• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The Suarez/Evra Racism Row

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

when you're emotional you use figures of speech. simples. oh except in the dressing room after the game when peoples contradictory hearsay about what you say. of course then your speech is reliable evidence
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Im up to paragraph 70 so far. One of the things that surprises me is that, apparently, we agreed to a verdict based on probability. Why the fuck would we do that?
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

How to win the appeal (courtesy of Mr McFuckWit the only way now is if we act like cunts)

At the very start of the hearing, the first point of business was to establish that the rules E3 were strict liability.
- We ask you to disregard McFuckWit's initial submissions here, as these were given on the spot as it were, and without an opportunity to take advice from Mr Suarez
- Judging that rules E3 is beyond the powder of the hearing panel, they can only decide whether the rules were broken or not
- The rules can only be set out and interpreted by the proper body (i.e. the FA board/council).
- Thus the decision to have this hearing on the basis of strict liability, was not a legitimate one

Consider further. If it was even necessary to make such an interpretation, does this not indicate that the rules are ambiguously stated? Therefore it is incredible that Mr Suarez has been punished for breaching rules, which at the time of the hearing noone even understood clearly.

I would say, had Mr Suarez known rules E3 were strict liability, then he would have played football matches without speaking to any opposition players. It is no fault of his own that the rules are not clear in this respect. And thus it is the fault of the FA that Mr Suarez was not able to follow them.
Any reasonable person reading rules E3, would conclude that they are subjective. Who would assume that they were liable for a third party misunderstanding their words? This was not the assumption upon which Mr Suarez played this football game. So it is ridiculous that he should be held to account for it. Moreover the public order acts and general law of the land take such offences to be not ones of strict liability. It is wholly reasonable for Mr Suarez to have understood that from rules E3. And it is wholly unreasonable for the hearing panel to interpret the said rules after the fact.

Furthermore, this assumption of strict liability set the tone for the rest of the hearing. It is wholly unreasonable to state at the end of their reasons, that had strict liability not been assumed then the same outcome would have occurred. This is an unfounded assertion. If the hearing was conducted differently from that point on, Mr Suarez would have had an opportunity to defend himself differently. And that may well have led to a different outcome.


If that can be tidied up with legal terminology. Then the FA's case falls apart and the appeal has to find that the hearing was not conducted fairly. That the hearing made a mistake which then could have affected the outcome. And therefore the decision must be overturned.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Basically, how can the FA have any right to expect Suarez to follow rules which are not clear. And this happens in employment law too, and when it happens the appeal panel look to see if the fairest possible interpretation of the rules was assumed on behalf of the accused. In this case they made the most unfair ridiculous interpretation possible. That isn't fair. Morally or legally.

And that single point is enough to win an appeal.
 
The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Evra doesn't think Suarez is a racist, Kenny doesn't think Suarez is a rascist and the FA dosen't think Suarez is a rascist....so why are people debating if he's a rascist or not? Stupid? Probably.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Jack D Rips link=topic=48021.msg1453736#msg1453736 date=1325442926]
Im up to paragraph 70 so far. One of the things that surprises me is that, apparently, we agreed to a verdict based on probability. Why the fuck would we do that?
[/quote]

Because all civil law matters are decided on the basis of the balance of probabilities. There is absolutely nothing unusual about it.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Why didn't Evra get two matches for the sister's pussy thang?
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1453745#msg1453745 date=1325444475]
[quote author=Jack D Rips link=topic=48021.msg1453736#msg1453736 date=1325442926]
Im up to paragraph 70 so far. One of the things that surprises me is that, apparently, we agreed to a verdict based on probability. Why the fuck would we do that?
[/quote]

Because all civil law matters are decided on the basis of the balance of probabilities. There is absolutely nothing unusual about it.
[/quote]

That balance was 50-50. Then the FA demonstrably take the kindest interpretation of Evra's evidence, and the worst interpretation of Suarez' evidence, to make that balance 49-51 and that's even being kind. You know all the facts which is your best contribution to this thread. But your ability to argue something non-existent. What gives?

I mean you're looking at the 115 pages.... and as long as you see that they stated that they applied the balance of probabilities, and write some more things to show them doing so...for you that's it. Your happy. End of story. But I don't get that. You seem to have a pathological reluctance to scrutinize anything anyone says. Actually that's harsh cos you probably can't be arsed to do it is all. But then be honest when you make posts. You're giving the impression that the FA and the hearing was legal, followed the law, Suarez admitted to enough for a guilty verdict, and that's it. No that's not it. That's what the FA state. But just cos a person states something doesn't mean you disengage your brain and take it as fact.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Woland link=topic=48021.msg1453746#msg1453746 date=1325444814]
Why didn't Evra get two matches for the sister's pussy thang?
[/quote]

No idea. But they make an effort to point out the cultural translation of that into english is "fucking hell", which is not deemed as insulting words.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=monsieurdantes link=topic=48021.msg1453749#msg1453749 date=1325445425]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1453745#msg1453745 date=1325444475]
[quote author=Jack D Rips link=topic=48021.msg1453736#msg1453736 date=1325442926]
Im up to paragraph 70 so far. One of the things that surprises me is that, apparently, we agreed to a verdict based on probability. Why the fuck would we do that?
[/quote]

Because all civil law matters are decided on the basis of the balance of probabilities. There is absolutely nothing unusual about it.
[/quote]

That balance was 50-50. Then the FA demonstrably take the kindest interpretation of Evra's evidence, and the worst interpretation of Suarez' evidence, to make that balance 49-51 and that's even being kind. You know all the facts which is your best contribution to this thread. But your ability to argue something non-existent. What gives?

I mean you're looking at the 115 pages.... and as long as you see that they stated that they applied the balance of probabilities, and write some more things to show them doing so...for you that's it. Your happy. End of story. But I don't get that. You seem to have a pathological reluctance to scrutinize anything anyone says. Actually that's harsh cos you probably can't be arsed to do it is all. But then be honest when you make posts. You're giving the impression that the FA and the hearing was legal, followed the law, Suarez admitted to enough for a guilty verdict, and that's it. No that's not it. That's what the FA state. But just cos a person states something doesn't mean you disengage your brain and take it as fact.
[/quote]

Dantes feel free to completely ignore me when I try to lecture you on thermodynamics or some other such shit I know nothing about.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

lol

this thread is gold now i appreciate it for what it is

a pile of shite
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

I've read about 70 pages of it now, and it seems enough to make some early conclusions:

There is no video evidence supporting Evra's claim, although there are many references to how the panel took into account video evidence, in actuality when you get about halfway in they clearly state you cannot see what Suarez says, but by the look on his face . . .

There is much fuss made of the inconsistencies in Suarez's recollection of events. This mainly focuses on the fact that in an early statement he says "Por que, Negro" in a 'friendly and affectionate manner' but later reports this as 'a conciliatory manner' - this difference is seen as highly suspicious and untrustworthy.

Also highly suspicious and untrustworthy is the fact that he says he pinched Evra's arm in 'an attempt to defuse the situation' by pointing out that he (Evra) was not untouchable (ie he can be fouled just like everyone else). The unlikelihood of this being an action designed to defuse the situation undermines Suarez's credibility.

The interpretation of what Suarez said (if it was "Por que, Negro&quot😉 hinges on whether Suarez was trying to be friendly and calm things down or trying to be offensive. According to the linguistic experts it could go either way (although they agree with Suarez that had he been trying to be offensive it would likely have been said as 'Negro de mierda' (shitty black). However, the panel decided that after chatting to the ref when Suarez puts his hand on Evra's neck in an apparently friendly gesture, this was actually a gesture designed to appear friendly whilst actually designed to wind Evra up, therefore they have interpreted what he said as having negative, sneering connotations.

The interpretation of what Suarez said (if it was as Evra claims) is, according to the linguistic experts, unusual in the dialect used by Suarez, although not unheard of. However other videos of Suarez reveal he has used the more prevalent and traditional form in the past, but they say it is possible that Evra, being somewhat unfamiliar with the language may have just heard it as the form he is familiar with (tu instead of vos).

The evidence submitted by several Scum players (of which much is made that it was accepted and unchallenged by Suarez) was from Valencia, Nani, Nani and Hernandez - from inside the dressing room. They all say Evra said Suarez called him a nigger, although in Evra's report he says "he called me black". There are contradictions as to the exact Spanish phrase Evra relates to them.

Evra says to them he called me a nigger five times, which changes to "more than ten times" by the time he speaks to Canal+.

This is by no means cut and dry
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

I will, because thermodynamics is a subject you would struggle to grasp without having a handle on physics, mathematics, partial differential equations and a bunch of other stuff that regular folks don't have. However the law, legal procedures, and all the rest is not as difficult to grasp as you think. I know it's your area of expertise but it is not anything like as difficult as thermodynamics. So your little analogy isn't valid. Of course I can understand the laws, what went on in the hearing, and generally how to think like a solicitor. It's just not that difficult for anyone with a modicum of intelligence and the ability to read the English Language.

Sorry for how arrogant that sounds. Science relies on the language of mathematics. What makes it inaccessible to you is that you don't "speak" mathematics. But don't for a second try and pretend that matters of law are inaccessible to me. Dantes "speaks" in English pretty well.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Jack D Rips link=topic=48021.msg1453736#msg1453736 date=1325442926]
Im up to paragraph 70 so far. One of the things that surprises me is that, apparently, we agreed to a verdict based on probability. Why the fuck would we do that?
[/quote]

Because that's how the Regulations are written
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Also, the evidence from witnesses only includes the testimony of one person from nearby, which is Dirk Kuyt and which is ignored. De Gea and Johnny Evans, the two closest Scum players do not give evidence
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Strange that the report says Kuyt didnt say anything to Evra, when video evidence clearly shows that he does. The deliberate foul and kick to the knee is also extremely far fetched Imho. The video evidence also here show otherwise.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Rosco.
Dantes pwned you.
all. thread. long.

Let it go mate. He's right.
And someone from here should be recommending to LFC that Dantes represent us from here on out.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

I can see why there should be an appeal against accepting as fact the statements from Evra, but Suarez should still get a 4 match ban for his one usage of the word negro and Evra should get a 2 match ban for breaking the same rule without the racism aspect. It's crap that they've taken a cocksucker like Evra's word for all the other shit but I can't see the FA budging now. If they appeal, who is the appeal made to?
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Dirty Sanchez link=topic=48021.msg1453766#msg1453766 date=1325447737]
Rosco.
Dantes pwned you.
all. thread. long.

Let it go mate. He's right.
And someone from here should be recommending to LFC that Dantes represent us from here on out.
[/quote]

lol

His preferred method of action is for LFC to launch defamation proceedings against the FA.
Any cunt can read the law, just like any cunt can completely misunderstand how to apply it too.

Just like Dantes has.

The finding is solid, it won't be overturned. The length of the ban might be.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Woland link=topic=48021.msg1453767#msg1453767 date=1325447903]
I can see why there should be an appeal against accepting as fact the statements from Evra, but Suarez should still get a 4 match ban for his one usage of the word negro and Evra should get a 2 match ban for breaking the same rule without the racism aspect. It's crap that they've taken a cocksucker like Evra's word for all the other shit but I can't see the FA budging now. If they appeal, who is the appeal made to?
[/quote]

Another FA panel. The question whether the matter can be taken to law after that is moot. FA rules seem to exclude that, but those rules themselves could and arguably should be attacked in court.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Evra clearly was on a mssion to wind up Suarez. Just like Materazzi winded up Zidane. Then he runs to the FA and make a meal of the respons.... At least Materazzi was man enough to admit his blame to the incident. Evra is a cocksucker. A huge one, and the cock he sucks is a smal white between the Sirs legs.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1453768#msg1453768 date=1325448044]
[quote author=Dirty Sanchez link=topic=48021.msg1453766#msg1453766 date=1325447737]
Rosco.
Dantes pwned you.
all. thread. long.

Let it go mate. He's right.
And someone from here should be recommending to LFC that Dantes represent us from here on out.
[/quote]

lol

His preferred method of action is for LFC to launch defamation proceedings against the FA.
Any cunt can read the law, just like any cunt can completely misunderstand how to apply it too.

Just like Dantes has.

The finding is solid, it won't be overturned. The length of the ban might be.
[/quote]

What have I misunderstood here? And the finding isn't solid. Don't you agree that the regulatory commission went beyond their powers in deciding how to interpret the meaning of rules E3? And the very fact they had to do this means they are effectively accusing Suarez of breaching a regulation that they defined after the breach? No, I don't know which facts of law to refer to for this argument. But that would simply being a case of me doing a search for it... which like you I can't be bothered with.

The only thing you can say to me here, is the commission were entitled to infer things in rule E3, that were not stated. That's not solid ground at all. That's a witch hunt.

And my preferred course of action for defamation was before the written reasons. If it was me, the FA would have struggled to write even 1 page of reasons, and then I'd begin slicing them up in court. It's not my fault one your fellow lawyers made a fuck up of the entire hearing.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

The reason I am so confident here is because this can always go to the European Court of Human Rights. I'm less confident they'll have the patience to see it through that far if that's what it comes to. It means fuck all what the FA rules and regulations state, what other laws we need to refer to, how to apply this to that. At most it's just delaying the inevitable. Unless you are utterly blind, you can see how unfairly Suarez has been treated by the FA and in this hearing. It doesn't matter what rules you apply, you are simply NOT allowed to do what the FA have done to Suarez.

Article 10.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 30.
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

We always needed to wait until the statement came out to be sure of what exactly went on, and although there is still room for doubt regarding certaintly of what EXACTLY went on, I really truly believe youd have to be deluded to believe that Suarez did not use the colour of Evras skin in a bid to wind him up.
The intricacies of exactly what was said and how many times and who supported which claims may never be known as it seems there wasnt any firm video footage.
But a couple of things are fairly certain.
Suarez used skin colour to wind up an opponent (and on that I disagree with the FA and Evra and say that DOES make him racist).
The club has lied to support him.

I think its pretty shameful that some posters on here are still sticking up for him.
I gave him the benefit of the doubt before we were supplied with report, and although there will always be wiggle room (seemingly to allow support to continue for a racist) I cant give him the benefit of the doubt anymore.
I dont think there is any doubt that he used a persons skin colour in a negative way. And that to me is the bottom line.

I'll go further than most though and say I hope we sell him. I dont want him at our club.
I didnt like it when I thought he was just a dickhead and a moan and a diver and an imaginary card waver and a cheat. I didnt like it then. I cant support this player at my club.

I dont believe i am being led by Fergie by the way.
'I dont talk to blacks!'
Fucking hell.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Evra has reported Ferguson to the FA amid claims Rooney was dropped as he was suffering with 'a few niggles'.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

It's by no means clear that is what he's said though Onk, it's Evra's testimony and Evra's testimony alone that makes that claim - which if you look at the report there is some discrepancy as to exactly what Evra has claimed he said, with Scum players each giving a slightly different account.

You know I wouldn't stand by a racist, and by no means am I coming out in full support of him, but it's not cut and dry and it's definitely inconclusive
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=48021.msg1453786#msg1453786 date=1325451516]
We always needed to wait until the statement came out to be sure of what exactly went on, and although there is still room for doubt regarding certaintly of what EXACTLY went on, I really truly believe youd have to be deluded to believe that Suarez did not use the colour of Evras skin in a bid to wind him up.
The intricacies of exactly what was said and how many times and who supported which claims may never be known as it seems there wasnt any firm video footage.
But a couple of things are fairly certain.
Suarez used skin colour to wind up an opponent (and on that I disagree with the FA and Evra and say that DOES make him racist).
The club has lied to support him.

I think its pretty shameful that some posters on here are still sticking up for him.
I gave him the benefit of the doubt before we were supplied with report, and although there will always be wiggle room (seemingly to allow support to continue for a racist) I cant give him the benefit of the doubt anymore.
I dont think there is any doubt that he used a persons skin colour in a negative way. And that to me is the bottom line.

I'll go further than most though and say I hope we sell him. I dont want him at our club.
I didnt like it when I thought he was just a dickhead and a moan and a diver and an imaginary card waver and a cheat. I didnt like it then. I cant support this player at my club.

I dont believe i am being led by Fergie by the way.
'I dont talk to blacks!'
Fucking hell.
[/quote]

I agree with all that, including the selling of him (let's face it his value has probably gone up in Madrid) except your last paragraph. I doubt he said that. I reckon Evra made that up.
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Woland link=topic=48021.msg1453787#msg1453787 date=1325451732]
Evra has reported Ferguson to the FA amid claims Rooney was dropped as he was suffering with 'a few niggles'.
[/quote]

*snigger*
 
Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Herr Onceared link=topic=48021.msg1453786#msg1453786 date=1325451516]
We always needed to wait until the statement came out to be sure of what exactly went on, and although there is still room for doubt regarding certaintly of what EXACTLY went on, I really truly believe youd have to be deluded to believe that Suarez did not use the colour of Evras skin in a bid to wind him up.
The intricacies of exactly what was said and how many times and who supported which claims may never be known as it seems there wasnt any firm video footage.
But a couple of things are fairly certain.
Suarez used skin colour to wind up an opponent (and on that I disagree with the FA and Evra and say that DOES make him racist).
The club has lied to support him.

I think its pretty shameful that some posters on here are still sticking up for him.
I gave him the benefit of the doubt before we were supplied with report, and although there will always be wiggle room (seemingly to allow support to continue for a racist) I cant give him the benefit of the doubt anymore.
I dont think there is any doubt that he used a persons skin colour in a negative way. And that to me is the bottom line.

I'll go further than most though and say I hope we sell him. I dont want him at our club.
I didnt like it when I thought he was just a dickhead and a moan and a diver and an imaginary card waver and a cheat. I didnt like it then. I cant support this player at my club.

I dont believe i am being led by Fergie by the way.
'I dont talk to blacks!'
Fucking hell.
[/quote]

Fucking hell man. You just take the mancs word for this? The honourable evra and alex ferguson?

Suarez didnt use the language to wind him up. evra was the one using bad language to wind luis up!!
 
Back
Top Bottom