The Suarez/Evra Racism Row

[King Binny]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

In short, Suarez, in his statement mentioned his word "was meant in a conciliatory and friendly way " and the FA pointed out incidents that proved to them that "Suarez's attitude and actions were the very antithesis of the conciliation and friendliness that he would have us believe. "

266. In our judgment, Mr Suarez's use of the term was not intended as an attempt at conciliation or to establish rapport; neither was it meant in a conciliatory and friendly way. It was not explained by any feeling on Mr Suarez’s part that a linguistic or cultural relationship had been established between them or that the context was one of informal social relations. The video footage, when viewed in detail and when looked at as a whole, shows that the players continued their animosity throughout this incident. Their hostility is shown in their actions and demeanour before, at the moment of, and after Mr Suarez's admitted use of the word.

267. Once more, we were troubled by the fact that Mr Suarez advanced this case to us and relied on it to the extent that he did, when it was unsustainable. The suggestion that he behaved towards Mr Evra at this time in a conciliatory and friendly way, or intended to do so in using the word "negro", is, in our judgment, simply not credible. His evidence is again inconsistent with the video footage. Once again, there was no satisfactory explanation for this inconsistency.

268. In contrast, Mr Evra’s evidence was not shown to be inconsistent with the facts established by other evidence, such as the video footage, in any material respect.

Pg 68 to 81:
the extent to which the witnesses have been consistent or inconsistent over time in the accounts they have given of what happened during the match. --> Even Kuyt and Comolli had a part to play in the inconsistency >_<

 

[Rosco]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

The club does not come out of this well at all.

Compare the club statement, with what we know now.

Compare the complaints by us about the delay of the FA, when:

On 21 November, Mr Suarez submitted his Reply Form (A) stating that he denied the
Charge, and requesting a personal hearing. By letter of the same date, Mr McCormick
applied for an extension of time for Mr Suarez to submit the further documentation and
witness statements on which he intended to rely in defence of the Charge. He sought an
extension of 14 days until Thursday 8 December.

 

[LeTallecWiz]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1452997#msg1452997 date=1325355410]
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=48021.msg1452994#msg1452994 date=1325355171]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1452991#msg1452991 date=1325355011]

321. The impression created by these inconsistencies was that Mr Suarez's evidence was not, on
the whole, reliable. He had put forward an interpretation of events which was inconsistent
with the contemporaneous video evidence. He had changed his account in a number of
important respects without satisfactory explanation. As a result, we were hesitant about
accepting Mr Suarez's account of events where it was disputed by other credible witnesses
unless there was solid evidence to support it.

[/quote]

Come on mate ... who can really trust a South American over a European national anyways? 🙂
[/quote]

You're better than that. You and everyone else I've been arguing with in this thread.
[/quote]

You've not really been that fair with most of my questions (The hypocrisy wrt the English tourist, the imperialist attitude re: racism and the fact no one BUT Evra heard this).

As I said, I believe he said the term negro and hence should be banned. But 8 games (You said 'actions speaks louder than words') tells me they're saying he's racist despite claiming otherwise. If Liverpool were to press charges against Evra for saying 'sudaca', nothing would happen because it's not offensive in England (as per your last post). So we just have to find new insulting words for Luis that are kosher in the UK.

 

[Dahuge]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

I have a question that I haven't seen mentioned.

Why is evra's derogatory comment in English and not Spanish, what did he say in Spanish and also why not publish it in Spanish if, as they say it isn't racist?

 

[Jack D Rips]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1452991#msg1452991 date=1325355011]

321. The impression created by these inconsistencies was that Mr Suarez's evidence was not, on
the whole, reliable. He had put forward an interpretation of events which was inconsistent
with the contemporaneous video evidence. He had changed his account in a number of
important respects without satisfactory explanation. As a result, we were hesitant about
accepting Mr Suarez's account of events where it was disputed by other credible witnesses
unless there was solid evidence to support it.

[/quote]

Who were those other credible witnesses? Does it name them? Or is it the four teammates of Evra who spoke of his demeanour after the match?

Im just asking like. Dont bite my head off.

 

[Dahuge]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Also are they saying that Suarez said what he said 8 times and not the once as he claimed?

 

[jexykrodic]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Jack D Rips link=topic=48021.msg1453006#msg1453006 date=1325356351]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1452991#msg1452991 date=1325355011]

321. The impression created by these inconsistencies was that Mr Suarez's evidence was not, on
the whole, reliable. He had put forward an interpretation of events which was inconsistent
with the contemporaneous video evidence. He had changed his account in a number of
important respects without satisfactory explanation. As a result, we were hesitant about
accepting Mr Suarez's account of events where it was disputed by other credible witnesses
unless there was solid evidence to support it.

[/quote]

Who were those other credible witnesses? Does it name them? Or is it the four teammates of Evra who spoke of his demeanour after the match?

Im just asking like. Dont bite my head off.
[/quote]

I think there are going to many, many questions about the whole affair. The whole business is a mess.

 

[Rosco]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Jack D Rips link=topic=48021.msg1453006#msg1453006 date=1325356351]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1452991#msg1452991 date=1325355011]

321. The impression created by these inconsistencies was that Mr Suarez's evidence was not, on
the whole, reliable. He had put forward an interpretation of events which was inconsistent
with the contemporaneous video evidence. He had changed his account in a number of
important respects without satisfactory explanation. As a result, we were hesitant about
accepting Mr Suarez's account of events where it was disputed by other credible witnesses
unless there was solid evidence to support it.

[/quote]

Who were those other credible witnesses? Does it name them? Or is it the four teammates of Evra who spoke of his demeanour after the match?

Im just asking like. Dont bite my head off.
[/quote]

Seriously, go and read the document. Nobody believes what I say, even though I always end up being on the money - so just go and read it.

Statement were taken from almost everyone involved - it doesn't go through each one but it mentions a lot of them.

 

[King Binny]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

314. In his witness statement, Mr Suarez gave details about his exchanges with Mr Evra which he had not previously given. After Mr Evra asked why he had kicked him and Mr Suarez had replied that it was a normal foul, Mr Evra said "Ok, you kicked me, I'm going to kick you." Mr Suarez told him to shut up and made a brief gesture with his left hand like a "quacking" motion as if to say he was talking too much and should be quiet. He then referred to the pinching of Mr Evra's arm and said that he was trying to defuse the situation and trying to intimate to Mr Evra that he was not untouchable by reference to his question about the foul. These details had not previously been provided by Mr Suarez to the FA.

315. Mr Suarez also changed some of the detail of his account of the incident when he used the word “negro”. He now said that it was simultaneously with the blowing of the whistle that Mr Evra spoke to him and said "Don't touch me, South American" (in English). Mr Suarez took this to be a reference to his touching of Mr Evra's arm on the goal line a few moments earlier.

316. There were, thus, three changes in this account from what Mr Suarez had said in his 2 November interview: (1) Previously he had said that this exchange took place when they were walking away after the referee had spoken to them, whereas now it was said to have occurred simultaneously with the referee blowing his whistle and before he spoke to them. (2) Previously he had said that the exchange took place in the context of Mr Suarez saying sorry to Mr Evra as required by the referee, whereas now nothing was said about Mr Suarez apologising. (3) Previously Mr Suarez said that he believed that Mr Evra's comment that Mr Suarez should not touch him was a reference to Mr Suarez putting his hand on the back of Mr Evra's head, whereas now it was said to be a reference to the pinching on the goal line.

318. In the course of the hearing, it became apparent that Mr Evra was not aware of Mr Suarez pinching him at the time it happened and only became aware of it when watching the footage subsequently. This posed a problem for Mr Suarez in that any comment by Mr Evra along the lines of "Don't touch me" could not have been referring to the pinching, of which Mr Evra was unaware at the time. Mr Suarez’s case on this point changed again so that, as put by Mr McCormick in closing, it was said that the touching which prompted Mr Evra's comment "Don't touch me" was the foul in the 58th minute. In Mr Suarez's several accounts, the touching being referred to by Mr Evra was (1) Mr Suarez's hand on the back of his head, then (2) Mr Suarez pinching Mr Evra on the goal-line, then (3) Mr Suarez fouling Mr Evra in the 58th minute.

319. There were clearly a number of changes in Mr Suarez's account, both of the incident in the goalmouth and the incident where Mr Suarez admitted to using the word “negro” between his initial account as reported by Mr Dalglish and Mr Comolli, his interview on 2 November, his witness statement, and his case as presented at the hearing.

320. It is true to say that Mr Suarez had not seen all the video clips when he was interviewed, and that it is not easy to piece together a detailed sequence of events which took place in a brief period of time in a high-pressured match. On the other hand, a serious allegation had been made against Mr Suarez. Mr Comolli took care after the match to find out what had happened in view of the seriousness of the allegation. Mr Suarez had watched a recording of the game with a view to preparing for his FA interview. It is a reasonable inference that he had thought very carefully about what had happened at the key moments in the penalty area, with the benefit of some recording to refresh his memory, in order to be able to give a clear account in his interview and his witness statement.

321. The impression created by these inconsistencies was that Mr Suarez's evidence was not, on the whole, reliable. He had put forward an interpretation of events which was inconsistent with the contemporaneous video evidence. He had changed his account in a number of important respects without satisfactory explanation. As a result, we were hesitant about accepting Mr Suarez's account of events where it was disputed by other credible witnesses unless there was solid evidence to support it.

 

[LeTallecWiz]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1453010#msg1453010 date=1325356575]
[quote author=Jack D Rips link=topic=48021.msg1453006#msg1453006 date=1325356351]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1452991#msg1452991 date=1325355011]

321. The impression created by these inconsistencies was that Mr Suarez's evidence was not, on
the whole, reliable. He had put forward an interpretation of events which was inconsistent
with the contemporaneous video evidence. He had changed his account in a number of
important respects without satisfactory explanation. As a result, we were hesitant about
accepting Mr Suarez's account of events where it was disputed by other credible witnesses
unless there was solid evidence to support it.

[/quote]

Who were those other credible witnesses? Does it name them? Or is it the four teammates of Evra who spoke of his demeanour after the match?

Im just asking like. Dont bite my head off.
[/quote]

Seriously, go and read the document. Nobody believes what I say, even though I always end up being on the money - so just go and read it.

Statement were taken from almost everyone involved - it doesn't go through each one but it mentions a lot of them.
[/quote]

Ok - so who else heard the word 'negro' being uttered 10 times? Please point me to page/bullet point whatever, so I can shut up about it.

 

[Buddha]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1453000#msg1453000 date=1325355636]
Before anyone goes off on hairbrained conspiracy theories, just read the document.

One point, which everyone disputed with me:

It is not necessary for the FA to prove that Mr Suarez
intended his words or behaviour to be abusive or insulting. We are concerned with
whether the words or behaviour were abusive or insulting when used in a football match
played in England under the FA Rules

It really was that simple.
[/quote]

But is shouldn't be. And there's a whole load of bollocks that contribute to the panel using objective rather than subjective paradigms.

 

[Rosco]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Mr Suarez denied the Charge. His case, in short, was as follows. He agreed with Mr Evra
that they spoke to each other in Spanish in the goalmouth. When Mr Evra asked why he
had kicked him, Mr Suarez replied that it was a normal foul and shrugged his shoulders.
Mr Evra then said that he was going to kick Mr Suarez, to which Mr Suarez told him to
shut up. As Mr Kuyt was approaching, Mr Suarez touched Mr Evra's left arm in a
pinching style movement. According to Mr Suarez, at no point in the goalmouth did he
use the word "negro". When the referee blew his whistle to stop play, Mr Evra spoke to Mr
Suarez and said (in English) "Don't touch me, South American". Mr Suarez replied "Por
que, negro?". He says that he used the word “negro” in a way with which he was familiar
from his upbringing in Uruguay. In this sense, Mr Suarez claimed, it is used as a noun and
as a friendly form of address to people seen as black or brown-skinned (or even just blackhaired).
Thus, it meant "Why, black?" Mr Suarez maintained that when he said "Por que,
negro?" to Mr Evra, it was intended in a conciliatory and friendly way. Mr Suarez said this
6
was the only time that he used the word “negro” in his exchanges with Mr Evra during
the match.

I thought this was interesting, because it's exactly what the media were going on about for a long time.

We were briefing very well.

 

[Buddha]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Moreover, once the panel have (wrongly in my opinion) decided on an objective stance with regards the use of the word negro, they have doubled the 4 match ban to 8 based on aggravating factors (key to which is Suarez's use of the word 10 times).

Fair enough Suarez admitted using the term once = 4 match ban.

Then the FA have doubled it on two premises:
a) Suarez appears to be an unreliable witness
b) Evra appears to be more reliable.

How the fuck does that give adequate proof that Suarez used the term 10 times?

 

[jexykrodic]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1453016#msg1453016 date=1325356865]

Mr Suarez denied the Charge. His case, in short, was as follows. He agreed with Mr Evra
that they spoke to each other in Spanish in the goalmouth. When Mr Evra asked why he
had kicked him, Mr Suarez replied that it was a normal foul and shrugged his shoulders.
Mr Evra then said that he was going to kick Mr Suarez, to which Mr Suarez told him to
shut up. As Mr Kuyt was approaching, Mr Suarez touched Mr Evra's left arm in a
pinching style movement. According to Mr Suarez, at no point in the goalmouth did he
use the word "negro". When the referee blew his whistle to stop play, Mr Evra spoke to Mr
Suarez and said (in English) "Don't touch me, South American". Mr Suarez replied "Por
que, negro?". He says that he used the word “negro” in a way with which he was familiar
from his upbringing in Uruguay. In this sense, Mr Suarez claimed, it is used as a noun and
as a friendly form of address to people seen as black or brown-skinned (or even just blackhaired).
Thus, it meant "Why, black?" Mr Suarez maintained that when he said "Por que,
negro?" to Mr Evra, it was intended in a conciliatory and friendly way. Mr Suarez said this
6
was the only time that he used the word “negro” in his exchanges with Mr Evra during
the match.

I thought this was interesting, because it's exactly what the media were going on about for a long time.

We were briefing very well.
[/quote]

I don't think it mattered too much what the Club said or indeed Suarez as they'd interpreted Evra was more reliable than Suarez anyway. Interpreting a persons reliability with uncorroborated evidence seems a process open to abuse.

 

[Dahuge]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Hasn't Evra's changed it to he only said it 5 times?

 

[juniormember]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

So they completely dismissed Suarez's evidence due to inconsistencies and the fact that Evra was calmer and cooler in his interviews.
Suarez, a Latino getting emotional in the interviews, versus a proven lier cool as hell just repeating his well rehearsed statement.

Sounds good.

 

[King Binny]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

354. Mr Suarez sought to persuade us that when he used the word "negro" to speak to Mr Evra he was acting in a conciliatory and friendly way, without intent to offend and in a way that would not be seen as offensive in Uruguay. He also said that when he pinched Mr Evra's skin he was trying to defuse the situation.

355. We rejected the evidence of Mr Suarez on these points. The pinching of the skin, and Mr Suarez's admitted use of the word "negro" when speaking to Mr Evra, took place in the context of heated exchanges between the players. Mr Suarez had fouled Mr Evra in the 58th minute. Mr Evra confronted Mr Suarez in the 63rd minute and complained forcefully about the foul. Their facial expressions, gesturing and physical movement showed their mutual animosity throughout these exchanges.

361. Mr Suarez told us that he said "por que, negro?" in response to Mr Evra saying "Don't touch me, South American". At one point in his interview with the FA, Mr Suarez said that Mr Evra used the words "Don't touch me, sudamericano". In his evidence to us, he said that Mr Evra's words were "Don't touch me, South American", all in English.

362. The Spanish language experts said that they were not familiar with either "sudamericano" or "South American" being used as an insult, although if used with a sneer it might well be understood as such. A more derogatory insult along these lines would be the term "sudaca", a term most frequently used in Spain to label South American immigrants.

363. Mr Evra denied using the words "South American" when speaking to Mr Suarez. When it was put to him that he had done so, he seemed genuinely bemused. He said to address someone as "South American" in this way is not something he would do. He said "What's the sense? What's the point?". There was no evidence of Mr Evra using this phrase on any other occasions.

 

[Rosco]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Honestly will you all go and read the fucking thing. It's easy to read, easy to understand and explains every question you're asking.

 

[Dylan]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

"We found that Mr Evra's account is probably what happened." Probably!?! Thank fuck this isn't Texas.

"Yeah he's probably guilty, flick the switch."

 

[King Binny]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

365. The video evidence clearly showed Mr Evra reacting to a comment made by Mr Suarez when the referee blew his whistle to stop the corner being taken. This reaction was shown in Mr Evra's face, his walking towards the referee and pointing back at Mr Suarez. Mr Evra then said "ref, ref, he just called me a fucking black". We found that Mr Suarez probably did use the word "negro" to Mr Evra on this occasion also, although it is not clear what else he said.

366. Therefore, there were two occasions when the players were in the penalty area and not in the goalmouth when Mr Suarez used the word "negro" in speaking to Mr Evra. The first use was before the referee spoke to them for the first time. The second use was after the referee had spoken to them for the second time.

367. Thus far, we have rejected Mr Suarez's case that he used the word "negro" once only and that when he used it he did so in a conciliatory and friendly way that was common and inoffensive in Uruguay. We have found so far that there were two uses and neither was conciliatory nor friendly.

 

[jexykrodic]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1453024#msg1453024 date=1325357636]
Honestly will you all go and read the fucking thing. It's easy to read, easy to understand and explains every question you're asking.
[/quote]

It has been read. It is understandable because it's based on interpretation of uncorroborated 'evidence'. The FA has exercised it's right to be judge and jury but there is enough doubt about the means used to make this a matter for burning injustice for along time to come.

 

[Rosco]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Suarez is coming across as very stupid in this whole thing.

 

[jexykrodic]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1453029#msg1453029 date=1325357903]
Suarez is coming across as very stupid in this whole thing.
[/quote]

Indeed, he should merely have denied everything.

 

[Ryan]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

He's coming across the way he does on the pitch. A moaning cheat.

 

[acejmk]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

I am fucking sick of this whole thing the FA is like the fucking dodgy hand shacker clan.

 

[Dylan]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Suarez would have been better off denying the whole thing.

 

[LeTallecWiz]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

You missed this boat Ryan ... The first to turn on Torres, you're way back in this line of the anti-Suarez group ... It's growing too!

 

[Rosco]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=jexykrodic link=topic=48021.msg1453028#msg1453028 date=1325357863]
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1453024#msg1453024 date=1325357636]
Honestly will you all go and read the fucking thing. It's easy to read, easy to understand and explains every question you're asking.
[/quote]

It has been read. It is understandable because it's based on interpretation of uncorroborated 'evidence'. The FA has exercised it's right to be judge and jury but there is enough doubt about the means used to make this a matter for burning injustice for along time to come.
[/quote]

"burning injustice"

Get a fucking grip of yourself.

Video evidence is corroborating the statements, as well as the various statements corroborating each other. But lets just ignore everything and bang on about how hard done by Suarez is.

 

[Ryan]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=48021.msg1453037#msg1453037 date=1325358223]
You missed this boat Ryan ... The first to turn on Torres, you're way back in this line of the anti-Suarez group ... It's growing too!
[/quote]

I've never liked him. Great footballer all thatnshit, but he's not likable is he?

Don't worry but the bandwagon jumping though, I was the first to ridicule Carroll.

 

[King Binny]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

373. We make a number of observations on these accounts of the conversation viewed as a whole. Mr Evra's account is more detailed, Mr Suarez's account is shorter. Having viewed the video evidence, it is clear that there was enough time for these exchanges to take place, including the greater number of exchanges suggested by Mr Evra. Mr Suarez's version does not seem to account for all of the comments that we see being made on the video footage, but we appreciate it is difficult for both players to recall every word or phrase that was uttered. For Mr Suarez to say to Mr Evra that he kicked him "because you're black" is initially surprising. We found the "quacking" motion to be a puzzling gesture, which was not really explained or explored further in the evidence.

374. 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 "fucking hell" or "you son of a bitch", as the Spanish language experts suggest.

375. Mr Evra then asked "Why did you kick me". According to Mr Evra, Mr Suarez replied "porque tu eres negro" ("because you're black&quot😉. According to Mr Suarez, he replied "It was a normal foul". We think that the shrugging of the shoulders by Mr Suarez is consistent with both answers.

376. It is to be remembered that Mr Comolli's initial understanding was that Mr Suarez had said to Mr Evra "Porque tu eres negro". This is what Mr Comolli said to Mr Marriner and what Mr Dowd noted down (save for what was perhaps some linguistic variation or confusion between "eres" and "es&quot😉. Mr Kuyt also understood Mr Suarez to have used Dutch words which translated as "Because you're black". This was said, on Mr Comolli's and Mr Kuyt's accounts, in the context of Mr Suarez replying to Mr Evra's "Don't touch me" comment rather than any exchange in the goalmouth. Both Mr Comolli and Mr Kuyt told us that they had misunderstood what Mr Suarez initially told them. We were sceptical about this explanation, although the point is probably most relevant as showing the confusion and inconsistency in Mr Suarez's account of events.

379. We accepted Mr Evra's account of these exchanges. The principal reasons for doing so were the following. First, Mr Evra was a credible witness whose evidence was not seriously undermined in any material respect, as explained above. Secondly, we found Mr Suarez, in contrast, to be an unreliable witness on critical parts of his evidence. His evidence was inconsistent with contemporaneous evidence in the form of video footage, especially with regard to his claims of pinching as an attempt to defuse the situation, and using the word "negro" in a conciliatory and friendly way. He changed his account over time in a number of respects. This all combined to cast grave doubt on the reliability of the remainder of his evidence on the main factual disputes.

380. Thirdly, the phrase "dale, negro" involved a use of the word "negro" as a form of address which was common in Uruguay. "Dale, negro" was also a phrase that Mr Suarez admitted using to an opposing player in another match. That Mr Evra heard and recalled that particular phrase being used in the goalmouth is credible, and also lends weight to his evidence about other comments in the goalmouth.

381. Fourthly, we found that Mr Evra did not invent the allegation that Mr Suarez said "I don't speak with blacks", whether to exact vengeance for Mr Suarez refusing to apologise for fouling him or for any other reason. Neither is there any basis for saying that Mr Suarez said something else that Mr Evra misheard as "No hablo con los negros."