makes them morally bankrupt is just not the comments of either a rational or fair man. We can at least agree on the fact most clubs would have backed there player though as United did when Evra was found guilty.

Click to expand...

It's not about what Suarez intended, but how it offended Evra. If I was in Evra's position and had a multi-lingual footballer repeatedly calling me a word, which in my native language is racist (or, at least, a term related to the colour of my skin)... then you would take offence, and rightly so. Especially in the context of what Suarez said - "because you are black", "I don't speak to blacks."

The point I think ESB is trying to make, and I agree with, is what you call the 'error of judgement' - Liverpool came out and gave their full backing to Suarez with the stupid T-shirts and etc. It made them looking ****ing ridiculous. They don't help themselves sometimes. Supporting a player who's found guilty of a serious case of racially motivated abuse is despicable and will linger for a long time.

The reliability of Evra in other cases has nothing to do with the Suarez case. The FA found him to be reliable in this case and Suarez unreliable.

Personally, I find it mental that anyone can try and defend Suarez or undermine the outcome of the FA's inquest.

From wiki...

The FA, while finding Evra to be a credible witness, declared that Suárez's evidence was unreliable and inconsistent with the video footage. According to Evra's testimony, Suárez said in Spanish that he had earlier kicked Evra "because you are black", said "I don't speak to blacks" and used the word "negro" five times in total as they argued. Suárez had claimed that he used the word 'negro' only once to address Evra and this was intended to be conciliatory and friendly, but the FA rejected this claim as being "unsustainable and simply incredible given that the players were engaged in an acrimonious argument." As the conversation between Suárez and Evra took place in Spanish, linguistic experts were called in to help the panel with the meaning of the phrases. The panel concluded that "Suárez's use of the term [negro] was not intended as an attempt at conciliation or to establish rapport; neither was it meant in a conciliatory and friendly way."

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Richard T said:

FA too busy dealing with the indiscretions and assaults by Chelski players and staff at the moment. With the amount of diving from Oscar,Hazard and let alone the disgrace that is Ramires I think this is a club that really should be getting it’s own house in order.
Suarez is far from perfect but there are players there are certainly other players that dive more than him but it does not get mentioned.

Click to expand...

OldBlueLady said:

I dispute that totally. Suarez is an odious little man who, despite his obvious talent, still feels the need to cheat to get ahead. You clearly dislike Chelsea, but I don't think there is a Chelsea player who comes even close to the amount of diving that Suarez does......he made a prat of himself with his "Easter miracle" at Norwich....hoisted by his own petard.

Click to expand...

londonblue said:

Drogba. He may not be a current Chelsea player, but he was far worse. I've never before seen a bloke as big as him have so much trouble staying on his feet.

Click to expand...

OldBlueLady said:

I dispute that totally. Suarez is an odious little man who, despite his obvious talent, still feels the need to cheat to get ahead. You clearly dislike Chelsea, but I don't think there is a Chelsea player who comes even close to the amount of diving that Suarez does......he made a prat of himself with his "Easter miracle" at Norwich....hoisted by his own petard.

Click to expand...

johnlattimerssponge said:

This is a bit off the thread title so this will be my last comment on this subject but having read your reply I do feel obliged to do that.

Firstly I am not suggesting Suarez was totally blameless or when he used the term he was anything other than very p!ssed off with Evra.

Click to expand...

johnlattimerssponge said:

Click to expand...

johnlattimerssponge said:

Gus Poyet said: 'In Uruguay it is a nickname for someone whose skin is darker than the rest. It is not offensive. Such people are part of society. We will defend them, go to war with them, share everything with them and at the same time use that word.'

Click to expand...

johnlattimerssponge said:

Also Evra has previous for making similar allegations as in at Stamford Bridge. Patrice Evra was damned by an FA regulatory commission for supplying “exaggerated and unreliable” evidence following allegations of racism during the infamous ‘Battle of the Bridge’ with Chelsea ground staff in April 2008. On that occasion, Evra was fined £15,000 and hit with a four-match suspension as punishment for his part in the post-match brawl at Stamford Bridge, following United’s defeat against Chelsea, which in him claiming he was called a “------- migrant” by Chelsea groundsman Sam Bethell.

Click to expand...

johnlattimerssponge said:

They did probably make an error of judgment with the T-shirts worn pre-match supporting Suarez but to suggest that or the way they backed him makes them morally bankrupt is just not the comments of either a rational or fair man. We can at least agree on the fact most clubs would have backed there player though as United did when Evra was found guilty.

Click to expand...

Ricey said:

Ramires has been given a 4 match ban for his whack in Seb Larsson's face.

Click to expand...

EastStandBlue said:

The vast majority of Liverpool fans, players, management and board of directors also went out of their way to defend the actions of someone proven beyond doubt to have racially abused someone. They're morally bankrupt, so how a Liverpool win can be considered a moral victory for football is beyond me.

Despicable club.

Click to expand...

mrsblue said:

This post breaks my heart regarding the game today.

Player A,Can go over the top breaking an opponents leg and will receive 3 match ban.
Player B,Can spout offensive words and receive a massive ban and be pilloried by many.

What occurs on the pitch remains on the pitch.

Regarding the incident in question I thought it was only Evra's word?

Click to expand...

mrsblue said:

This post breaks my heart regarding the game today.

Player A,Can go over the top breaking an opponents leg and will receive 3 match ban.
Player B,Can spout offensive words and receive a massive ban and be pilloried by many.

What occurs on the pitch remains on the pitch.

Regarding the incident in question I thought it was only Evra's word?

Click to expand...

OldBlueLady said:

I was talking current team, yes, I grant you Drogba, you also have Cristiano Ronaldo - all world class players who should really not need to resort to cheating to gain an advantage. The authorities - be that EUFA, FIFA or just the FL - need to start doing something about it. Suarez is the worst at it currently in the country, yes, and that means he's worse than Anthony Grant!

Click to expand...

Ricey said:

Has anyone seen today's press conference with Mourinho? I can't work out if he is being an arrogant **** or is justified in the way he was with the press.

Click to expand...