Author’s note: This is not about Luis Suarez, or Liverpool, or the Football Association, or the rights and wrongs of the case which led to the striker being suspended for eight games and fined £40,000. Enough has been written on that subject by my peers and superiors in what might be termed the football commentariat; I have little of worth to add, on that subject, and, even as a Spanish speaker and a former inhabitant of South America, have no more qualification than most to do so.
What has struck me as remarkable, in the days since the verdict was announced, was how many people “know” what Suarez said, and even why he said it. This is quite a feat, when the evidence is bafflingly yet to be released. The debate remains one of impassioned ignorance. I do not wish to become embroiled in an uninformed discussion of fairness and unfairness, of claim and counter-claim. This is not about Suarez, or Liverpool, or the FA. It is about what it is to be English, and what the last few days have shown us about our nation.
I should, of course, declare a bias; not the one that has so polarised assessment of the case and of the judgment, between those who mindlessly admit no wrongdoing on the part of a hero and those who have sought to see a man labelled a racist simply so a rival football team might be deprived of their best player, but that of the self-loathing Englishman, and that of the Hispanophile, and that of the natural, inherent contrarian. All other considerations, I hope, have been removed.
THE THREE white men sat in a room. The milky light of winter seeped through the windows. Realisation dawned in their minds. Before them was a case of the utmost complexity, but one they must unpick. They made unlikely arbiters of justice. A former football manager. The chairman of a local FA. A highly-regarded QC. Eminent in their diverse roles, of course, but now placed in a position understandably well beyond much of their experience.
The case was unprecedented: not just to them, but, as far as anyone in that room could tell, to anyone. On the surface, for all the investigation that had gone into it, it was simply one man’s word against another. Below that, at least in one interpretation, it was bound up with issues of cultural relativism it would require a scholar to explain. These three men, the lawyer, the manager, the administrator, had been selected by cruel kismet to unpick the semantics, to navigate between the nuance, and to deliver a judgment.
Luis Suarez against Melbourne Victory during a preseason friendly match at the Melbourne Cricket Ground. (Pic by David Rawcliffe/Propaganda)
What’s in a word? Whichever of the two words allegedly used, no natural equivalent exists in English. It has been used both as defence and prosecution that both the words – negro and negrito – might be used affectionately. Here, perhaps, there is a parallel. The word ‘pal’ might be used affectionately. Indeed, if you were to explain it to a non-native speaker, you would describe it, perhaps, as a friendly placeholder. Have it growled at you in Glaswegian, though, in the sentence “You looking at me, pal?” and there is nothing affectionate about it. The meaning of a word, especially a placeholder, lies in no small part in the delivery.
But what of the reference to colour? In England, that is clearly intolerable. Of that there is no question. Even in an age when we live, largely peacefully, in a multi-cultural society, we are not a country who like to mention colour. And, of course, the offence took place in England. Our house, our rules? Fine. More importantly, the central tenet of what can and cannot be defined as racist has long been seen not as the intention of the perpetrator but the interpretation of the victim.
But, then, in the plaintiff’s defence, his own cultural heritage, his own understanding of what is acceptable. In his homeland, it seems, such words are used simply as descriptives, and certainly without enormously offensive overtones. The Argentines, for example, pepper their speech with the word “che”. Mate, pal, man. It is used almost unconsciously. It can be substituted for a more personalised term, though. Rubio. Gordo. As one of the defendant’s countrymen put it, this is a place where, if you have a big nose, your nickname is big nose. A big head, and it’s big head. If you have darker skin – not black, just darker – then you are negro. Not “a negro”. Simply negro. Sensitive? No, not at all. But deliberately offensive, designed to wound and directed to hurt? Not really.
Both arguments have their merits. If a white English player called a black English player “n******”, it would be an open and shut discussion. There would be no discussion. No ifs or buts. We all know the effect, the loading, of that word. Whichever way you see it, to suggest that this case is not more nuanced, more complex, more intricate is borne of either incomprehension or arrogance.
In such an instance, any punishment handed out – or indeed any reprieve afforded, since it seems the defendant did accept use of one of the terms under discussion –should, presumably, reflect that nuance. Perhaps a minor ban with a far heftier one, one to make clear that not learning from your inability to accept our cultural sensitivity would be utterly unacceptable, suspended above it?
Alas no. The lawyer, the manager and the administrator, looked at this fine-mesh case, this argument of intent and interpretation and this issue of cultural relativism, and brought down upon it the swingeing sword of righteousness. A draconian penalty, a message sent. This is our land. You will play by our rules. Assimilate or die. This is Albion, perfect. Perfidious.
The Football Association’s Independent Panel, of course, are not lawmakers. The FA occupies a curious role in society; it is a state within a state. A person subject to its laws can commit an offence that, by possessing both mens rea and being, in itself, an actus reus, is a crime, on English sovereign soil and yet not be judged by a criminal court. Ask Roy Keane, and Alfe-Inge Haaland’s knee. Aggravated assault? No. Fine and a ban? Yes. Those patches of greensward up and down the land are FA embassies, in effect. What happens there is under their jurisdiction. It is only when those in the stands become involved that the police may intervene. The ones on the pitch have diplomatic immunity.
It gets stranger: the FA is not just a judge and a jury, but a plaintiff in itself, too. That was shown in the appeal of Wayne Rooney’s red card against Montenegro. That, to the FA, is a three-match ban. Except when Uefa’s sliding punishment structures allow, when it might only be a two-match ban. That conflict of interest is unavoidable, thanks to the way the administrative side of the game is constructed, but it is also undeniable. The FA’s reasoning is that the clubs do not want sliding scales of punishment, that Uefa permits it, that there are different standards and different practices. Occam’s Razor, though, applies: the simplest of several explanations is the most likely. The FA has a dual role.
In neither does it make the law. It has, despite that, in the Suarez case, set what might be termed a media precedent. The reaction to the guilty verdict, the ban and the rancour from Liverpool that followed, on the part of the newsmakers was that the FA had taken an important step to show the world that racism in any form is not acceptable in this country. Quite right. It is more than that, though: we must now accept that we believe, as a media and, by extension, as a mewling nation, that the basic rule of society dictates that an immigrant must conform to the laws of the country in which they find themselves.
That is absolutely fine. Consistency, though, is the key. The next time a British couple are arrested in Dubai for holding hands in a mall, or jailed for kissing in a public place, we can only presume not one of the same media outlets who have so heartily backed the decision of the FA’s independent panel will criticise the legal system of the UAE.
They will, of course. Hypocrisy is an English disease. It infests every part of our lives. That became clear with the cringe-inducing international campaign for the national team to wear poppies on its shirts, swiftly followed by the outrage at the very idea that Argentina might be allowed to adorn its Olympic uniforms with a badge signifying the Malvinas conflict.
It is permitted, though, because English culture is so unstintingly convinced of its own superiority. The Suarez verdict has shown that to the world. The panel have taken into consideration the idea that, elsewhere in the world, words are not quite so loaded, colour not quite such a taboo identifier, and decreed that such an approach is outdated. We pride ourselves – in many ways correctly – as standing in the vanguard in the fight against racism. But in doing so we too often find ourselves preaching that others must follow our lead. Perhaps they do not need to; perhaps in Latin America the issue of racial discrimination manifests in a different way, and therefore requires a different treatment.
Besides, our approach is not flawless. There is an allegation that Patrice Evra, Suarez’s target, labelled him a “South American”. This is a strange thing for a footballer to say. It has been suggested that Evra, a Spanish speaker and a close friend of Carlos Tevez, may have used the term sudaco, a word applied to South Americans by other Spanish speakers, and one considered deeply offensive.
Not in England, though. Liverpool’s assertion that Evra should be punished for that insult was, rightly, derided as the last desperate snatch of the damned, a vapid attempt to sully his name in a bid to lessen the negativity around Suarez.
Putting that to one side, it was never a logic that would elicit much sympathy. We may not like to mention colour in this country, but where ethnicity is taboo, nationality is not. An imperfect example: I have a Scottish friend, who is obviously quite the skinflint. I have another friend, who’s black, and therefore isn’t the strongest swimmer. Both of those comments are derogatory, prejudiced and based on the most hackneyed, malicious and inaccurate stereotypes (and, needless to say, are entirely hypothetical and do not represent my views). One will have caused you to flinch. The other will not.
Why should the colour of your skin be a source of offence but the place of your birth, the land of your parents not? Racism has long been a vile stain on our society, but so too xenophobia. Both have resulted in a myriad deaths and countless horrors. It is a question I cannot answer: perhaps we have evolved beyond the nation state. Perhaps racism is the more virulent of two poisons. Or perhaps a culture which continues to place such a taboo on the very issue of race, which is so conscious of colour that it will not permit its mention, is suffering from an ultimate hypocrisy: not being quite as advanced as it claims to be.
Nail – Head – Hit
Great article Rory, now retire from ‘The Game’, ‘Life’s a Pitch’ and return to TAW.
Hari has it spot on.
Nail – Head – Hit.
Very good article. I’ve become annoyed over the last few days with the argument that “he has lived in Europe for four years and should know better” used against Suarez. Tevez has lived in England for 5 years now and cannot speak a word of English (likewise Anderson at Utd) yet 12 months is deemed not only sufficient time for Suarez to not only learn a new language but to also learn which words spoken in his native tongue could be deemed offensive when translated into this language.
This same situation applied to another individual that doesn’t have the reputation of Suarez (the “cannibal of Ajax”, “knocked Africa out of the World Cup”, “diver”) would definitely not have seen the same outcome.
great article! the best ive ever read on here,spot on in every aspect
Very good read.
Bang on Rory and by far the most intelligent commentary written throughout the pig circus the Suarez smear has become
Rarely does the most powerful point come in the author’s note:
“between those who mindlessly admit no wrongdoing on the part of a hero and those who have sought to see a man labelled a racist simply so a rival football team might be deprived of their best player.”
Spot on.
Couldn’t agree more Rory. Throughout. Except for one assertion – that LFC’s call for Evra to be punished is wrong. I don’t see how it is, if they believe that Evra, at the very least, was the first one doing the insulting, and possibly in a racist/xenophobic way at that.
Surely if (and I agree until we know more this is a big ‘if’) Evra first called Suarez this derogatory ‘Sudaca’ term then he is guilty of something pretty equivalent to that they perceived Suarez to be guilty of ?
Agree with the rogbutman. Evra is no shrinking violet and can clearly dish it out.What of the subject of regional racism ?? How is you scouse bastard any less inflamatory than you black bastard.??…. In one instance the police will turn a blind eye(ear) in another the perpetrators will hauled out of the crowd by the hair…..I am all for equality but why should one section of society be afforded greater priveledges and protection above another ???
Drakerichards, people weren’t enslaved for being scouse. No-one has ever been strung up from a tree for being scouse. I could provide more examples, but the basic principle is that scousers have never faced prejudice on the scale or with the same vehemence/impediments on their lives as black people have worldwide.
Seems quite straightforward to me.
“English culture is so unstintingly convinced of its own superiority. The Suarez verdict has shown that to the world”.
Brilliantly intelligent and balanced piece Rory.
You claim to have little to add to what has been already written, but this is THE best piece I have read on this whole sorry affair by quite a distance.
You should turn pro.
Wow!
Indeed. I look at the likes of the BBC’s self-proclaimed “Chief Football Writer” and my head falls into my hands!
But I didn’t know that Evra spoke Spanish! That puts a very different light on the whole affair! i.e., he KNOWS the (in)significance of the word in Spanish, but CHOSE to interpret it in a dubious English equivalence. Are the FA aware of this?
I am a Liverpool supporter, and agree with every word.
Best article ever written, on this or any other subject.
Great read
A fantastic article. Liverpool fans have been derided for backing Suarez since the punishment was announced, perhaps if the club put it’s point of view across this eloquently the backlash may have been reduced, and there would be a greater understanding of the situation.
Spot on. Xenophobia is probably a bigger English disease than hypocrisy, or they at least run each close.
From what I understand though, South American is the literal term of Sudaco, in pejorative way, means ‘greaser.’ Now, surely as we have had two months of journos dissecting the meaning of negrito they could do the same here.
Greaser is far more insulting than South American, and if one called an Italian a ‘wop’ for example, I would expect to be prosecuted. So why not Evra for his slur on Suarez?
I’m not saying two wrongs make a right, but when one wrong goes unpunished, then the charges of bias are very hard to ignore.
This is brilliant stuff. I think you have accurately addressed the issue. i like the example about foreign countries and respecting their rules that govern them (U.A.E). I think Suarez has been victimized here. he has become a media scapegoat and everyone is hammering on his past as enough evidence to justify the unfair treatment he has received. Racism is terrible but this incident is not enough to label a person a ‘racist’. That’s just plain cruel.
Good piece.
Basic fact – all humans are “racists” one way or another – its natural. And it can be against clan/birthplace/cult/religion/tribe/caste etc call it what you like. Its just the sense of other and what you project on it at any given time.
when a term (any of the above) is used as an insult its to draw attention to a generality of the type – and they do exist. Especially when the individual personality disappears under say the identity of extreme belief system.
Anyone who doesn’t understand racism should go and live in Africa for a while and look at the REAL history of Africa and what Africans do to eachother. Its not really about race or tribe, its just about what difference you percieve the other person to have – e.g I employ a black Xhosa woman in Africa. ( I love there 9 months of the year) She says openly to me she hates coloured (mixed race) she doesn’t realise but I am mixed race. Does it sour our relationship? No. Because I make nothing of it. Its pointless.
Malawians have been brutally treated by Cape blacks in SA recently – burning tyres around their necks, shacks burned down etc… Did anyone in England – any black organisations pick this up and offer to educate the Cape Blacks on what is basically a racial attack? Extend a hand of international gelp? No, it went uncommented. it doesn’t fit the romantic idea of who is the victim. Why would British black people care? Why is it alright for a black man to call another nigger? Its very common in the US. … and on and on and on.
Patrice Evra is a pathetic little man. He’s a good enough player but he’s spineless. He’s got so little self respect he plays brutally and then acts victim when someone gets peed off for having lumps kicked out of them. He’s sly and weak.
Amzing article!!
You should put this in the Times – if it doesn’t contradict the editors agendas
You’re an amazing writer!!
The appeal panel should read this. Perhaps it’ll help them find a cure.
You calling me tight ya wee Sassenach? ;-)
Wonderful bit of thought-provoking prose, thanks for submitting it.
well written, but within your first paragraph describing the three men of the trial, you state it’s one man’s word against another. When in fact, as you alluded to earlier, the evidence is yet to be released. Credibility lost, colours shown and bias proved.
The most incisive and balanced piece I’ve read on this affair. I particularly liked the reference to the English couple in Dubai.
And since when did The FA become an infallible beacon of justice and light? An utterly disproportionate response.
Quite simply, the punishment doesn’t fit the crime
Great piece Rory.
Just one quibble:
“Liverpool’s assertion that Evra should be punished for that insult was, rightly, derided as the last desperate snatch of the damned, a vapid attempt to sully his name in a bid to lessen the negativity around Suarez.”
Not sure why that should be seen solely as a nasty swipe from Liverpool. If you’re investigating a claim from someone that they have been racially abused and that person admits using an equally nasty insult in the exchange, it’s extraordinary not to also charge that person. The FA’s rules specifically state that referring to someone’s nationality is the same as referring to their race or ethnicity.
Cannot for the life of me understand why Evra has not been charged. It makes the FA look like a laughing stock of incompetence or bias or both.
I’ll say it again though. A consistent defiant stance on this from the club and its players may not be 100% adversarially watertight, but its symbolic value far outweighs any legal or brand-related risk.
It’s become a rite of passage.
This article is well written, the writer articulate and yet has an obvious slant, in fact in mirrors Liverpool’s stance on the matter when you get down to it and their response was knee jerk, classless and does not befit the Club that brought the world the genius and class of the like of Shankley & Paisley.
for Liverpool to throw individual players under the bus in a statement when it is their player who stands accused was indeed classless and smacks of hatred for the player and the club he plays for, worse still, it sends the wrong message to the players and fans of football teams all over the world that in the eyes of Liverpool football Club, it is perfectly ok to go after a player of a different club and to protect their own player, even though the report on the incident has never been seen by anyone, other than the decision makers.
Suarez should fight this ban right up until the point that the decision makers prove his wrongdoing, I am not convinced right now that he is in fact guilty, I will. unlike LFC and Liverpool fans wait to see what the report says and judge the situation from there, that would seem to be a reasonable approach to take. i do believe that the ban is a disgrace as of now because they should have issued a statement to justify the ban in detail, they better have conclusive proof that he constantly racially abused Evra, if they do not have such proof the verdict should be thrown out.
No matter what the findings say, it saddens me that excuses are being made by both pro and anti Suarez fans, ignorance and cultural mores are not excuses for the use of racist remarks to upset an opponent and the people, United fans in particular are disgraceful for labelling Suarez a racist prior to seeing the evidence and making their own determination.
I am a United fan this forty years, I hope like hell Suarez is innocent and will make up my own mind when I see the evidence they put forth in the official report.
Evra should be charged also for his remarks otherwise it looks like Liverpool and Suarez are being stitched up.
As for Terry, he has a very checkered past as well, I despise the man but he should be afforded the innocent until proven guilty thought of thinking until proven otherwise
Thank you for such a considered response. I too await the findings with interest and agree that is it gross incompetence on behalf of the FA to not be in a position to offer said findings for several weeks. This leaves Suarez and LFC in limbo for several weeks while their player is branded a racist. Something the FA should have anticipated and the gap between delivering a verdict and offering their findings simply leaves a void for the gutter press to exploit. Now as an eloquent Manchester United fan you must surely have been embarrased at the chanting from your own fans last night singing with glee to the tune of LFC fans Suarez song except using the words “Racist Bastard”
Nice to see a well balanced reply from a Utd fan – one point however why are you accusing LFC of throwing Evra under a bus, he admitted in a written statement that he insulted Suarez and then claimed racisum when Suarez insulted him – surely he is doing the same to Suarez.
The whole point is that LFC do not need to see the report, they have a privallge we do not which is being present during the hearing.
The report will only provide details of why the commision belives Suarez is guilty not what was said between the players.
I would first like to say that I wish more people had your view point when it comes to this case…..I think that everyone would say if they found REAL evidence that Suarez racially abused Evra then people would accept it including LFC and their fans
But it is not an excuse if it is true that Suarez said negrito..Ive been in Argentina, Mexico and Brazil and I was affectionantly called the white equivalent term “gringo” plenty of times and didn’t take offense…and no its not because white people are immune to racism as some people think its because people in S. America mostly call it how they see it, I travelled with one of my best friends who is black and he was called negro or negrito plenty of times but you could just tell when you were there that they dont have any racial connotations at all….I mean the way most of them see it (exceptions to every rule) my buddy was black so they called him by his race…what is wrong with being called black if your black? Sure if it was to insult him saying that black was inferior to a different race then thats wrong, obviously. But just thanking my buddy for buying a Coca-Cola and saying Gracias, negrito?
Racism has been turned in (by America and UK imo) as either a pardon my lack of a better term a black or white issue..there is no grey area…either you are racist or apparently a crusader of racial justice
My hope is one day that we can imitate Uruguay’s way of going about racism, its a non-issue
Thanks Lee,
This main is not perfect, just like you and me. But he was sent to the guilliotine if the press and the public opinion witount any professionalism. only with hipocrisy. The commission should be much more professional and undersatand that if the dispute was held in spanish and starten in spanish by Evra then the main aspect was to consider not english culture but uruguayan one.
Regards,
El negro José (and is not a joke)
er, what?! “for Liverpool to throw individual players under the bus in a statement when it is their player who stands accused was indeed classless…”
what were fergie & evra doing marching into the refs office after the game.
It’s pretty obvious this was handbags between 2 pros. Only evra is a little girl, not a man.
You’re the one with the bias, mate.
Thanks for the considered response Kevin.
I’ve also looked at the Manchester United forums, and even accounting for bias was quite unimpressed by the level of debate – there must be other supporters like you who’s voice are not being heard.
I too was uncomfortable about what was said about Evra, even though I suspect it is probably true. I can only see two explanations: either its a club at its wits end of frustration or its a cynical understanding of the furore and the need to use any advantage – a ‘street fight’.
I think they should have only considered going for the ‘nuclear’ option once the detailed statement was released, although I understand what is turning into an unnacceptable delay in its publication is extremely damaging.
The furore may have started with Evra going to the Press with the infamous ’10 times’ and Ferguson hilariously formally complaining about Suarez but I’d rather Liverpool had risen above this.
Ultimately I am concerned that a dangerous precedent of using off-field tactics has been set here, with spectacular and disastrous results. Again I’d rather Liverpool steer clear. Maybe they have no choice.
I wonder if discerning United fans are unhappy with this situation also.
Rory, this piece is very eloquently articulated and hit the nail on the head..
Great work!!
Rory – you’re wasted as a journalist. A piece of faultless writing. Frank, searching, honest, incisive, rational, logical – mere words fail to do it justice. Now, if only I knew what ‘mewling’ means I might have been even more gushing. Terrific piece.
Excellent piece. My worry is that the FA will drag their feet over releasing any ‘evidence’, or worse even refuse to. With the latter, I’m not sure whether they’re allowed to do such a thing, yet they do seem to be unaccountable to anyone.
Brilliant, at last a balanced article. The media are doing my head in, no one seems to get this at all, lazily just turning on the scousers as usual.
Superb piece of writing.
That is a fantastic article. It captures what I was thinking, develops it and expresses it better than I ever could. Why is Rory wasting his time on football journalism which is the last resort of lazy, opinionated hacks.
“What has struck me as remarkable, in the days since the verdict was announced, was how many people “know” what Suarez said, and even why he said it. This is quite a feat, when the evidence is bafflingly yet to be released.”
Thank you, THIS.
Only point I might have a disagreement with is on what the club alleges Evra said. If you’re saying they oughtn’t to have stated publicly that he admitted to having said something and should be charged then I agree, but if he did actually say something then I think the club should file with the FA for a n equal charge. One slur is not worse than the other just because one is alleged to be referring to skin color and one to geographic origin. If both players have said something they shouldn’t, both should be punished.
Most mere ‘football writers’ are worthy of ridicule, especially when they pontificate and moralise on matters more serious than football, matters well beyond their intellectual capacity. This, however, is fantastic. Rory, you are a credit to your profession and stand clearly head and shoulders above the majority of your peers.
Very good article. In my mind punishments for these types of cases really should only take in to consideration the actual intent of the words said instead of what the perceived intent is.
Exactly.
Apparently Evra complained that he was called a “ni**er”, an English word that has obvious racist connotations in an English conversation.
I have only recently read (to be confirmed of course) that the conversation was in SPANISH, the word in question is “negro” or “negrito” (pronounced “negg-row” and “negg-ree-toe”), and the context, connotations and inherent INTENT in what was said are literally a world away.
While I don’t particularly want Evra charged in a tit-for-tat response, in the interest of balance, the FA should also determine and state how they interpret the use of the insult “Sudaca”, by a Spanish-speaking French national in addressing a South American Spanish speaker, in Spanish, in an English “Kick Racism Out” context.
It is quite clear however that there are some rulings the FA are incapable of making: they’ve made their bed, climbing out of it now would undo years of moralistic holier-than-though positioning.
How many blacks are there on the FA Board anyway?
Look it up.
A balanced article, a good read, and some interesting thoughts.
However, whilst making the salient point that many people are already second-guessing what was said by Suarez and have seen him prejudiced as a result, in the fourth last paragraph the author himself makes a speculation about something Evra “may” have said, and we are let to the latent conclusion that could portray him as xenophobic. Indeed, we must all be wary of hypocrisy in our thoughts
This is a brilliantly cerebral article (and I mean that as a compliment). There are so many issues here and this piece seems almost as though it has been written from a panoramic viewpoint.
I think if this case had been put before the CPS, they would have decided within an hour that there was not enough evidence to proceed. The fact that the case did continue and that they took so long shows both the FA’s arrogance and their incompetance.
Easily the best article on the case I have read. Good job Rory!
Good article Rory,
As regards the roots of xenophobia, and why we fear ‘the other’, the recent book ‘Them+Us’ by Australian author Danny Vendramini offers some interesting arguments, namely his theories on ‘Neanderthal Predation’ (NP) and ‘Traumaticially Encoded Emotional Memory’ (TEEM).
It’s an easy read and well worth anyone’s attention. The hardcover book is costly to ship abroad but the e-book is cheap (PDF).
For more, see:
http://www.themandus.org/index.html
And no, I have no vested interest. It’s just a cracking book, wiv pitchers.
Even if he’s only half right, it’s a useful twist on Darwinism.
Mike
100s bra
Great read
Now get Suarez off
Brilliant article. Found guilty by an institution not qualified to judge and vilify. And they wonder why Liverpool have come out in objection to what’s happened.
I am back following you on Twitter now Rory since not everything you do is behind that paywall… :)
Bravo!
Beautifully put… unfortunately many other journos and media pundits won’t agree and still spout copious amounts of bile without knowing the full facts.
Top read Rory.
…including, today, a certain manager with vested interests in another team being deprived of their top player.
Brilliant piece. The perfect retort to the ignorance I’ve been arguing against all week.
Thank you for writing this. By far the most intelligent commentary I’ve read over the last couple of days. Sadly, I fear it won’t make a bit of difference.
While the English FA and media is busy congratulating itself for its vanguard-leading position in the anti-racism campaign, perhaps it may one day consider that they are, perhaps, lagging far behind other cultures? It seems to me that a culture is more advanced when it has managed to remove the underlying stigmas rather than adopt a bludgeoning campaign to ban the use of certain words regardless of circumstance.
I don’t hold out much hope.
Great article although a little more research on the facts would have helped. Under the rules the FA have applied Evras use of the term South American in the heated exchanges is an agrivating factor and deemed just as serious as any reference to ethnicity or race in the cold hard application. You, like all media, have failed to highlight this.
Brilliant,brilliant article. And as many have said,here in the comments,by far the best piece to have been written in the fallout of the FA’s verdict.
A very interesting take on a very sensitive subject!
My only take on the whole situation is why did Suarez feel the need to call a fellow professional (who is French), by a term widely used in south America, if not to cause a reaction and offence from said player? And not only once, but numerous times!
There is no need in the heat of a match to address someone else in this way, bu the colour of his skin! Call him by his name!!
If you were to call someone Negrito in the street in the uk you would probably
A. Be arrested
B. Get a punch on the nose
I think that his use of the term cannot be meant in an affectionate way as it was said in a confrontation with an apponant, and so a ban is fair and just!
How do you know he used the term ten times? Evra said so but also said their would be video evidence to back this up. None has been found. It seems the only thing verified is the two sentence exchange by the two players. Of course, we won’t know until the FA releases the information.
They were speaking in SPANISH! Your leap of interpretation suggests ignorance of the vocabulary used and its context in the Spanish language.
Evra, however, cannot hide behind the same naiveté.
Firstly, if Evra was offended then Suarez should be punished and educated – I do not condone any type of offensive language or offensive acts and nor should anyone no matter the context in which it was meant, the language it was in or the social/cultural heritage of it.
Secondly, this is extremely well researched Rory (through experience and education), well written and balanced. It’s also the first place I have seen the intricacies addressed of the when, the where, and the who i.e. where – England, who – Evra – tri-lingual Frenchman, Suarez – tri-lingual Uruguayan. I feel like this brings about such a host of issues because we are in multicultural league where many players speak many different languages and are from all walks of life and backgrounds. If when I first came the the US I told a cigarette smoker that “I hate f*gs” (no offence intended), was over-heard and branded a homophobe by the US media I’d be extremely aggrieved (presuming Suarez was speaking Spanish and meant no offence and presuming the US media would give 2 sh*ts about what I said!) whereas if someone here had researched/knew the English English language and called me a “Berkshire Hunt” but didn’t get in trouble because in the US this means nothing again I would feel that the world was against me (presuming Evra called Suarez “sud*co”). Bizarrely both alleged words were in Spanish, not English which makes things even more nonsensical. If a Chinese player called another Chinese player something horribly offensive what would the FA do if the word was not understood or “deemed offensive” under rule whatever in the FA handbook?! Alternatively, Thai people are extremely offended if you touch their head – how do you punish someone – culturally unaware of this – for patting someone on the head?! You don’t, you educate them, right? Additionally in which language was Evra offended or which language should he be offended in? French? Yes. Spanish? No. English? Yes.
I just cannot see how you set this intricate case with such a heavy precedent. By all means kick racism out of football but don’t replace it by encouraging xenophobia.
The FA should have been smart about this and released their findings so we could all judge this with all the facts rather than the resulting media circus and headlines of “racist”. Why are they so unbelievably naive?!
Brilliant. Luis Suarez will still be thought of by many as a racist even the verdict is to be overturned. If you don’t believe me, just wait and see. The FA was shocking in the handling of the case, considering the amount of time taken to examine and investigate.
In terms of the question “It is about what it is to be English, and what the last few days have shown us about our nation.” I think Rory knows the answer. So do google.
Great piece Rory. Many a true word & opinion.
Talking of opinion – Glen Johnson should’ve thrown Suraez’s shirt on the floor according to Paul Mcgrath.
Quite ironic from a guest/speaker at a nostalgic Aston Villa social evening with himself & Ron Atkinson (of Marcel Desailly comment fame) in recent years.
Excellent article Rory. Spot on in every aspect. What is most frustrating is that it could be weeks before the panel reveals the reason for the punishment but everyone assumes they know the reasons already.
On the whole, I thought this was a brilliant article.
However, I fail to see the ideological (or legal?) difference between Suarez insulting Evra in a language that Evra speaks fluently, and Evra insulting Suarez in a language that Suarez speaks fluently.
Why does it matter which geographical location the words are said in, when it is a conversation between two individuals?
(That isn’t a rhetorical question!! I’d be happy to be responded to!)
From the other side of the debate here in S.America with a black wife the term negrito in her opinion is an offensive term and would only ever be acceptable if used by a close friend and even then you would excuse it, but still not like it maybe a broader appreciation of other peoples feeling should be considered before you label it a playground spat in a 1eyed on the TAW. This I think underlines the point Rory made earlier, that here in S.America people will sometimes refer to other people’s skin colour when addressing or passing comment on a person but from what I understand black people do not like or appreciate it.
As a Sud Americano living in Australia I can tell you that the word negro or negrito is not an insult in Uruguay or Argentina unless prefix with an insulting adjective – insert your choice here – … Negro, Negra, negrito, negrita is used to when refering to friends, partners, children, sons, daughters etc … like Rory says in both countries racism is manifested in deifferent ways … the colour of one skin is not usually one of them … El negro jefe … that is the title with which our revered 1950 WC winning captain Obdulio Varela is honoured with … El negro Rada … one of our most respected and famous musicians who represent our culture … my parents call me negro or negrito … I am 50 years old and of spanish-portuguese decent … there is little or no negro in me … make of that what you will
I agree with everybody else, 11/10 for a magnificent article!
A question though: Did Suarez really say that 10 – ten – diez – times?
If that is so, his claim of ignorance wanes.
On the other hand; if it’s a term of endearment as claimed, it is in its insistance close to bordering on popping the question.
Hah! You think you’re going to change MY mind, Rory? English hypocrisy & all that mularky?!
Not a JOT!
I agreed with every word before I even started reading!
Well done.
What is racism? It is perfectly accepted that a white person derogatory referring to someone colour is offensive. But for a coloured (black, dark) skinned person, (are we allowed to use any of those terms anymore??) are they allowed to insult white people freely, just because in the past they (I mean their parents/grandparents etc), were once persecuted by the white people.
The FA are also living in bubble if they think nationality is the same as race. If that were the case, Anne Robinson would be serving many hours of community service for her comments against the Welsh. But why stop there FA? What about the city people are from? Words like ‘scouse’, ‘manc’, ‘geordie’ are commonly used with insulting undertones.
It sounds to me – as has been pointed out no actual evidence has been released – that this is as harmless a conversation as it would be if Wayne Rooney called Gabi Agbolahor a Brummie gang leader, and Gabi calling Rooney a Thieving Scouse. Not a particularly pleasant exchange, but certainly not worthy of the FA’s wrath.
Evra playing the race card is solely an attempt to push the FA into this excessive action, he may as well have gone down clutching his head after being patted on the arm.
“We may not like to mention colour in this country, but where ethnicity is taboo, nationality is not.”
Sudaca refers to ethnicity:
“Sudaca, in spite of its etymology (sudamericano, “South American”), is a derogative term used in Spain for all Latin Americans, South American or Central American in origin.”
Negro to colour:
word endings such as aco. arro, azo, ito or (in Spain) ata are used to confer a falsely augmentative or diminutive, usually derogative quality to different racial and cultural denominations: e.g. negrata or negraco (and, with a more condescending and less aggressive demeanor, negrito) are the usual Spanish translations for nigger.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_profanity#Racial_and_ethnic_derogatives
& http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/sudaca
The exchange between Suarez and Evra was reported on 17 Dec in Uruguay as:
Evra: “Vos no me toques, sudaca”
Suarez: “¿Por qué, negro?”
http://ow.ly/887Bu
The Telegraph and The Guardian mistranslated that as “you South American”:
When Suárez attempted to pat his opponent on the head, Evra allegedly pulled away and said: “Don’t touch me, you South American.” The Uruguayan replied: “Por qué [why], negro?”
http://ow.ly/889wQ
‘Sudaca’ is not the same as ‘Sudamericana’, it’s a Spanish *ethnic* slur against South Americans. Reuters report on Uruguayan reactions today:
“This leaves us with a disagreeable feeling,” Uruguay’s National Sports Director Ernesto Irureta told the Montevideo newspaper Ultimas Noticias (www.ultimasnoticias.com.uy).
“A sanction like this is absurd, out of place and absolutely exaggerated. What’s more, there’s the story that the other sportsman (Evra) might have called Luis a ‘sudaca’,” he added, referring to an insulting Spanish term for South Americans.
http://ow.ly/887D0
Remember Suarez said before the case:
”There were two parts of the discussion – one in Spanish, one in English. I did not insult him. It was just a way of expressing myself. I called him something his team-mates at Manchester call him, and even they were surprised by his reaction.”
http://ow.ly/888Sl
Liverpool statement maintains Evra was using Spanish:
“We would also like to know when the FA intend to charge Patrice Evra with making abusive remarks to an opponent after he admitted in his evidence to insulting Luis Suárez in Spanish in the most objectionable of terms.”
I think Evra said in part-English, part-Spanish “Get your hands off me, Sudaca,”
So Saurez mocked the insult and Evra’s use of Spanish by replying in the same language, with the more ambiguous “¿Por qué, negro?”
Evra was insulting, he provoked it and uttered the only unambiguous racial / ethnic slur ‘Sudaca’. Suarez mocked him for that with legitimate use of the Spanish word ‘negro’, condescending to Evra and his ethnic slur.
Evra even accused Marriner accused the referee of racism during the game for booking him:
“Evra was clearly annoyed by something and it was also reported that when he was shown a yellow card later in the match, he allegedly said to Marriner: “You’re only booking me because I’m black.””
http://ow.ly/889wQ
The FA have sided with the verbal aggressor, Evra, to make a sacrificial lamb of Suarez. They’ve also ignored Evra’s accusation of racism against the referee Marriner.
It suits the FA to divert attention from their England captain John Terry, now facing a criminal charge of unambiguous racist abuse, but the FA can strike a sanctimonious against Evra and even use the Suarez punishment to hit out at Sepp Blatter – proof they’re playing politics and PR with the judgement and punishment.
I expect ‘3 lions immunity’ generally applied to England players in disciplinary and legal procedures will see Terry off in the courts, the FA then will use that to close it’s own disciplinary process. Suarez is a sacrificial lamb, he pays the price of being judged as using racist so that the FA can strike an anti-racist pose against (a foreigner, how ironic!) – but the FA had to ignore a racist insult against him to fix the case the way they wanted it.
good response!
thank god iam scouse not english.
Meh! I’ve read better
A great read, best picece I’ve read on the issue and trust me I’ve read a few.
Unbelievable to read today that LFC are supporting a racist after wearing the Suarez shirts before the Wigan match, gutter journalism at it’s best!
It is funny how football fans are so incapable of balanced judgement (me included). This article, whilst interesting and well written, is clearly written from the perspective of a friend of Liverpool. The same can definitely be said about all the posts of glorious praise that followed.
When are any of us going to be in a position to pass fair judgement on what happened? Even when the report is published, none of us will have the luxury of deliberating over various different pieces of evidence in the first person (eg interviews, video footage, etc) for weeks on end, let alone be qualified to do so. Perhaps the best we can do is place some faith in the 3 man tribunal that has been appointed by the FA to do exactly that. Liverpool FC have clearly chosen not to do that. I appreciate this is partly (largely?) because they don’t agree with the FA’s judgement on this case. However, it genuinely looks to the non-Liverpool FC public that they are condoning racist behaviour. As someone who grew up watching (albeit not supporting) John Barnes dazzle in a Liverpool shirt, this is a pity.
Why was my post earlier not published?
Please ignore last post!
Thought provoking piece of journalism and i commend you for it.
However, i cannot understand or agree with your assertion that Liverpool were wrong to call for Evra to be charged for his racial abuse of Suarez.
Another point i would raise is this, if the discussion in question between Evra and Suarez had of occurred in any South American Country, it would be Evra punished with an 8 match ban and not Suarez.
Why is this?
Simply put, either of terms that Suarez is attributed to have said, are not racially abusive terms in South America, however the term Evra is attributed to have said is racially abusive.
People also say that it is irrelevant that either of the terms attributed to Suarez is not racially abusive in South America as it is the tone in a persons voice that gives it a different meaning, like the way pal can be said as pointed out in the article.
Well perhaps when someone says pal with an angry undertone, it just indicates you are angry, nothing more, nothing less, because the word pal, still does not mean anything other than friend.
Now, let’s all sing together, why can’t we be friend’s, why can’t we be friends..
is it true that Mackie at Reading got an 8 match ban for far worse and had 5 of those suspended for admitting it? if it is did this not set a precedent?
if so, and the FA’s only evidence is Suarez’s own admission and the PFA’s bizarre idea that the use of a word which may infer skn colour is self evidently insulting – then how can this ‘offence’ be worse?
The FA are using Suarez as a political football – point scoring with FIFA with no regard to the individual – the idea this is ‘sending a message’ is obscene – those claiming victory for anti racism need to have a look at themselves, if victimisation is to be their weapon of choice. The message it actually sends are of hypocrisy and self interest.
Is the FA entitled to insist on education or community work? If so, where is it? Punishment and not rehabilitation?
Why is not punished someone who issued a clearly chauvinistic statement: “you, South American”? Is chauvinism more tolerated in UK than racism? When an European citizen (from country with imperial legacy) adress such a words to an South american is not offensive? Very strange…
would it be ok for german players to call the opposition cunts because kuntz is a german name?
no it would not.
it is dissapointing that somebody as eloquent as the writer of this article can not see passed his bias.
before somebody accuses me of obssesion, I was linked to this article on a football message board.
Would a German player get an 8 game ban if he did?
Great article, and it’s a relief to hear some intelligent thoughts on this topic for a change.
However, I disagree with the comments regarding Evra’s own insult towards Suarez (assuming he actually said it). According to the wording of the FA rule that Suarez was adjudged to have breached (Rule E3), references to an individual’s colour or nationality are treated in the same respect in that they both elevate the offence to an “aggravated” one. Other aggravating factors include references to an individual’s faith, sexual orientation and gender. There is no distinction in the rules as to which of these aggravating factors is more “serious”.
This case is not about the FA determining what constitutes “racism” or whether a player is a “racist”. It is about whether a player has breached FA rules. The independent panel has made a finding of fact that Suarez has breached the rule in question and we will only know the detail of that finding when the full decision is published. Whether the penalty is fair is a different question. If Evra really said what he is alleged to have said then I cannot see any legitimate reason why he too should not be deemed to have breached the same rule and thereby face a similar sanction.
I was thinking along the same lines…
If an incident occurs on the pitch, i.e. physical, or a verbal confrontation more often than not a referee will show both players a yellow card. In fact this occurs even if it is clear that one was instigating the incident but the other retaliated.
Therefore, why didn’t the fa, considering the admission by evra of his involvement hand out the same ban for both players?
I’ve no interest in looking at this from a lfc vs manu point of view, merely talking about consistency, which seems in so many instances, beyond the capacity of the fa
what a superbly written article. If only those fans/media outlets hanging LS out to dry could read this (and actually understand it)…well done
Superb – the very best piece of writing on the subject. Do you fancy the writers job at L4?
Excellent – liked too the reference to Occam’s Razor!
Talking of hypocrisy, might one add the role of Paul Goulding QC? He is housed at Blackstones Chambers – whose members between them do most of the in-house and adversarial work for the FA, most notably in the recent Rooney appeal. Goulding himself appeared as lead counsel for the Premier League in the high-profile suit brought by Sheffield United over the Tevez saga.This FA business is worth millions and millions of pounds a year to Blackstone Chambers. And we’re being asked to believe that this is an independent arbiter in this case when the the FA are one of his clients? He’s not only deeply implicated – and thus compromised – in FA business, but he would have risked all that lucrative business going elsewhere if he’d come up with a verdict that the FA paymasters didn’t like (and it’s clear they wanted above all to send a message to Sepp Blatter). For all the attention of Denis Smith, it’s Goulding who will have led this panel in its deliberations (and it’s Goulding who will be coming up with the written reasons). Conflict of interests? Hypocrisy?
At last some perspective on what is a hugely complex issue.
The main point we should all concentrate on is how on earth the FA have managed to brand an individual as racist without disclosing the evidence on which their verdict is based.
This has resulted in the media pack crucifying Suarez including national papers slating him as RACIST without any factual evidence to back this up.
In fact, it appears to be inarguable that the accuser & the FA have both stated that Suarez is not racist. So why have they allowed him to be castigated in this way? And why has virtually every opinion-maker followed this totally unfair witch hunt?
Rory has explained the reasons why – it remains to be seen if this is picked up in the general press or if the FA and the press hounds prefer to carry on with their own agenda – while at the same time missing the point entirely about the real nature of racism.
Brilliant article! Really hit the nail on the head. This is what I have been trying, but failing, to articulate to anyone that’ll listen for the past 2 days. Xenophobia is just as bad as racism, is it not? So why are us Brits allowed to get away with it? It’s ridiculous.
That’s a fantastic article. I hope this can be published to a wider audience. It simply is THE TRUTH.
… apart from the bit at the start which says this article is not about the Luis Suarez case… it was a bit wasn’t it?
Very good article. Suarez was guilty until proven innocent in the media, and has been given a bad reputation, wrongly.
It seems to be split between fans, those of United supporting Evra, and Liverpool fans supporting Suarez. Neither can make a judgment before they see the evidence.
A mention of someone’s skin colour is not offensive, and I think those who have condemned Suarez have done so in delight of his 8 game ban, which is not justified at the moment.
How can you expect a player who doesn’t speak English, never mind understand our cultural differences, to act in the way an Englishman ‘would’.
I agree with the noises coming from Uruguay, which are in favour of Suarez, but which are from people who may use words such as those mentioned, regularly
#backSuarez
Brill article, we are now too P.C. as a country and race and I believe it is a complete “stitch up”
Superb stuff!
Great read…It is amazing how we all criticise FIFA/UEFA for what we perceive is their arrogant and dictatorial way of administration, and yet here we have a body within our national game who place themselves as social commentators and above civil law, who can make a statement about another nation/continent who have words that have different connotations from ours…I wonder exactly who it is they are frightened of upsetting by their conclusion to this enquiry !!!
Brilliant. I also think it matters that they were having their conversations in Spanish, as Evra is a Spanish speaker. To apply English “rules” to what’s right/wrong in the context of the Spanish language, seems deeply flawed.
Best I’ve seen on the issue to date. As unbiased as a Liverpool fan could be. This should be on a neutral site, because putting it up here automatically clouds the reader’s judgement with the assumption that it must be another piece of rabid pro-Suarez ranting from another blind supporter – evidently not so if they bothered to read.
I agree with all the comments calling for equal treatment. By all means show the red card to racism. But also show the red card to hypocrisy, slander, ethnic slurs, libel. And for goodness sake, issuing a verdict without any accompanying evidence is just plain dumb. And we thought an accusation without evidence was bad enough…
A thought provoking article, Rory.
I too speak Spanish and lived in Spain with non-English speakers for a couple of years – I literally went native.
When I returned to England I had a culture shock – not only did people here need more personal space but I realised I wasn’t as carefree – linguistically I had to mind my p’s and q’s!
Hispanic culture is IMO more honest and free of the guilt that ties us in intellectual knots – you say things how you see them. The language is an expression of that culture.
If somebody addresses me in Spanish I respond in kind – it’s reflexive, I can’t help myself. It’s the Spanish version of me.
So if Evra said, “No me tocas, sudaco”, he has defined the cultural medium and Suarez would reply “Porque, negrito?” perfectly naturally without any malice intended.
The FA commission has, in effect, branded hispanic culture and its linguistic expression racist – I think this could go all the way to the European Court of Justice, after all Spain is a member state of the EU and doesn’t need the English FA making moral judgements on its idioms.
“The FA commission has, in effect, branded hispanic culture and its linguistic expression racist – I think this could go all the way to the European Court of Justice”
I can’t see that happening, but it might be a good thing if it did. One thing that has come out of this affair is that the English nation as a whole has no one common idea from one person to the next, of what racism IS! There was a debate on Victoria Derbyshire’s show on BBC 5 Live shortly after the event featuring 2 black ex-players (if I remember rightly – I don’t remember the names), who could not agree on the definition of a racist insult.
Here we have John Barnes saying it’s wrong & Ferguson & the all-white FA jury saying it’s right! With NO evidence released (and why not, pray tell?).
Does Barnes have an agenda? He could arguably represent both sides of the debate.
Does Ferguson? Do the FA? Of course they do!
Truly outstanding read Rory, the most considered and thoughtful piece I’ve read regarding the Suarez affair. Possibly the only one even.
So, if FA are not going to do anything about Evra racially abusing and provoking Suarez, shouldn’t we report Evra to police, so that they deal with that, like they are doing with JT case? Provided we have evidence, of course.
Also… and this is one thing that botheres me about the LFC statement upon hearing the verdict: why attack Evra in the statement related to Suarez? Instead, just file the racial abuse case against him in a proper manner, as a separate case. It looked like an attack on a victim of racial abuse to many people.
The club statement sounded a bit too emotional, and many people, even among the fans found its form quite unprofessional and provocative.
I personally liked every bit except for the dig at Evra – that sounded quite petulant for a club official statement.
If the Suarez’s defence was done in the same manner as the club statement was put, then no wonder that he found himself in such trouble as 8 matches ban. We fans and the club are under attack from everyone else, and it is a nasty situation where the world v LFC. Not helpful at all, and something needs to be done about it instead of shooting ourselves in the foot!
There is a very popular Uruguayan song named “negro Jose” sung throughout latin america . It speaks of the struggle of all latin americans against all forms of oppression. This kangaroo court should have listened to this song before passing judgement. Then again it might be too much for a proud Englishman.
Close, but the definition of race includes geographic ancestry in addition to ethnicity and therefore Evra’s remarks were racist and of malicious intent.
Good article. A few observations to chuck into the pot…
1: Why did the FA not employ experts in relevant disciplines in the panel? A lawyer, an ex-player / manager and an administrator!? Why no forensic video analyst, linguistics expert, South American traditions expert?
2: Evra’s name can hardly be sullied any further. I’m not talking about the misinformation regarding the other racism allegations, but the leadership of the French national squad in their strike action during the World Cup. To me, this points him out as some kind of professional hair-trigger offendee as well as a national disgrace (from the French point of view).
3: Suarez has lived in Europe, yes, but in Holland where they have this interesting Christmas tradition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwarte_Piet
Maybe the FA would like to ban the Dutch too.
4: Mens rea – handball in the area needs this before a penalty is awarded. Evidently the FA ignore this concept off the pitch. I do disagree with Rory that racism should be all about the perception of the offended party and not about the intention of the supposed offender. If there’s no racist intention, how can it be racist? I don’t see it.
5: In the Suarez case, it seems to me to boil down to whether there was any racist intent in his words, and since the words he used may be racist or not depending on delivery, then surely it’s one man’s word against another’s, unless the FA have video evidence to prove racism of course.
“I do disagree with Rory that racism should be all about the perception of the offended party and not about the intention of the supposed offender.”
I think what Rory was suggesting was that that is how “racist” is generally defined rather than it being his own opinion; a quite ridiculous approach, as it means we could all feign “offense” at ANYthing anyone else says to us! If that is to be taken as the rule, then we can expect a plethora of charges further down the line.
Incredible. Really, that’s all I can say.
But like the comment above I disagree with the idea that a racist action should be defined by the reaction of the offended. If the victim was offended and the intent was not to offend, it’s a misunderstanding. The focus should then be on repairing the “damage” rather than punishing the supposed offender. If he’s intending to make a racially fueled statement of hate, than he’s exactly the kind of cancer that needs to be cut out and thus deserves to have punishment thrown his way.
Cheers for the great article.
What I appreciate in this article is it’s impartiality and neutrality (despite it being posted on a Liverpool FC related site). It seeks not to pass judgment, but merely to elicit thought-provoking questions not on the Suarez-Evra case, but on racism and it’s context in general.
On the incident itself:
Aside from the obvious poor handling of the whole investigation on the side of the FA, the reaction from the two opposing sides have been rather interesting, if not amusing.
I do believe that Liverpool FC have handled the whole saga in a rather sloppy manner. Stemming from KD’s initial reaction to the press to the official statement on it’s website, from a PR point of view it was unwise for them to suggest that a vendetta/witch-hunt against the club was taking place. Liverpool FC have prided themselves with dignity and class over the many few years, and it should have been in this way – dignified, objective, cultured, that they handled the situation until more facts had been established and unraveled.
Manchester United’s response to this seemed more appropriate. Aside from Evra’s official complaint over the incident and the one press conference by Alex Ferguson which suggested that Liverpool FC had been ‘drip-feeding’ things to the media, they remained silent throughout the course of investigation. There was no explicit attempt to reinforce the accusation of Suarez making racist comments/ being racist.
That being said, it is my firm belief that this whole incident should not have been blown up (and out of proportion) in the first place. Football itself is a heated game, especially so in a fierce rivalry match. Words and antics on the pitch should stay on the pitch and remain on the pitch, under the understanding that at the end of the day there is no ill-intention or at the very least, no intention of personal insult.
Evra should have, in proverbial layman terms, not have made a mountain out of a molehill. He’s a highly paid and experienced professional who’s job is to perform at the highest level regardless of heckling by opponents or whatever forms of distractions there might be. He is also a grown man who should understand that it is one thing to be mocked on his skin color (whether or not intentional or accidental), but another thing altogether to allow himself be goaded into losing his temper. That reeks of childishness and petulance.
Countless English people buy homes abroad, live in a country for yrs and never learn the language of their adoptive home. They disparage the native customs and mock their habits and culture. I have experienced this personally. Yet Suares, Tevez et al are expected to assimilate. Even tho they are here to do a job, most likely on a temporary basis before moving on to a new club. It is hypocrisy and a superiority complex as you rightly say. I imagine the author is not english (as opposed to British) by heritage? They would be rare insights and self awareness from an englishman
Excellent article and many brilliant comments by my fellow readers! How refreshing!
Rory, its a fantastic article. Let me tell you the experience I had about this whole incicent. No matter how hard T try to talk to Man U fans or other club fans, they were simply not willing to listen to it and started repeatin Suarez is racist. Many of them are based on the headlines of the article published related to it. Much of hatred towards our player that they simply want him to get disturbed and effect the performance on the pitch. But if Suarez is not guilty, what FA did to him could haunt him in his entire life. That could prove to be way too much for any individual. As a liverpool fan I am really hurt to see one of our player being treated unfairly by FA. Totally unacceptable from FA. FA shuld know that “even if you dont punish a person who is guilty never punish someone who is not guilty”
Good morning to all,
From Uruguay, thanks very much for the best article I´ve read till now about this issue.
Its exhausting all the media evading the real issues how you treated it.
Here every one is annoyed, insulted and feels this as a terrible injustice.
Not only from the start that he wasnt being racist/discriminating (and he isnt), but afterwards if they think (the FA) that it was soooo terrible, why Evra didnt had exactly the same penalty or even more for triggering the event?
Plus, adding all the other concepts and UAE (thats so right) things mentioned, I think you are completely covered everything in a great manner.
Ive always loved England. Its unhappy how FA is creating such a bad feeling from people around the world doing this kind of stuff. Its sad.
Sad also the moments Suarez is having to live through, his family, friends, everyone.
The FA statement also finished with “Merry Christmas”? Because they ruined it.
Best regards!
You can all think what you like about Evra & the FA and reputations, but the cold hard truth is that every other club, and ever other set of fans have seen your reputation plummet in the last few days through your myopic, paranoid behaviour. You’re the laughing stock of the country. And your own fans’ rambling in house articles on the unfairness of it all aren’t swaying that one little bit I’m afraid.
Great article.
This man is being hung out to dry by the English media/footballing fraternity and its a fucking disgrace.Meanwhile good ol JT,against whim there is actual evidence, gets patted on the back for doing his job in the face of his charges.The hatchet job is like that perpetrated against Rafa and various England managers who have out stayed their welcome according to influential media figures,only this time they are trying to destroy a man’s reputation,not just get him out of his job.
It makes me sick,hopefully he can win his appeal and sue every last one of them.
PS. the reason Evra hasn’t been charged is cos nobody made a complaint about what he is alleged to have said,not Suarez or Marriner who both should be rectifying that fact asap.
Im uruguayan and all I have to say is that while Europe was trading slaves Uruguay had black players in our national team. Racism is not in our culture
Great article.
Any chance of getting it in your newspaper, Rory? Not many neutrals will see it on here.
First of all, excuse me about my basic English.
Very good article. I wish to emphasize especially the intellectual honesty and rigor self employed in constructing the arguments.
Who knows, maybe this global world is giving us the opportunity to discuss with the goal of making a better humanity.
Well said Rory.I was fortunate enough to meet you at a European game season before last.I agree with virtually you had to say.When I looked at the Daily Telegraph today and read Paul Hayward’s article and then saw the picture of John Terry displayed on the front of the sport pages I realised that all you say about the hypocrisy of the British press is correct.
Has anyone bothered to ask a black south American or more specifically a black person from Uruguay just how offensive the term is? All we’ve seen so far is a constant steream of non black Spanish speakers saying that the term is not offensive. Why should I believe them? After all they are not likely to ever be on the end of such a term.
I can tell you for a fact that there are certain terms that the white community in the uk use that are viewed as ok in that community but are not looked upon in the same way amongst the black community.
Palito Pereira, from the Uruguayan National team, who plays in Porto (Portugal) a really nice, soft spoken guy (yes, black) responded in an interview (in Spanish) about this and more or less laughs at Evra saying that he probably has some inferiority complex
Translate this site – I can’t find the video yet, it’s in spanish anyway:
http://observadorglobal.com/alvaro-pereira-salio-a-defender-a-luis-suarez-n37410.html
I´m from Uruguay and i have a few things to add to this article.
Here, it´s not necesary to have darker skin to be called ‘negrito’ or ‘negro’, in fact my own fathers call me that way, ‘negrito’, and guess what? I´m what you call ‘caucasic’
Another thing it´s that hypocresy isn´t just an English disease, it´s a human been diseace, in every country appears in a diferent way but it´s everywhere.
Discrimination are not words, are actions and thoughts. We are very descriptive here: an spanish is ‘gallego’ an italian its ‘tano’, a blond person (like Dirk Kuyt) its a ‘rubio’, a fat person is ‘gordo’ and a thin person is ‘flaco’. I play football at universitary league and with some mates on friendly matches. If i count this almost 30 people i find: 1 ‘negro’ 1 ‘rubio’ 2 ‘gordos’ 1 ‘flaco’ 2 ‘pelados’ (bald headed) and one ‘cabeza’ (big head)
Think about this.
Very good article.
Regards
Good read, but what are you saying? I lost the thread as it rambled along. Started out stating this was not about Suarez, et al, and ended up being about Suarez, et al.
Ah well, gets no closer to understanding what really happened than other articles written with less intelligence.
If Suarez had said you African I bet you he’ll would break loose… Of course Evra should be punished if he used the word sudeca! It’s a hell of a lot more offensive than porque Negro/blanco, which has a meaning of why pal/mate?
If anyone in the UK thinks that they live in a superior society they really need to travel more, the hereditary titles and class segragation
alone is enough for the rest of us to shake our heads in confusion and frustration… I thought everybody were supposed to be equal with the same rights, apparently not in the UK !
Great well written and researched article. I just read this on the LFC website from a Uruguayan national.
Uruguay was the first country in latin america to avoid slavery. Uruguay was the first country in the world to have black players in its national team. The first time was in 1916! The first black footballer considered as a world star was uruguayan. He astonished europe in the olympics of 1924 and 1928, and was called “the black marvel” by the french press. The great captain of 1950, world champion in Maracana, was known as “el negro jefe” (“the black chief”) and its the most beloved football player in the history of Uruguay.
Meanwhile, we have England that had its fisrt black player in the national team in 1978!!! They had a FIFA president, Stanley ROus, that practically supported the apartheim in South Africa. The fans used to throw bananas to the black players in the late 80´s.
DO YOU REALIZE THAT ENGLAND IS NOT IN A POSITION TO SEND MORAL MESSAGES TO THE WORLD?!?
lfc statement said evra used spanish to abuse Suares so suares used south american yet suares charged in english law can some one explain
Excellent article, if only the FA would show the same aptitude.
Excellent article as many have said. Funny how both the FA and Evra have said that Saurez is not a racist, yet he has been punished for being a racist! Makes no sense and we all know the hidden agenda behind this.
We all also know that in the case of JT with the CPS it will have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that JT is guilty which the courts won’t do and subsequently the FA will not use the same methodology in branding him guilty!
good job here of elaboration of the topic.
regardless of a persons point in place and time, we each have our own views and beliefs, however formed, we each believe our own truth, it’s as simple as that. We are not it seems always good at understanding or accepting of views that differ from or challenge our own, in whatever form that difference manifests itself. I think there should always be scope for positive personal growth, in terms of how we formulate our own individual judgements and likewise for more formal methods of judgement.
The Uruguayans are a strange breed, they call white people “negros” and will eat you if you happen to be with them when a plane hits the side of a mountain But they sure know how to score goals, I want to see more of them in the EPL.
a good article in general, but it falls down big time on the suggestion that liverpool’s claim that evra should be punished is a petty, desperate act. if the rules have indeed been broken and the FA have a confession, then they have no grounds whatsoever not to charge evra, and liverpool have every right to bring this alleged offence into the public domain just as evra did the original alleged offence.
indeed, liverpool’s actions were more appropriate than evra’s, as liverpool have at least gone through the FA’s own process before revealing details, rather than bitching to the first tv station they could find.
Congratulations for the article and almost all the comments. This issue has grew beyond all control because football is so popular around the world and we shouldn’t forget that originally this was a pitch issue between two grown up, well paid and supposedly professional football players.
I remember when football was a men sport. That’s the way it is still taught here in South America. You can have a difference with any rival, you can get angry, you can get mad, you can have an argument about a referee decision, even it’s normal to pay back a rival’s fault with another one. But at the end of the game you must shake your rival’s hand (who is also a colleague, someone who is just wearing temporarily a different shirt) and go home. It could seem strange or retrograde to anyone but yes, it is so basic.
That used to be the spirit of real football. Even the FIFA president have publically said it and suffered the anger of those who are most interested on looking politically correct than sport and game spirit.
Britishmen like rugby a lot. You sure understand what I mean about the spirit of the game. It refers to something almost completely forgotten: loyalty and chivalry.
This issue must have been ended with a mutual apology and a handshake at the end of that game. That was what two true good professional and good men had had to do.
If FA wants to apply “justice” they should ban Mr. Suarez as well as Mr. Evra because Evra provoked Suarez with a word he assumed it was offensive and got an equal response. As for racism (or ethnic prejudice which is the same thing) accusation Evra is so guilty as Suarez. Both of them deserve the same response from FA, at least. And both foreign professional players should learn that their demeanor on the pitch is a public example for many people (kids included) around the globe and this little mountain out of a molehill as a wise man wrote above is the clearest example of that.
And guys, the most important thing is that even in XXI Century we are discussing about racism, ethnic prejudices, and differences between men. Shouldn’t we have learned?
Maybe this simple and insignificant issue between two millionaire sportsmen leads us to think and learn a lesson.
Many thanks for taking your time to read. Have a good life and keep enjoying the game and the freedom to express.
Fantastic article – easily the most well-thought our and argued writing on the subject. Thanks, Rory.
Great article, well thought out and considered. Although I must agree with several others here that Evra’s initial racial slur is pivotal to the whole confrontation, so it is hardly an unnecessary attack on Liverpool FC’s part to deem it equally relevant. As to one persons view here that Alex Ferguson’s behaviour here was better than LFC’s response leaves me more than a little bemused. Was this not the same match where Ferguson labelled Suarez ” a bit of a diver” deliberately labelling him a cheat, and knowing that his sycophantic press and commentator following would take this up with relish. Having assassinated his character as a player he was already instigating the same fate for his person by labelling him a racist. If this is the right way to behave I am glad our club treads a different path.
So Suarez uses a word that’s ultimately not racist in his native tongue or in translation into English. A word that’s not got racial hatred undertones whatsoever.
In contrast Terry says something that’s nothing other than racial hatred, racial abuse.
In response the FA ban non English Suarez and do nothing to English Terry. Food for thought in itself indeed.
Skin colour has been the premise on which millions have been forced into slavery and subjected to untold trauma. Nationality, much less so. In answer to your question. Context, as you mention earlier, is everything.
Well written well thought through….maybe we are are own worst enemy in thinking we need to defend those less fortunate…. Soon we will not e able to say you are a scouser!!!!!!
Why are the FA waiting for the CPS to make a decision. Surely they should be applying their own rules and standards and not waitingfor an external agency to make a decision for them…..or are their rules and standards so flawed?????
The point about Dubai is completely moot – the reason we protest when people are found guilty of breaking those laws is because those laws are rubbish.
Thanks Tom, for giving us an example of xenopobia, what gives you the right to say whether a law of another country/culture is “rubbish”? You are entitled to your opinion, but that does not mean you are right
Might I suggest the Dubai slant is for contrast. As Brits we tend to preach the ‘when in Rome’ stance at anyone that lands on our shores. Yet when we Brits land on other shores we don’t tend to apply it to ourselves. Is that not a function of if not hypocrisy in itself. The focus of the article might I further suggest.
Stopped reading replies about halfway down, apologies if this has already been mentioned, and sincere thanks that you have had more staying power than me to get this length.
Racism is rife in Britain, and in football in particular, and it comes also from the highest level in the media. Take the example of Blackburn, recently bought over by an Indian concern, Venky’s. Immediately, the knives were out for the new indian owners, and the media fell over themselves to reproduce every faux pas or inappropriate pronouncement from the owners, concentrating on the Ronaldinho angle. The sniggering and laughing up sleeves from those who purport to be serious journalists and high profile football commentators have emboldened the fans to the point where they feel empowered to carry out a hateful campaign against the manager, despite the fact that just up the road, Owen Coyle was doing even worse. The self-congratulation among the chattering classes when Blackburn hit bottom was palpable.
Remember Champion’s league nights during the nineties? When the Italians were labelled as divers and time-wasters, along with the Spanish and the French? Still going on today. I’m not British, as you can probably guess, and I have cringed at every race-related stereotyping during world cups and Euros for as long as I can remember, because as a nation, the British at their heart do not know who they are supposed to be…Are they English? Are they British? They seem to have spent so long telling the Welsh the Irish and the Scots that they are British, that they have lost the moral right to call themselves English…but ask a Scot , a Welshman or Irishman who they are, and they will tell you straight off, proudly, without ambiguation. I know English people want to be English, but their flag has been captured by the NF/BNP, and it ain’t coming back anytime soon. I have loads of English friends, both those I met while living in England, and those who have moved over here to Ireland, and they are the warmest, friendliest people imaginable, quick to help, with a great sense of humour. But for some reason, when a group of Englishmen get together, they quickly descend to a morality of the lowest standard, and race inevitably becomes one of their defining characteristics. It is well known in Ireland that individually, English people are excellent company, but in a group, they are to be avoided at home and abroad. Without trying to stir up trouble, one only has to look at the fact that The S*n is the country’s biggest selling paper to see what the nation is, at heart. I am proud that this rag is treated in Liverpool with the hatred and contempt it deserves. So really, are we surprised that Suarez is villified and Terry given every benefit of the doubt? And also, does anyone think it was funny that the Suarez verdict was released the night before it was announced that Terry was to be charged by the police? So that all the next day, most people were talking about the punishment handed down to Suarez, and not that the England captain was to be charged as a racist?
thanks for your time
ferdia
I wrote to a Uruguayan friend about this. She’s not a big footy fan but is bright (has a Masters in Coexistence & Conflict, aptly enough). Here is her reply:
“greetings from montevideo. I had no idea, believe it or not about the suarez controversy. it’s crazy but here it hasn’t been a topic of conversation. Since Mike posted the link i read up on it. although shocking, I don’t have an opinion. I can see both sides of the argument. here it is very common to say to someone, “che, negro.” without it being offensive…without the person even being black…so it would depend on so many things being able to tell if there was a negative intention to it.”
I don’t usually like your stuff in the papers Rory but this is a cracking article.
YNWA
It hurts me that some have went as far as calling Uruguay the most racist country in the world. If they would only do their research on Uruguay history.
Being Uruguayan I feel that I myself am being judged (as well as Suarez), by those who have no idea of what Uruguayan culture is.
Great article and some very good responses. I wish the board would read all this in order to gain some insight into what they have done. Suarez is being made an example of and he has now been branded for the rest of his career.
Here is something else that readers may want to ponder. Luis Suarez’ grandfather was black. Kind of makes the FA board look a little foolish.
“The FA’s rules specifically state that referring to someone’s nationality is the same as referring to their race or ethnicity. ”
I would suggest that as the FA actually lists them separately in their rules and regulations, that precisely the opposite is the case and that’s why their statement regarding Suarez explicitly referred to colour and not race.
Remember Suarez denied saying anything racist but admitted the ‘colour’ reference. Since that was against the rules and he admitted it, he was found guilty of it. That’s simple enough isn’t it?
I am a big MUFC fan but I must say having read the entire report i am still no better off and I think they’re (Suarez an Evra) are both as bad as each other. I think we in this country place too much importance on issues like this. I will say however I find LFC’s behaviour from start to finish both childish and insulting. To question Parrice Evra and attempt to besmirch his reputation based on his ‘past’ is plainly wrong. We could have said the same about Suarez but didn’t. That said I hope our 2 great clubs can in time get over this farcical display and get on with what really matters the FOOTBALL! Love to all :) hope to see you all on feb 11th for the next instalment. LB
Dear lee,
I don´t know you personally but I´m sure you are no better that Suarez, Evra and me.
First its fine and well for people to claim this sort of language is acceptable to black people in Uruguay. Would appreciate knowing what percentage of black people in Uruguay are say, government ministers? Lawyers? CEOs? Well there’s your answer – if they are accepting it, its not by choice. They are downtrodden.
Second, if Suarez claims he uses this sort of language all the time, would love to know if in his 3 years in Amsterdam he was be comfortable say facing up to Edgar Davids and calling him “negrito” in an aggressive manner. Or any of the many Surinamese he would have encountered there.
This is utter bollocks. The accused knows full well what he did. Not surprising he is persisting with the incredulous denials, its takes a lack of morals to do what he did in the first place.
So the facts
Evra says something derogatory about Suarez’s sister.
Suarez tackles him,
Evra, says why did you kick me, in front of referee.
Suarez says ‘because you’re black’.
Evra threatens to punch Suarez.
Suarez isn’t racist, but he did make a mistake. Instead he should have decked that fucker! end of story!
He would’ve got a 4 match ban, and everyone would’ve patted him on the back.
Remember, Zidane in the 2006 world cup final.
What did you say about my sister? Fuckin head butt into the chest! done!
Question for Sam.
How do you know about the downtrodden in Uruguay?
The fact is, everyone is downtrodden in Uruguay, black people no exception.
absolute perfection Rory! used to read ur articles in Telegraph..don’t know why they don’t appear so often anymore?..writers like u are what we need for liverpool fc.
Personally, I find it kind of funny that mentioning the colour of someone’s skin is considered racism in the UK. It seems like you’re at a delicate stage where you’re so afraid of being racist that you just pretend that different skin colours don’t exist. The funny thing is that this doesn’t at all extend to people from other parts of Europe, so far as I can tell it’s still completely acceptable to insult Poles, Ukrainians, Italians, Portuguese, whatever; only people of different skin colour who live in the UK.
Talking of Hypocrisy – Rooney sleeping with prostitutes whilst wife is pregnant, Gi@@s shagging his brothers wife, Gi@@s shagging Imogen, Cantona assaulting a fan, Scmeichel RACIALLY abusing Ian Wright, Ferdinand disappearing when drugs tests are due. Keane maiming and putting out opposition players on a freqent basis. All this under the stewardship of Mr Ferguson who in modern times is the upholder of all that’s virtous. Amazing how he’s got an opinion on the disgraceful handshake incident but says nowt all about the scuffle in the tunnel at half time.
Probably the best article I’ve read on the issue. Shame I found it so late and that it has not seen more widespread diffusion. Can anyone explain why none of the national papers see fit to present what in this case is a minority opinion? My own impression, and I’m not British although I grew up there, is in line with the article: it seems to strike a very deep chord of latent insular xenophobia, never properly addressed, and so much more easily transposable onto someone who, let’s be honest, makes a great panto villain. Even without a moustache.