Thesiger wrote:Goat Boy wrote: what he said is unacceptable in England.
Since when have the words negrita and sudaca been unacceptable in England?
Is making reference to a players race on the football pitch acceptable then?
Thesiger wrote:Goat Boy wrote: what he said is unacceptable in England.
Since when have the words negrita and sudaca been unacceptable in England?
Griff wrote:The notion that Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong vocal proponent of antisemitism, would stand in front of an antisemitic mural and commend it is utterly preposterous.
Copehead wrote:a right wing cretin like Berger....bleating about racism
Thesiger wrote:Goat Boy wrote: what he said is unacceptable in England.
Since when have the words negrita and sudaca been unacceptable in England?
TopCat G wrote:Thesiger wrote:Goat Boy wrote: what he said is unacceptable in England.
Since when have the words negrita and sudaca been unacceptable in England?
Making a derogatory reference to someone, even if the term itself is relatively mild, by way of their skin colour is wrong and has been unacceptable in our society for decades.
Goat Boy wrote:
I'd go along with this. I don't necessarily think Suarez is racist but what he said is unacceptable in England.
I want consistency though.
fange wrote:One of the things i really dislike in this life is people raising their voices in German.
Oh look it's Christmas wrote:Goat Boy wrote:
I'd go along with this. I don't necessarily think Suarez is racist but what he said is unacceptable in England.
I want consistency though.
Yes.
Re Terry, he's facing criminal charges; the FA might think it's not their business any more, although if he is found guilty in the courts then I imagine he will be hit with a ban or other punishment.
andymacandy wrote: Unless he's jailed, and thus misses games that way (hugely unlikely) then the FA simply have to ban him.
fange wrote:One of the things i really dislike in this life is people raising their voices in German.
trans-chigley express wrote:Worth posting Liverpool's statement:Liverpool Football Club is very surprised and disappointed with the decision of the Football Association Commission to find Luis Suarez guilty of the charges against him.
We look forward to the publication of the Commission's Judgment. We will study the detailed reasons of the Commission once they become available, but reserve our right to appeal or take any other course of action we feel appropriate with regards to this situation.
We find it extraordinary that Luis can be found guilty on the word of Patrice Evra alone when no-one else on the field of play - including Evra's own Manchester United teammates and all the match officials - heard the alleged conversation between the two players in a crowded Kop goalmouth while a corner kick was about to be taken.
The Club takes extremely seriously the fight against all forms of discrimination and has a long and successful track record in work relating to anti-racist activity and social inclusion. We remain committed to this ideal and equality for all, irrespective of a person's background.
LFC considers racism in any form to be unacceptable - without compromise. It is our strong held belief, having gone over the facts of the case, that Luis Suarez did not commit any racist act. It is also our opinion that the accusation by this particular player was not credible - certainly no more credible than his prior unfounded accusations.
It is key to note that Patrice Evra himself in his written statement in this case said 'I don't think that Luis Suarez is racist'. The FA in their opening remarks accepted that Luis Suarez was not racist.
Luis himself is of a mixed race family background as his grandfather was black. He has been personally involved since the 2010 World Cup in a charitable project which uses sport to encourage solidarity amongst people of different backgrounds with the central theme that the colour of a person's skin does not matter; they can all play together as a team.
He has played with black players and mixed with their families whilst with the Uruguay national side and was Captain at Ajax Amsterdam of a team with a proud multi-cultural profile, many of whom became good friends.
It seems incredible to us that a player of mixed heritage should be accused and found guilty in the way he has based on the evidence presented. We do not recognise the way in which Luis Suarez has been characterised.
It appears to us that the FA were determined to bring charges against Luis Suarez, even before interviewing him at the beginning of November. Nothing we have heard in the course of the hearing has changed our view that Luis Suarez is innocent of the charges brought against him and we will provide Luis with whatever support he now needs to clear his name.
We would also like to know when the FA intend to charge Patrice Evra with making abusive remarks to an opponent after he admitted himself in his evidence to insulting Luis Suarez in Spanish in the most objectionable of terms. Luis, to his credit, actually told the FA he had not heard the insult.
Some interesting points there including Evra insulting Suarez in Spanish but getting nothing, Suarez being of mixed heritage (though not strictly relevant) and Evra saying that he didn't think Suarez was racist.
If Suarez can get a 8 match ban without a scrap of evidence what the hell will John Terry receive? He must be crapping himself.
Thesiger wrote:Clint Planet wrote:Well, given that he admitted calling Evra a "negrito" (a "little black man") I'd say he's guilty as charged. I've seen a few commentators who are familiar with Uruguayan culture ...
I lived in Latin America for over 8 years. Negrito/Negrita is common parlance. And it may sometimes be used pejoratively, and other times affectionately c.f. Hey, Negrita (Jagger - Richards).
The punishment looks ridiculous because (1) the exchange of words was not documented or recorded; (2) Evra admitted insulting Suarez; (3) the imputed 'crime' has been punished out of all proportion to the going rate for violent acts against the person committed on the field.
It's hysterical overreaction like this that makes one almost side with Sepp Blatter.
trans-chigley express wrote:Thesiger wrote:Clint Planet wrote:Well, given that he admitted calling Evra a "negrito" (a "little black man") I'd say he's guilty as charged. I've seen a few commentators who are familiar with Uruguayan culture ...
I lived in Latin America for over 8 years. Negrito/Negrita is common parlance. And it may sometimes be used pejoratively, and other times affectionately c.f. Hey, Negrita (Jagger - Richards).
The punishment looks ridiculous because (1) the exchange of words was not documented or recorded; (2) Evra admitted insulting Suarez; (3) the imputed 'crime' has been punished out of all proportion to the going rate for violent acts against the person committed on the field.
It's hysterical overreaction like this that makes one almost side with Sepp Blatter.
I was speaking to a South American this week and he mentioned that he found it laughable every time he heard news reports of Saurez 'racially abusing' Evra. He regarded the term as more affectionate than pejorative (although I doubt Saurez used it affectionately and was likely using it in a 'sledging' manner). He said that what Evra called Suarez was by far the more offensive term. To Suarez's credit he never made a deal about that although he easily could have to get his own back.
The 8 games is very harsh but I suspect the FA thought an appeal was inevitable and wanted to give themselves some leeway for reduction. My guess it will be reduced to 6. As Owen said on the Liverpool thread the guy looks like he needs a break anyway.
To cap it all he now has another one game ban for giving the finger to Fulham fans. Not that I disagree with the one match ban but has any other player received a suspension for doing that?
This, of course, is the best way to give the boo boys the finger:
Owen wrote:
I think the ban is probably excessive but that the reaction of the club has been awful
Rorschach wrote: But the point is that the FA is in no way competent to decide on the linguistic or cultural subtleties of what passed between the two of them and there was no rule in place to deal with the situation. The FA should admit this and make a rule to cover future cases e.g. Any insult based on a player's race, ethnicity or country of origin will be treated as racist and punished accordingly.
fange wrote:One of the things i really dislike in this life is people raising their voices in German.
Clint Planet wrote:Rorschach wrote:Suárez shouldn't have received a ban at all. The FA, as usual, has just made up a new rule and in this case without having the faintest idea what they were judging.
One mistake that a lot of people seem to be making is in assuming that "negrito" is somehow related to "nigger" in English and it really isn't. "Nigger" is a purjorative word for a black person that carries a huge amount of cultural baggage. "Negrito" is the diminutive (and cute) form of a word for a black person. As anyone who has studied another language in any depth knows, you can't just translate word for word.
A few years ago the manager of the Spanish national team referred to Thiery Henry as a "Negro de mierda" or "Black piece of shit". That would be nearer to "nigger". Sadly, he got away scot free.
Mind you, "sudaca" is considered a pretty serious insult here. I couldn't say for Uruguay or France.
But the point is that the FA is in no way competent to decide on the linguistic or cultural subtleties of what passed between the two of them and there was no rule in place to deal with the situation. The FA should admit this and make a rule to cover future cases e.g. Any insult based on a player's race, ethnicity or country of origin will be treated as racist and punished accordingly.
I think that's going to be a tough one to work with but at least there will be a rule to refer to instead of just making something up based on a typically British narrow-minded view of how things ought to be.
Was there any need to make reference to the colour of his skin at all? Would it have been okay for Carragher, for example, to repeatedly refer to him as "black lad"? After all, "black" is not a racist word in itself and "lad" is often a term of affection in Liverpool.
Suarez knew what he was doing.
Owen wrote:Clint Planet wrote:Rorschach wrote:Suárez shouldn't have received a ban at all. The FA, as usual, has just made up a new rule and in this case without having the faintest idea what they were judging.
One mistake that a lot of people seem to be making is in assuming that "negrito" is somehow related to "nigger" in English and it really isn't. "Nigger" is a purjorative word for a black person that carries a huge amount of cultural baggage. "Negrito" is the diminutive (and cute) form of a word for a black person. As anyone who has studied another language in any depth knows, you can't just translate word for word.
A few years ago the manager of the Spanish national team referred to Thiery Henry as a "Negro de mierda" or "Black piece of shit". That would be nearer to "nigger". Sadly, he got away scot free.
Mind you, "sudaca" is considered a pretty serious insult here. I couldn't say for Uruguay or France.
But the point is that the FA is in no way competent to decide on the linguistic or cultural subtleties of what passed between the two of them and there was no rule in place to deal with the situation. The FA should admit this and make a rule to cover future cases e.g. Any insult based on a player's race, ethnicity or country of origin will be treated as racist and punished accordingly.
I think that's going to be a tough one to work with but at least there will be a rule to refer to instead of just making something up based on a typically British narrow-minded view of how things ought to be.
Was there any need to make reference to the colour of his skin at all? Would it have been okay for Carragher, for example, to repeatedly refer to him as "black lad"? After all, "black" is not a racist word in itself and "lad" is often a term of affection in Liverpool.
Suarez knew what he was doing.
Exactly,
i doubt if the FA has a list of acceptable and unacceptable words, any reference to someones skin colour on the field of play that gets reported (and admitted to by suarez) is bound to be breaking the rules and under their jurisdiction.
whether the south american comments are just as bad or worse neither Suarez or an official made a complaint about them. You could argue that if in the course of the hearing it was established they were said then maybe evra needs a ban as well but suarez still doesn't have a leg to stand on