Suarez gets 8 match ban

[littlebabyjesus]

You mean point out that the article says he hasn't apologised to the person he abused. I'd say that it's entirely relevant frankly. And again, if you'd some somethign like this and abused a person would you have the decency to apologise to him or just issue one via the press??

And still no less stupid.

He's still maintaining that Evra's lying about him, though. As long as he continues to maintain that, he's not going to apologise to him.

Of course, he's also still maintaining that his use of 'negro' wasn't in any way intended to wind Evra up. I, for one, do not believe that for a second, and that makes this particular apology worse than nothing really. He's just continuing to dig afaic.

 

[butchersapron]

I'm not asking about some Daily mail journo's take on it?.

You're not talking about the newspaper article that you posted a link to and then made a very specific claim about?

 

[butchersapron]

Where's the apology anyway?

It's a sorry people were offended by my offensive behaviour apology. I'm sorry you were offended by me behaving like an offensive arsehole.

 

[butchersapron]

A different take on it

http://twitpic.com/837vxs/full

Have a look at the headline in that 'other view' - what do you spot there around the word apology? Even the stuff you're trying to use to support your posts undermines you, even the headline writers recognise this isn't an apology and mock it as best they publicly can

 

[friedaweed]

A different take on it

http://twitpic.com/837vxs/full

That's a pretty good advert at the bottom of that page. I've just applied for some viagra. This needs sharing with the DF

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Where's the apology anyway?

It's a sorry people were offended by my offensive behaviour apology. I'm sorry you were offended by me behaving like an offensive arsehole.

It's not even that. I'm sorry you were offended by my behaviour, which you mistakenly took to be that of an offensive arsehole but actually wasn't.

 

[Wilf]

It's not even that. I'm sorry you were offended by my behaviour, which you mistakenly took to be that of an offensive arsehole but actually wasn't.

Absolutely - though it's very different in tone from yesterday's ranting by Dalglish and Suarez. A sign that the phone call from the owners has finally got through?

 

[Kanda]

Have LFC or Suarez apologized or anything yet?

Or was this an overblown incident where Evra made it all up and it's a load of bollocks?

Just wondered.

 

[sleaterkinney]

You're not talking about the newspaper article that you posted a link to and then made a very specific claim about?

Has he not apologised then?

 

[ChrisFilter]

Has he not apologised then?

Not really.

 

[butchersapron]

What do you think he apologised for and to who? You must have some idea given that its your claim - despite the two pieces of evidence you presented of this apology actually mocking it, both of them recognising it for the non-apology that it is.

 

[sleaterkinney]

What do you think he apologised for and to who?

Do you want me to quote it?

 

[butchersapron]

Yes. And i'd like you to have a go at answering the question i asked you - after a critical examination of the 'apology' of course - who is he apologising to and for what?

 

[London_Calling]

Most definitely feels like a very clear and intentional non-apology.

Just a word for the FA though; though you are generally the most abject shower of incompetent, self-serving shit, well done for getting this absolutely right.

 

[sleaterkinney]

On my phone so can't do a c+p, he apologises to anyone he may have offended.

 

[butchersapron]

On my phone so can't do a c+p, he apologises to anyone he may have offended.

Why do you think the two sources that you used to illustrate the universal nature of this apology first specified that this didn't appear to include Evra and, second, mocked it as not really apology at all?

 

[sleaterkinney]

Why do journalists put slants on things?. To sell newspapers.

 

[butchersapron]

Yes, and sometimes they simply don't need to as the evidence speaks for itself. This is one of those times.

 

[sleaterkinney]

They simply didn't need to - yet they 'mocked' it.

 

[butchersapron]

Yes, because of its patent absurdity and duplicity. Sometimes people do things that are so stupid or clumsy that they are mocked. This is what happened here.

 

[butchersapron]

I must say, it shows the rottenness of your position SK that you are now reduced to attacking as biased or slanted the very sources you presented to us as somehow supporting your own posts. Tied up in knots and you don't even recognise it.

 

[Deareg]

A spokesman for a LFC supporters group has just been on Sky sports news blaming the FA for the whole thing.

 

[TruXta]

That apology, as apologies go, is shit. It is as said a non-apology. And that's arguably another PR blunder on top of the many others that have happened. That said I think it's perfectly obvious why it's come out as it has. Neither Suarez nor, by extension, LFC agree with the verdict given by the FA panel. At the end of the day there is still only the word of Evra against the word of Suarez wrt how many times and in what context the offending word was used. Suarez maintains it was a one time, not intentionally offensive usage in a context where it was ill-advised to use that word (i.e. any English, or even Europea pitch), whereas Evra maintains it was malignly used either 7, 8 or more than 10 times (according to different statements to press and the commission). Seen in that light I can understand why Suarez feels the need to try and protect his reputation, such as it is. That doesn't make it right, even if his version of events is the true one. He should've realised straight off that it was a stupid thing to say and said sorry to Evra at once, in person.

 

[sleaterkinney]

I must say, it shows the rottenness of your position SK that you are now reduced to attacking as biased or slanted the very sources you presented to us as somehow supporting your own posts. Tied up in knots and you don't even recognise it.

I'm not though, did I ever reference the articles to say which part of them proved or disproved my points?.
This is your imagination going off again.

 

[Deareg]

That apology, as apologies go, is shit. It is as said a non-apology. And that's arguably another PR blunder on top of the many others that have happened. That said I think it's perfectly obvious why it's come out as it has. Neither Suarez nor, by extension, LFC agree with the verdict given by the FA panel. At the end of the day there is still only the word of Evra against the word of Suarez wrt how many times and in what context the offending word was used. Suarez maintains it was a one time, not intentionally offensive usage in a context where it was ill-advised to use that word (i.e. any English, or even Europea pitch), whereas Evra maintains it was malignly used either 7, 8 or more than 10 times (according to different statements to press and the commission). Seen in that light I can understand why Suarez feels the need to try and protect his reputation, such as it is. That doesn't make it right, even if his version of events is the true one. He should've realised straight off that it was a stupid thing to say and said sorry to Evra at once, in person.

There is also the video footage, expert witness's and basic common fucking sense.

 

[Deareg]

Also, Suarez's witness's contradicting him and him also admitting lying.

 

[butchersapron]

I'm not though, did I ever reference the articles to say which part of them proved or disproved my points?.
This is your imagination going off again.

Yes you did, when you argued that they were clear and unambiguous evidence of an apology, not only to Evra personally but everyone generally. Do you actually remember your own posts from hour to hour?

 

[Yelkcub]

They simply didn't need to - yet they 'mocked' it.

Suarez and Liverpool FC's behaviour has been disgraceful all around SK. I could see why you'd want to defend your club, but it doesn't make them look any better when their position is this weak, it just makes you look a bit deranged.

 

[TruXta]

There is also the video footage, expert witness's and basic common fucking sense.

AFAIK there's no video footage or sounds recordings showing him using the offending word.The expert witnesses were all about the semantics, not about the incident. Again, this doesn't mean that Suarez' version of the events is the correct one, but IMO neither does it conclusively prove that Evra's is. Anyway, didn't I excuse myself from this thread? Bye!

 

[butchersapron]

There's visual video evidence of the reactions of both players when certain things happened - i.e facial expressions, physical reactions and so on.