Suarez ban

Fitba' crazy, fitba' mad. But mostly mad. And angry
User avatar
PENK
Midnight to Six Man
Posts: 34727
Joined: 07 Aug 2004, 20:12
Location: Stockholm

Re: Suarez ban

Postby PENK » 29 Dec 2011, 12:39

Evra certainly seemed to take it as a bit of harmless affection. Not at all an attempt to anger him. Oh no.
Copehead wrote:I have met Gruff Rhys - although he claimed he wasn't and that he couldn't speak Welsh, as I spoke to him in Welsh, but it was him lying bastard.

User avatar
Owen
definitely not Travolta
Posts: 14658
Joined: 17 Jul 2003, 22:52
Contact:

Re: Suarez ban

Postby Owen » 29 Dec 2011, 12:50

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

User avatar
Geezee
Posts: 12333
Joined: 24 Jul 2003, 10:14
Location: Where joy divides into vision

Re: Suarez ban

Postby Geezee » 29 Dec 2011, 15:13

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



...and regardless of whether the FA or incompetent or not, i sincerely doubt that they would come to this decision in a vacuum without consulting a variety of authorities first. Rorschach makes the common mistake as well of just assuming that the N word in English is a "bad word" - when its original meaning was not (eg. Nigger of Narcissus etc), and it has since been taken over by black people in a positive way...and i sincerely doubt if it was used in that latter context that anyone would have a problem with it (though it still makes me uncomfortable).

I've heard loads of people refer to their "South American friends" who claim there is no racist connotation in what was said and are up in arms about the UK's PC-fetish (and i heard the same argument over the Aragones debacle) - and it is certainly not as clearcut as that. I've heard just as many local commentators argue precisely the opposite - they acknowledge that it's used very frequently, but not that it is "accepted" as completely non-volatile...which is precisely why it is by no means used by politicians or business leaders. again, I'm fairly confident the FA would have done their research on this - or perhaps i'm giving them too much credit.
Smilies are ON
Flash is OFF
Url is ON

User avatar
Thesiger
Posts: 20156
Joined: 08 Aug 2003, 17:12
Location: Old Meadow

Re: Suarez ban

Postby Thesiger » 29 Dec 2011, 18:36

Owen wrote: 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.


Law 12 (Sendings Off) includes offensive, insulting or abusive language/gestures. There's nothing specifically about references to race or colour.
BCB Cup - R.U. 2010: W 2012

User avatar
trans-chigley express
Posts: 17504
Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 01:50
Location: Asia's WC

Re: Suarez ban

Postby trans-chigley express » 30 Dec 2011, 00:47

Is it known for sure that Suarez got his ban for "negrito"? As far as I know that was what he admitted to saying but isn't it possible that Evra maintains he said something else that hasn't been made public? The full 50 page (50!!) FA report should be made public soon which may make things clearer. Or not.

The worst outcome of this case is not the ban at all but the fact Suarez will be permanently tainted with the racist tag which must hurt. It's one thing being disliked for being a bit of a nutter and a cheater but quite another being branded a racist.

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 66682
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: Suarez ban

Postby Diamond Dog » 30 Dec 2011, 07:38

trans-chigley express wrote:The worst outcome of this case is not the ban at all but the fact Suarez will be permanently tainted with the racist tag which must hurt. It's one thing being disliked for being a bit of a nutter and a cheater but quite another being branded a racist.



I guess the answer is not to use terms that could be construed as racist, then.

Hopefully he, and others, will learn that using the colour of a persons skin - whether in jest, 'affectionately', or just in an outright racist fashion - to make any point, will not and should not be condoned. It is a harsh sentence, maybe, but the point has been made.

Now let's hope the FA are as draconian when it comes to the England captain......
1-800-288-8372

User avatar
The Prof
Composing a revolutionary symphony
Posts: 45164
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:32
Location: A Metropolis of Discontent

Re: Suarez ban

Postby The Prof » 30 Dec 2011, 12:00

Rated B wrote:Good to see Liverpool fans at their usual high level of classy behaviour...

http://twitter.com/#!/StanCollymore/favorites

Cunts.


Fucking hell - is that what people do on Twitter?

Jeez - I despair.

User avatar
trans-chigley express
Posts: 17504
Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 01:50
Location: Asia's WC

Re: Suarez ban

Postby trans-chigley express » 30 Dec 2011, 12:42

Twitter attracts pond life. I'm glad I've never gone near it.

User avatar
Rorschach
Posts: 1866
Joined: 02 Jun 2008, 12:43

Re: Suarez ban

Postby Rorschach » 31 Dec 2011, 11:50

I guess if you live in one country all your life then it's going to be difficult to see past the attitudes you've been brought up with.

Owen wrote:
Clint Planet wrote: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


I think we can all agree that, in Britain, it is not considered acceptable to refer to someone by their race or sking colour in the way that Suárez did. Indeed, as I suggested before, the FA should have a rule about it and then there would be no excuses and everyone should know what is not allowed and what punishment they can expect if they break the rule. However, they didn't have that rule in place and still don't. They just made up a crime and a punishment. A bit like Owen's first sentence.

A year is nowhere near long enough to fully take on board the cultural mores of a society and bear in mind that I speak from experience as opposed to those who say that it is enough time. For all we or the FA know, Suárez may have considered his way of speaking completely normal and not felt that referring to someone's skin colour was a bad thing.
If there were a rule or a law to say otherwise then he should be punished because it's his business to find out about these things but there isn't.
Bugger off.

User avatar
Rorschach
Posts: 1866
Joined: 02 Jun 2008, 12:43

Re: Suarez ban

Postby Rorschach » 31 Dec 2011, 11:56

Geezee wrote:
...and regardless of whether the FA or incompetent or not, i sincerely doubt that they would come to this decision in a vacuum without consulting a variety of authorities first. Rorschach makes the common mistake as well of just assuming that the N word in English is a "bad word" - when its original meaning was not (eg. Nigger of Narcissus etc), and it has since been taken over by black people in a positive way...and i sincerely doubt if it was used in that latter context that anyone would have a problem with it (though it still makes me uncomfortable).


I know you're not a native speaker so I'll just explain that not competent to do something doesn't mean incompetent. It means not having the means or knowledge to do something.

And the original meaning of nigger is irrrelevant as is the current, positive use by, mainly, African Americans. In the context everyone, including you, understood what I meant.
Bugger off.

The Modernist

Re: Suarez ban

Postby The Modernist » 31 Dec 2011, 13:12

But they did have the knowledge. They were aware that the word 'negrita' has multiple usages and can carry many different associations in South America. That's why the case took so long to investigate. However they concluded that Suarez was using ethnicity to wind up Evra, and it can be used in a pejorative way along with its many other uses. I don't see why such a conclusion was unsound.

User avatar
Butch Manly
Utter Cad
Posts: 51166
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Suarez ban

Postby Butch Manly » 31 Dec 2011, 14:31

Rorschach wrote:I think we can all agree that, in Britain, it is not considered acceptable to refer to someone by their race or sking colour in the way that Suárez did. Indeed, as I suggested before, the FA should have a rule about it and then there would be no excuses and everyone should know what is not allowed and what punishment they can expect if they break the rule. However, they didn't have that rule in place and still don't. They just made up a crime and a punishment. A bit like Owen's first sentence.

A year is nowhere near long enough to fully take on board the cultural mores of a society and bear in mind that I speak from experience as opposed to those who say that it is enough time. For all we or the FA know, Suárez may have considered his way of speaking completely normal and not felt that referring to someone's skin colour was a bad thing.
If there were a rule or a law to say otherwise then he should be punished because it's his business to find out about these things but there isn't.


Thesiger wrote: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


So do you think he was using it affectionately or pejoratively, Tym?
Goatboy to Belle:

"I suggest you retreat to the safety of your Facebook bubble. Griff has a post he needs you to like."

User avatar
Rorschach
Posts: 1866
Joined: 02 Jun 2008, 12:43

Re: Suarez ban

Postby Rorschach » 31 Dec 2011, 18:20

Clint Planet wrote:So do you think he was using it affectionately or pejoratively, Tym?


My guess would be that he was using it perjoratively but, like you and the FA, I don't know. The fact that he so readily admitted to what he'd said even though it couldn't otherwise have been proven makes me wonder.

So, I would say (again) that as we don't know for sure what he intended and there was no rule to cover the situation he shouldn't have been punished. This was an opportunity for the FA to clear up the whole issue to avoid future cases but instead they've just made an arbitrary stop-gap decision.
Bugger off.

User avatar
andymacandy
"Liberal Airhead"
Posts: 29971
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 18:26
Location: MacAndys Farm

Re: Suarez ban

Postby andymacandy » 31 Dec 2011, 18:42

Rorschach wrote: The fact that he so readily admitted to what he'd said even though it couldn't otherwise have been proven makes me wonder.


A very good point.

I wonder if Liverpool are holding the appeal pending Terry's case.
Puts the FA in the position of having to treat them on an "equal" standing,
which Im sure they don't really like.
Not (I suspect) that the FA like having to take any kind of firm action.
Bless the weather.......Image

User avatar
Butch Manly
Utter Cad
Posts: 51166
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Suarez ban

Postby Butch Manly » 31 Dec 2011, 18:55

Goatboy to Belle:

"I suggest you retreat to the safety of your Facebook bubble. Griff has a post he needs you to like."

User avatar
Butch Manly
Utter Cad
Posts: 51166
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Suarez ban

Postby Butch Manly » 31 Dec 2011, 19:24

Suarez deemed as unreliable as a witness. Evra's evidence largely consistent. Interestingly, Suarez used the term "negro," not "negrito." The latter would seem to be some sort of LFC spin.

The experts [because they did actually employ some, it seems] reviewed the paragraphs in Mr Evra's witness statement where he described
what happened in the goalmouth, together with video clips of the goalmouth coming
together. They proceeded, for the purpose of this part of their report, on the basis that the
substance of Mr Evra's account was accurate (ie allowing for linguistic errors made by a
non-native speaker of Spanish). Having done so, the experts provided the following
observations on Mr Evra's account.
178. Mr Evra stated that the goalmouth incident started when he addressed Mr Suarez,
beginning with the phrase "Concha de tu hermana". According to the experts, the literal
translation is "your sister's ****" and it can be taken as a general swear word expressing
anger, although the word "concha" is not as taboo as the English word "****". It is thus
equivalent to "****ing hell" or "**** me". If directed at someone in particular, it can also be
understood as "[you] son of a bitch".
179. Assuming Mr Suarez responded with "Porque tu eres negro", this would be interpreted in
Uruguay and other regions of Latin America as racially offensive. When the noun is used
in the way described by Mr Evra, it is not a friendly form of address, but is used in an
insulting way: it is given as the rationale for an act of physical aggression (the foul), as if
the person deserved such an attack since they are black

The experts concluded their observations on Mr Evra's account as follows. If Mr Suarez
used the words "negro" and "negros" as described by Mr Evra, this would be understood
as offensive and offensive in racial terms in Uruguay and Spanish-speaking America more
generally. The physical gesture of touching Mr Evra's arm would also, in the context of the
phrases used, be interpreted as racist.
Goatboy to Belle:

"I suggest you retreat to the safety of your Facebook bubble. Griff has a post he needs you to like."

User avatar
Butch Manly
Utter Cad
Posts: 51166
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Suarez ban

Postby Butch Manly » 31 Dec 2011, 19:27

306. An alternative explanation is that Mr Suarez was aware that he had said to Mr Evra
"Porque tu eres negro", and that this might have been overheard or caught on camera. 78
When he was questioned about it in the aftermath of the game, he did say that he had said
"Porque tu es/eres negro", as both Mr Comolli and Mr Kuyt understood at the time but he
sought to cast it in a different and better light. Subsequently, he changed that account to
explain that he used the word in a friendly and conciliatory way that was common in
Uruguay.
Goatboy to Belle:

"I suggest you retreat to the safety of your Facebook bubble. Griff has a post he needs you to like."

User avatar
Butch Manly
Utter Cad
Posts: 51166
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Suarez ban

Postby Butch Manly » 31 Dec 2011, 19:54

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.


According to the Beeb website, they have these rules:

Rule E3(1): "A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour."

"In the event of any breach of Rule E3(1) including a reference to any one or more of a person's ethnic origin, colour, race, nationality, faith, gender, sexual orientation or disability (an "aggravating factor"), a Regulatory Commission shall consider the imposition of an increased sanction."
Goatboy to Belle:

"I suggest you retreat to the safety of your Facebook bubble. Griff has a post he needs you to like."

User avatar
Butch Manly
Utter Cad
Posts: 51166
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:22
Location: 16 Beasley Street

Re: Suarez ban

Postby Butch Manly » 31 Dec 2011, 19:59

432. The second aggravating factor was what Mr Suarez said when using the insulting words. He did not simply use the word "negro" to address Mr Evra. He did that, but he also said that he had kicked Mr Evra because he was black, and that he did not talk to blacks. Even if Mr Suarez said these things in the heat of the moment without really meaning them, nevertheless this was more than just calling Mr Evra "negro". According to the Spanish language experts, the uses would have been regarded as racially offensive in Uruguay.
Goatboy to Belle:

"I suggest you retreat to the safety of your Facebook bubble. Griff has a post he needs you to like."

User avatar
trans-chigley express
Posts: 17504
Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 01:50
Location: Asia's WC

Re: Suarez ban

Postby trans-chigley express » 01 Jan 2012, 00:21

I'd pointed out earlier that no one really knew for sure if the word "negrito" was what Suarez said. I think the word "Negro" makes a big difference even if Suarez never meant it as a racial slur and the fact that he openly admitted to it when he could easily have denied it given the lack of evidence other than what Evra claims, supports this. I can't make judgements on what is considered racist in other countries; I sometimes get referred to by a local term that relates directly to my skin colour in a completely non-racist way.

There are certainly big differences between the two versions of events and If Evra's version is true Suarez deserves the ban, if Suarez's version is true then it's harsh. It's still very much one word against another and it boils down to the FA believing Evra's version:

Evra's version of events
Evra: Why did you kick me?
Suarez: Because you are black.
Evra: Say that to me again. I'm going to punch you.
Suarez: I don't speak to blacks.
Evra: I'm going to punch you.
Suarez: OK, blackie, blackie, blackie. Suarez then touched Evra's arm, gesturing at his skin.
Evra: Ref, ref, he just called me a fucking black.

Suarez's version of events
Evra: Why did you kick me?
Suarez (shrugging): It was a normal foul.
Evra: I'm going to kick you.
Suarez: Shut up. (Suarez then touched Evra's arm in a pinching-style movement).
Evra: Don't touch me, South American.
Suarez: Por que, negro (Why, black?)

tbh I know Suarez can be a bit of a nutter but I find the Evra version quite hard to believe.



115 pages!