Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Suarez gets 8 match ban

My understanding is that negrito means "little black boy" and in South America can be used either affectionately or as a term of abuse, common sense alone should tell you that if used repeatedly in the heat of an argument with a black man, then the intent is to cause maximum offence.
Just because something that is wrong is accepted in another country does not mean it should not be challenged or punished in a country where it is not accepted.
Referring to someone's colour during an argument is only going to be taken one way.
 
It sounded like it. Right now in football racism is more important to deal with than a slap here or there.

Sticks and stones can break my bones but names will never hurt me.

I agree that racism should be tackled, but banning someone for a comment which was only heard by one person is not the answer.
 
What is the answer to players who make racist comments to opponents then?

If the comments are heard by the ref, or other officials, or recorded by cameras then and are undoubtedly racist then the players should be punished.

If they are only heard by one other player then no action should be taken as it leaves the system open to abuse.
 
lets start a 'can i use the word nigger as i listen to hip-hop and its not meant in a racist way' thread and see how much this shit matters. As i remember it they have never gone well.

I defended dicanio after he did the nazi salute and it got to the point where i was trying to prove that mussolini wasn't a racist before i finally had to admit to myself that maybe god wasn't infallible.

People should learn from my mistake and look at what they are saying and realise they are being dicks.

dave
 
If the comments are heard by the ref, or other officials, or recorded by cameras then and are undoubtedly racist then the players should be punished.

If they are only heard by one other player then no action should be taken as it leaves the system open to abuse.
But Suarez has admitted saying it
 
apologies. hes admitted using the word 'negrito'. repeatedly. which is apparently considered acceptable in uruguay when addressing a very close black friend. how close do you think suarez and evra are? particularly in the context of the match in question?

his intention was to racially abuse evra and as such he got punished.
apologies. hes admitted using the word 'negrito'. repeatedly. which is apparently considered acceptable in uruguay when addressing a very close black friend. how close do you think suarez and evra are? particularly in the context of the match in question?

his intention was to racially abuse evra and as such he got punished.
A lot has been said with regards to Luis Suarez, and Liverpool's full support given to him, with a defiant statement, a cringeworthy twitter post and embarrassing attire, with Suarez's silhouette. Not only is this behavior embarrassing, it is simply choosing partisanship over the rules, with the club seemingly willing to support their star man through any situation. I want to look at the facts, an
d determine whether, from the information we have, Luis Suarez has done any wrong, but also to look at the club's position, and try to understand why such backing has been given to someone found guilty of committing a racist act.

An independent panel found Suarez guilty of racially abusing another player. From what I have heard, Suarez has admitted using the word, and has not disagreed with the generally accepted position that he said this on a number of occasions. Liverpool, very kindly, leaked their stance to the press, despite being told that this should not happen, which has led us to note that his defence was on the grounds that the word used was not intended as racist, and the fact that the term is culturally acceptable in Uruguay. Based on the fact that he used the word repeatedly, and continued using it despite Evra's apparent provocation, I am led to believe that he knew what he was doing, and therefore is guilty of the act.

Prior to the verdict, Liverpool leaked the details of their defence to Henry Winter, writer for The Telegraph, and allowed the story to go ahead, breaching the agreed terms of the case. The importance of this is that Liverpool fans, as well as the rest of the interested public, know one side of this story, whilst Manchester United and Patrice Evra adhered to the rules of the case and remained silent. This has led many to question the validity of the United/Evra case, claiming that there is no evidence, rather than understanding that there is no evidence available. The sheer outrage of Liverpool supporters, has been caused by their own club, and has since been backed up by the vehement, and bullish statement that followed the decision.

The final point that I would make is that until the full disclosure is made available to both Liverpool Football Club, and the public, no one (club or supporters) should have to decide where they stand in the issue. Obviously people will have opinions, but the way that the club have dealt with this issue is, in my opinion, classless and confrontational. I believe that the club have created this division, and have created more of a stir than was necessary, and should have waited for full facts before binding themselves to a position.
 
If someone shouts racist abuse in the woods and no-one hears it, does it make an offence.
As long as there are no bears having a shit within earshot???

What the fuck has that got to do with this case?

What if the intended victim does not hear it but someone else lip reads it?

And why don't you stick to the facts instead of inventing alternate versions in your head?
 


A lot has been said with regards to Luis Suarez, and Liverpool's full support given to him, with a defiant statement, a cringeworthy twitter post and embarrassing attire, with Suarez's silhouette. Not only is this behavior embarrassing, it is simply choosing partisanship over the rules, with the club seemingly willing to support their star man through any situation. I want to look at the facts, an
d determine whether, from the information we have, Luis Suarez has done any wrong, but also to look at the club's position, and try to understand why such backing has been given to someone found guilty of committing a racist act.

An independent panel found Suarez guilty of racially abusing another player. From what I have heard, Suarez has admitted using the word, and has not disagreed with the generally accepted position that he said this on a number of occasions. Liverpool, very kindly, leaked their stance to the press, despite being told that this should not happen, which has led us to note that his defence was on the grounds that the word used was not intended as racist, and the fact that the term is culturally acceptable in Uruguay. Based on the fact that he used the word repeatedly, and continued using it despite Evra's apparent provocation, I am led to believe that he knew what he was doing, and therefore is guilty of the act.

Prior to the verdict, Liverpool leaked the details of their defence to Henry Winter, writer for The Telegraph, and allowed the story to go ahead, breaching the agreed terms of the case. The importance of this is that Liverpool fans, as well as the rest of the interested public, know one side of this story, whilst Manchester United and Patrice Evra adhered to the rules of the case and remained silent. This has led many to question the validity of the United/Evra case, claiming that there is no evidence, rather than understanding that there is no evidence available. The sheer outrage of Liverpool supporters, has been caused by their own club, and has since been backed up by the vehement, and bullish statement that followed the decision.
The final point that I would make is that until the full disclosure is made available to both Liverpool Football Club, and the public, no one (club or supporters) should have to decide where they stand in the issue. Obviously people will have opinions, but the way that the club have dealt with this issue is, in my opinion, classless and confrontational. I believe that the club have created this division, and have created more of a stir than was necessary, and should have waited for full facts before binding themselves to a position.
 
Davie - that won't be enough for Sleater. On the Liverpool thread s/he seemed to want a camera and microphone positioned in front of the entire LIverpool squad, manager and owners publicly saying all this outloud. Sleater doesn't accept that big organisations use their links to the media. :rolleyes:
 
Davie - that won't be enough for Sleater. On the Liverpool thread s/he seemed to want a camera and microphone positioned in front of the entire LIverpool squad, manager and owners publicly saying all this outloud. Sleater doesn't accept that big organisations use their links to the media. :rolleyes:
I'm a he, and you can stick your :rolleyes: up your arse. No evidence or statements have been released by the Club, Suarez or the FA about what was said. If you want to believe some journalists speculation it's because you either have an agenda or because you're an idiot.
 
I'm a he, and you can stick your :rolleyes: up your arse. No evidence or statements have been released by the Club, Suarez or the FA about what was said. If you want to believe some journalists speculation it's because you either have an agenda or because you're an idiot.
so how do we know he said neggito or what ever ,,evra has said fook all. no one else heard. so he has said something then so shut up
 
Says the man who quotes the Sun.
was not the sun mate and would not buy it (lee nicol 14 years old) justice for 96 best mate he was.. so get that one right for a START. sorry having a go at the dirty kopite ...will leave that up in case he starts going down that line.
 
Back
Top Bottom