By Karl Coppack
Those Bloody T-Shirts
Well, there it is. From thieves and dole scroungers to murderers to murderers of our own to racists. How long before charges of paedophilia for the full set? Oh, we hit women now too.
The Suarez debate has stopped being just that – a debate. A pyrrhic victory in some ways as we’ve defended our man but lost the war but we’ve since been defeated on more battlefields than this as now every journalist with an agenda can promote their prejudices from beneath the safety blanket of ‘supporting anti-racism’.
It’s open day on Liverpool, folks, strap on a few hand grenades and join in. You can’t lose this one.
The argument is tiresome and the cards are so heavily stacked against us that we couldn’t win either way. Personally I think Suarez was right to get a ban, not an eight game ban, but a ban nevertheless mostly for being bloody stupid or naive.
Nice old Patrice Evra isn’t going to miss the opportunity to point the finger and in some ways I can’t blame him. If someone addressed my girlfriend (of African descent) as ‘negro’ I wouldn’t be asking which part of Uruguay he was from and begin painstaking research as to the cultural background of the term, I’d be requesting a private meeting in a lonely place to discuss it further.
I have selfish reasons for thinking a one or two game ban would be appropriate as one thing Suarez needs from a footballing perspective is a rest. Any chance of a small, reasonable ban, an explanation of the misunderstanding and a handshake (unlikely to be accepted) and back to the match?
Nah, that’s far too sensible. Now every gobshite with a keyboard can wade in.
YES! WE ARE ALL INDIVIDUALS!
The first club statement was bullish, childish, crass and glorious in equal measure while the T-shirts were brave but were open to misinterpretation by those who wanted to misinterpret it and view it as a KKK party conference rather than the support of, in their view, an innocent man.
At that point the gloves were off and we were fair game. Holt, Lipton, Barclay and Samuel couldn’t get to their desks quick enough. Yes, we could argue back but they had the perfect rejoinder. ‘We’re not anti-Liverpool, we’re anti-racism. You’re being too tribalistic and missing the wider issue.’
Oh do fuck off and fuck off twice.
Is there anyone who seriously thinks that this pond life and the fans who will shouting about Suarez are putting their protective mitts over the ears of every member of every ethnic minority in the interests of multi-culturalism? Are they thinking only of the children?
The one thing this whole debacle is not about is race and racism. It’s not about doing the right thing or saying the right thing, it’s about being seen to do the right thing.
This is about agendas and prejudice. As mentioned in the last podcast, the Mirror were shouting ‘racists’ at us before the police had even got to Friday’s miscreant and had little to with Tom Adeyemi.
If that story is about racial issues in the country where is the universal condemnation of John Terry and the effect it’s had on Anton Ferdinand? It all about agendas.
Is John Terry a racist, sorry, ‘brave’ John Terry a racist? I’m not sure. Would we like him to be a racist? Ah. A more definite answer and one that applies to Luis Suarez and Liverpool Football Club.
It goes both ways of course.
Was Patrice Evra genuinely offended or is he using it as a bat to beat the player and the club? I’d go for ‘I don’t know and I know what I’d like to be the case.’
Of course it’s tribal to that extent and in Barclay and his chums’ view it’s impossible for us simple folk to stand outside the confines of club loyalty to see the wider picture. That’s a very convenient argument for starting a smear campaign.
We can either take the criticism or be perceived to be paranoid. Criticise the Kick Racism out of Football campaign for failing to point out that Suarez was convicted as ‘probably’ guilty in their over-zealous statement and suddenly you’re criticising the campaign itself.
Then you’re just a hop, skip and a jump away from being racist. It’s an easy route and an easy accusation. I’ve been told to ‘hang my head in shame’ this week simply for supporting Liverpool. Quite.
The press are of course having no end of joy with this as evidenced by Patrick Barclay’s tweets from earlier this week. Let’s look at the highlights
‘What of Liverpool’s outreach programmes now? I mean – you’d recoil, wouldn’t you?’
Then this retweet – ‘Imagine if Luis Suarez showed up at your community centre…’
How can does he back this nonsense up?
‘Predictably, a bit of the response was tribal. And that’s the disease. Only KD can cure it.’
Tribalism is the disease? Defending your player because you consider an accusation of racism to be false is now tribalism? He went on with this –
‘I’d be especially interested to hear the views of black and mixed-race people, whether Liverpool fans or otherwise. Thanks.’
I was all over that like Skrtel on a forward’s back while defending a corner, stating that my girlfriend’s national team has been wronged by Suarez so she could bear a tribal grudge but she considers the whole incident to cheapen the racism debate by turning into a panto and that it’s people like Barclay using this opportunity to attack some (but not all) people, support and clubs under the name of anti-racism while ignoring the wider issues that is the problem. He chose not to reply.
The Friday incident added further fuel to an already roaring fire. The charge is as yet unproven but what the hell does matter if you’ve got the word ‘probably’ hanging about the place?
One idiot shouts something and suddenly the story changes again. It’s not one idiot after all, suddenly it’s ‘the Kop’. Well, I was on the Kop that night and I wasn’t abusing anyone. I wasn’t booing either and most of those that were did so as it looked like timewasting.
It was a genuine misunderstanding but you can convict on misunderstandings these days. Naturally that story was lost in the media condemnation of entire stands singing Hillsborough songs and ‘Anton Ferdinand – you know what you are’ and…sorry must have been dreaming.
I was talking to a mate about Oldham’s very dignified and classy statement where they thanked the club for their support and wished us well in the next round. He reckoned the Mirror were already drafting a headline which read ‘RACIST SYMPATHISERS!’
I pointed out this lack of balance in the press between one anus of a human being shouting something and Utd and Chelsea fan singing songs in unison to a journalist on Twitter and, well you’re ahead of me aren’t you? He told me to stop being paranoid and tribal and that the debate was about racism and not Liverpool Football Club. Ah well.
If only it were. I’ve heard some unpleasant things at away games over the years and they were said by dickheads which is always going to the case if there thousands of people in an enclosed place as dickheads are prevalent in society but I’ve never heard an entire stand abuse a footballer for the colour of his skin. I’ve seldom seen the press slate those that do it either.
If the debate was governed under the sole banner of racism and what it constitutes rather than petty squabbles between the press and the club, the FA and Blatter and LFC and United we may actually take something from this whole sorry affair.
Instead the cause is cheapened by those keen to air their cack-handed and glib views.
Fat bloated white men telling a man of mixed race what is racist. Gap toothed shaven headed goons using race as a stick to beat the club…its too funny for words
It’s just a fucking witch hunt and, because it’s a witch hunt, most journalists are too spineless to chance looking at the other side of the argument. Just make sure you’re up there with all the other sheep, claiming your stake of the moral high ground, and fuck fairness, balance and real justice. Even a paper as apparently even handed as The Independent ran four separate features on LFC the day after the defeat to MCFC at Eastlands, all of which at some point made reference to the FA report, Suarez’ alleged ‘racism’, and how ‘stupid’ the club and KK had been in their efforts to support him, instead of just focussing on the match. If that isn’t a journalistic agenda, then i don’t know what is.
Now, i don’t for one minute believe that Suarez is an angel. In fact i believe him to be a Robbie Savage-style wind up merchant, but i do believe he made a mistake and is now being crucified for it. I can’t see him hanging around beyond the end of this season and sadly, i wouldn’t blame him. Would you want to live in a country where the majority have you written off as the lowest of the low, a racist scumbag, and no doubt will remind you of it every time you enter a football stadium? How will it affect his family? Are they getting abuse by proxy?
I will never again spend money on a british newspaper. the shameless bastards.
I read an article on the Counterfire website which stated the people on the Kop wearing Suarez t-shirts are racists and Luis has become their mascot! When I challenged this I received a reply which ignored my complaint and personally insulted my probable mental state, saying I must be in denial.
Liverpool and Suarez set the mood here. Suarez admitting his evasiveness whilst only apologising after it was all over. Liverpool stoked the idea the report was unjust even though it was impressive. So impressive that Liverpool did not dispute any of it. Then with the t-shirts and comments giving the idea that Suarez was a victim gave diehards the green light to ignore all facts and show their worst tribal bias.
The report did not believe Suarez was racist. The verdict was correct, which was the main thing and the atmosphere has been created my Liverpool and their fans, so they can’t complain that they’re getting all manner of opinions in response.
He got done because he made out he was only being friendly which was untrue, which he admitted. Lying like that was one reason that made it more likely what Evra said was true. That’s it! It only needed to be ‘probable’ because this is a civil case.
Some Liverpool supporters still think the verdict was wrong. That’s a excellent example of the relationship between tribalism and truth.
Ferguson and Evra set the mood here. Evra only admitting Suarez didn’t use the n***** word after the whole affair had snowballed and never apologised for it. The media stoked the idea that Suarez was a racist and that no stone was left unturned in the report even though the analyis of what was found under the stones was incredibly biased and unsubstantiated. So unanimous and myopic in their hostility were the press, that Liverpool realised that little would be gained trying to merely reduce a ban from a judge-and-jury prosecuting system with a 99% success rate. Then with the t-shirts and comments reported as a tribal defence of a racist gave diehards the green light to ignore all facts, or indeed lack of and show their lazy journalistic bias.
The report did not believe Suarez was racist. The distractions from the logic of the case however were impressive and verdict was deeply problematic, which was the main thing and the atmosphere has been created by the resulting deep sense of injustice felt by Liverpool and their fans, so they can’t complain that they’re getting all manner of critical opinions in response.
He got done because his inconsistencies were prioritised over Evras inconsistencies, despite Evra being coached through the video soon after the event and despite Evras inconsistencies being of significantly more material importance to the case. Lying like that was one reason that made it more likely what Evra said was bollocks. That’s it! It only needed to massage implausible but possible into ‘probable’ through a long report, because this is a civil case.
Most if not all Liverpool supporters will think the verdict was wrong until justice is seen to be done . That’s a excellent brake on justice being removed from the foundation of the fight against racism, because if not truth and racism become the decadent playthings of the elite.
Nice article, somewhat undermined by your oh-so-hard-as-nails claim that you would seek “a private meeting in a lonely place to discuss it further” if someone called your girlfriend negro. If someone called your girlfriend ‘a negro’ (in English) I could maybe understand, but the whole point of this whole stupid case is that a barely understood word in a different language was taken out of its cultural context.
It astounds me that people are so quick to ascribe blame for an innocuous word they evidently don’t even understand.
(And no, I’m not white, yes, I am *shudder* ‘ethnic’. I’ve experienced racial abuse numerous times in my life.)
I’ve been trying to point out on various forums how the FA “independent” commission’s ‘findings’ contained numerous holes etc… nothing new, it was all falling on the deaf ears and people told me to be ashamed because I defend a racist. And Liverpool FC “once a great club but not any longer” for the very same reason…
Unfortunately, we have no one else to blame except ourselves. Like you have pointed out in this article (which, if you read it again you may see, requires some editing for missing prepositions, at least twice), the statement of the club was too aggressive, and then misinterpreted t-shirts, and then half-hearted apology… all piled up together, and only a lazy one wouldn’t kick us for that, because we gave too many opportunities for that ourselves.
It is too late now to blame the media and other eager bandwagon-jumpers for their one-sided, agenda-driven accusations towards the club and the fans. A good PR professional would and should have predicted that storm. But failed to do so.
It will take some brilliance from the club’s Public Relations people to get the situation straight again. Being aggressively-defensive never helped anyone, and it won’t help us either. We will be further accused of the siege mentality, tribalism and, simply, racism. This “banter” will go on for years.
What can we do… do the talking ON THE PITCH! WINS, TROPHIES should silence the critics. Nothing else will.
Ok, I should declare I’m a United fan first and foremost but I enjoy on occasion reading some of the blogs here though goes without saying, not all of them :)
Anyway, I just wanted to throw in an opinion as I personally feel that this issue has become way too tribal, I like to think I can be objective but that’s for others to judge.
I think some great points have been made by the original poster as well as the replies that followed.
With regards to Liverpool’s handling, I think they DID handle the whole issue badly and quite possible affected their decision on appealing. It was very aggressive, almost as if KD was sitting there typing them out. I don’t blame KD for his position at all, if it was SAF in the same position I would imagine he would have gone to the walls to defend his player. I do point the blame at those employed about KD to look after the image of Liverpool, they should have known better. That is what they’re employed to do. KD was welcome to say what he felt his team and player needed, those in the PR dept should have taken a much more restrained view.
Instead of focusing on highlight the positive aspects of the report, that they didn’t believe Suarez was racist and neither did Evra, they went off on a tangent trying to discredit Evra. It ended up sending a very mixed message. I think many Liverpool fans at the time supported it, as it felt like the right thing to do but in hindsight many would now think otherwise.
In terms of the coverage. It’s not a witch hunt per se. But the more I’ve read the work of “journalists” the more I become disillusioned with the whole concept. It appears most have a flair for writing but that’s about the the scope of their abilities. This applies across the board, be it sports or subjects. In an age of information, most are just happy to pluck information and opinion on the net and reword and present as their own work depending on what appears to be the popular at the time. So I don’t think it’s an anti Liverpool thing, just I don’t think it’s an anti United thing when we’re the subject of a reporting matter. It’s just a “journalist” thing. They foam at the opportunity to be judgmental and self righteous.
And finally, did Suarez warrant an 8 game ban? I can’t honestly say. There is no concrete evidence and I think the weight of the ban has been determined by the number of times the word “negro” was used. I don’t know how many times it was used. I don’t know Evra personally to vouch for him. I haven’t seen the evidence on which the commission concluded Suarez had used it multiple of times. I do think it could have been appealed if the Liverpool hadn’t tried to present the view the word was used in a friendly/playful manner which I think defeated the whole argument.
I do think the whole matter is very unfortunate and for those, on both sides for who the name of their club is the be all and end all. United fans are equally guilty in attempting to goad and label Liverpool a racist club as are those Liverpool fans determined to discredit Patrice Evra without consideration of the context of the issue and believing Suarez to be whiter than white (no pun implied or intended!).
Unfortuately as soon as the club’s actions in releasing the statement, kk’s comments and the T-shirts mean that ordinary fans (and not the dickheads) were left wide open to attacks from every side.
“my girlfriend’s national team has been wronged by Suarez so she could bear a tribal grudge”
Your girlfriend must be very forgiving as all the Ghanians I have met cannot even stand to look at Luis on tv!
Karen… what holes are there in the report?
Oh wait… did someone use a hole-punch on the version you had?
Hello Glen,
I think this link is probably the best deconstruction of the report, or at least the most considered.
http://tomkinstimes.com/2012/01/the-suarez-decision-lfc-grounds-for-appeal/
The objections most LFC fans have to the report relate to the fact that the report sets itself a reasonable burden of proof, then massively undershoots it. The report basically sides with Evra, explicitly ignoring the inconsistencies in his testimony, and slaughters Suarez by picking on every inconsistency and making the maximum out of it that it can. Evra’s credibility (and Luis’ apparent lack of credibility) was the bedrock of the judgement. The fact that Evra’s credibility is actually very questionable, both in light of this incident and the findings of a previous FA investigation, is rightly highlighted by LFC.
The “tribalism” comes from the fact that seemingly noone who is not a Liverpool fan has had the slightest interest in questioning the verdict in any way. Its been left to fans to apply scrutiny to it (as any report should receive), we are then accused of being biased and one eyed in our support. The accusation in circular and self-fulfilling. The first reports into Bloody Sunday and Hillsborough (obviously both much more serious) were deeply flawed and were subsequently shown to be so only after those affected (BIASED! TRIBAL! etc….) showed that they were flawed and needed to be reviewed.
HI Karl: You said “Nice old Patrice Evra isn’t going to miss the opportunity to point the finger and in some ways I can’t blame him. If someone addressed my girlfriend (of African descent) as ‘negro’ I wouldn’t be asking which part of Uruguay he was from and begin painstaking research as to the cultural background of the term, I’d be requesting a private meeting in a lonely place to discuss it further.”
If you visit any country where spanish is spoken, you’ll be in problems. I’m shocked to read here, after all this trouble, that some people still believe that “negro” is a word used with no racist connotations in just a distant and isolated country.
For your information, Karl, spanish is the third most spoken language in the world. So stop blaming a country you hardly find in a map.
And “negro” is a word without racist connotations in this language. (and the alleged conversation was in spanish)
If you don’t want to believe me, just google the several anti racist latin american associations using the word negro in its names.
Just try, before spreading prejudices and misinformation.
Never thought I’d address this to a United fan but thanks Crip for a cultured and considered response.
Hi Carlos
I agree and disagree with you in equal parts. Firstly whatever was said and however many times it was said, was not said in a Spanish speaking country. It was spoken in an English speaking country and I imagine that is what the original poster was suggesting.
I don’t know the Spanish language but I do understand that as a passing term it’s not considered offensive in the same way as we would consider it here in the UK. However, I think you would agree that it wouldn’t be considered a friendly term to use in the middle of an argument but equally so it may be no worse than what Patrice Evra said when he used offensive language about Suarez’s sister.
The critical point is, what he said DID offend Evra and because it took place in an English speaking country it right it was addressed and a process of education was put in place to ensure it didn’t happen again. Whether any lessons have been learned I’m not so sure given the fall out.
Let’s face it, Crip… Evra perhaps was right to be offended. But the way he dealt with it made it impossible to settle that incident by an apology and shaking hands. He filed a report where he said that Suarez called him nigger, and Fergie made it “he called him nigger 5 times” and the “boy dives all over the place”, and then Evra went straight to the French TV and said he was called a certain word not less than 10 times. While Suarez, who clearly didn’t mean any racial offence, found himself attacked by the media in the foreign country, accused of racism and what not.
Then the FA made things even worse, with the timing of theit charge (exactly a couple of hours after the unfortunate Blatter’s interview was aired), etc.. and English press manner of reporting on the matter piled on an incredible pressure, which however, does not take the blame off the Liverpool FC for poor handling of this case. They were 100% right to support and defend the player, but they should have left it at that. So no one came out smelling of roses out of it. No one.
Now someone called Scudamore comes out and says “I am proud of living in such country where we deal with racism like that!” – Oh REALLY? Proud??? It would have been funny if it wasn’t so sad.
Sorry Karen, you’re wrong.
Suarez DID NOT allege Suarez called him ‘nigger’, rather that was how he translated it. He only EVER alleged he used the word ‘negro’.
Evra DID NOT go straight to the French TV. He asked the reporter NOT to ask him about the incident, but the reporter still did. The journalist confirmed this was the case. This is UNDISPUTED by Suarez’s representative.
BOTH sides AGREED “10 times” is a figure of speech in France.
Also, Suarez didn’t have to MEAN racial offence. They don’t need to prove INTENT to charge him.
What a lot of nonsense!
Yes he did accuse him of calling him a nigger – ten times. If you think for a second that a man, who converses frequently in proficient Spanish, does not know the Spanish meaning of Negro then you are clearly deluded. In his evidence to the panel Evra admits telling the ref and giggs that he was called black. Does that not give you a clue to what he understood the word to mean?
Yes he did go straight to French TV. Are you really so naive that you believe the contrived explanation, that you have repeated, for Evra’s on screen utterance of his unsubstantiated allegation? The journalist in question is a friend of Evras.
Both sides did not agree that “at least ten times is a figure of speech in France”. In fact the Report’s comments on this issue was a downright shameful misrepresentation of Damien Commoli’s evidence on this issue. For the record he said that a comment like that would never be used in a matter of this seriousness unless it was meant literally.
You are partially correct (at last) on the last bit. They do not have to prove intent to charge him. However despite this they stated in their judgement, with absolutely no supporting evidence, that he did intend to wind Evra up by causing him offence.
Read the report or don’t comment on it.
Wrong on all points. Need me to explain why?
I feel I need to repeat something: the language used was Spanish, not English. And one of the contenders doesn’t have good knowledge of this. What if you have an argument like that in China in English, with a non English-speaking person? What will they say? “Sorry, lad. This is China. We don’t care you were talking in English. That word you used allow us to label you as a racist.”
I don’t agree when you said that word is racist in the middle of an argument in Spanish. As you said you don’t know Spanish.
But the word “sudaca” has one possible meaning and no more. And who knows this word knows the meaning too. Specially if he’s a football player who doesn’t speak Spanish. Why does Evra know that word?
Carlos,
I fear we’re descending into the semantics of this debate and once we get to that level we can go back and forth forever forensically and there will be points we both make which are equally relevant because finer details are usually outside of context.
On a broader level, the point I’m trying to make is that it’s not too relevant what language was used. I think we can both agree there are words and actions in every language which would not be considered offensives within the confines of that language and culture but considered otherwise outside, be there intent to offend or not.
The more relevant point is that it was made in a country and culture where for whatever reason it is not considered OK to reference someone by their colour/ethnicity in the midst of an argument.
In your example of China, you’re absolutely correct…in that, that is exactly what you will expect to hear and should expect so. If you go to another country, you have to be aware of the cultural differences and know that there are certain things that you may say or do in your native country which would not be acceptable to them. If I was to gain employment or travel to a foreign country, it would be incumbent upon me and my employer to culturally educate me.
This process of education is the crux of the matter, if you’re assuming Suarez’s complete innocence. He clearly was not informed by his club/agent/colleagues etc that this would not be an acceptable way to address someone. Had he been aware, Suarez would never have used the term, regardless of if it was OK to do in Spanish or not.
As to your final point, I’m not sure what the implication here is. Why does, in general, anyone always know the offensives terms words or another language? It seems to be the way of the world. I’m of an ethnic minority and the number of times I have seen/heard others of another ethnic persuasion to teach them offensive terms to use in banter among their friends…well, it’s countless. It just happens and it probably shouldn’t but we all gravitate to the lowest common denominator to compensate for our lack of knowledge.
Karen, I don’t agree Evra did anything wrong in filing a report of Ferguson back supporting him when he made that report. Any manager worth his salt would back his player, much like KD did with Suarez which I don’t have a problem with myself either.
I do however agree he then shouldn’t have gone to the media and stated so. I would cite a degree of mitigating circumstances given it was post game and emotions would have been running high. However in the main, I agree making the statements he did to Canal+ only served to exacerbate the situation.
I’m not sure anyone can say explicitly whether Suarez meant any racial offense. That’s not to say he did, I don’t think anyone on any side of this argument can explicitly say one or the other. The one thing we do know however is that in Spanish it does not carry the same connotations as in English. There is a gulf of difference between what Suarez says he said and what Evra claims he heard. If we take the version of Suarez, then it wasn’t racist. If we take Evra’s version then clearly it was. And this is the line that divides most. Liverpool fans will only take Suarez’s version and United fan’s will only take Evra’s which in the main is also supported by the commission. There is no concrete proof however and I suspect the truth as always lies somewhere in the middle as opposed to the two versions we have.
I do agree that had this happened at another time, it may have been dealt with in an more even handed manner, however coming in the back of Blatter’s comments and the FA and the media’s condemnation of comments, both entities had to be seen to be righteous and so the self serving began. I did wonder at the time of Blatter’s comments why the international media and football associations weren’t rushing to same judgement as ours were and I even posed the question to a few British journalists based abroad but got no feedback, I do however digresss.
Yes, Liverpool were poor in their handling, they shoudl have issued one statement and then flat stated they were taking no further questions on the matter and that would have protected KD as well, instead he was pushed to the front and had to manage a team and handle PR. My sincere belief is Liverpool fans should now focus their attentions on why this happened, it’s easy to point the blame outside and there are failings there but in the main Liverpool fans cannot affect those responsible. They CAN however question effectively who ducked their responsibilities, pushing KD to the front and who decide on their public position.
Scudamore? I’d take anything he said and then wash it down with a bucket of salt.
Whatever context the word was used in doesn’t matter a jot. It was admitted by Suarez, Comolli and Kuyt that the word was used. Once the enquiry had that evidence, the outcome was obvious and only the length of ban was going to become an issue.
I wonder if there would have been a different outcome had the club made Suarez apologise publicly for the incident, stepping in themselves, citing the cultural differences, but making the point that it is unacceptable in this country and that the matter would be dealt with internally. Fine him/ban him etc
Except of course they wouldn’t have written 115 pages spent 3 months and employed spanish experts if ‘Whatever context the word was used in doesn’t matter a jot’.
Until Suarez admitted that he said Evra was a black man all we had to go on was Evras accusation of him calling him a n****** ten times. Clearly if that was MUFC stance an apology was impossible. Even when Evra was helped to change his story to fit within the bounds of the possible both sides were still miles apart.
However, will be interesting to find out what went on behind the scenes – allegedly there was an attempt to mediate.
I am becoming more and more perplexed about this issue and the polarised views from within Liverpool support, especially from the journalistic fraternity. Perhaps the edicts for NUJ has a bearing (http://www.mediawise.org.uk/www.mediawise.org.uk/display_page8a15.html?id=648) or is it they are more intellectual than the tribalism centric intelligence for majority of Liverpool supporters?
Let us get facts straight, the majority of Liverpool fans are delighted with the response from the club, showing support to Suarez and injustice of verdict. The churnalism (http://newsframes.wordpress.com/2012/01/06/media-on-racism-churnalism/) that followed the report is an absolute disgrace and the whole sorry debacle best explained from http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0112/1224310143238.html
By his own admission, Suarez used Negro (Neh-grow) once, without c**t or other expletive deletive and if people believe this deserves an 8 match ban then let us agree to disagree on the punishment matching the crime and move on. Yes as an earlier post put it, he is a wind up merchant for certain, learning his trade in South America (can i say that) but i have never seen a snidey elbow or foot left in but for sure he will now be the villain without protection.
But to suggest the club and KD managed the aftermath in a triabalistic manner, i will not accept. Perhaps KD will know next time to take copious notes and bring in advisors sooner. SAF has learned over the years how to use the system like your good old shipyard convenor. I read recently he now has a team of 43 persons reporting into him.
To be accused of poor PR and media management – for fucks sake, lets get Alastair Campbell in? This is football and who gives a fuck?
Allegedly football does not have a racism problem but for some reason we have the FA on their white horses on a crusade akin to Knights Templar. Does anybody truly believe there is a racism problem in football? In society, a massive yes and demonstrated no more than the cold blooded murder in Manchester on boxing day of defenceless Indian student by white thug with single shot to head. Google You Tube for racism on train, absolutely vile act of tribal racist language by young white females.
Will the punishment for Suarez, help remove racism from society…………
This has nothing to do with racism, this is a smear campaign by Manchester United simply because Luis Suarez is one of the most talented football players in the world & he plays for Liverpool.
After the 1 – 1 draw at Anfield in a BBC MOTD interview Alex Ferguson was asked did he think a free kick should have been awarded, that led to Liverpool’s goal. Ferguson’s reply was “ sure he (Suarez) was diving all over the place. The thing is it was Charlie Adam who was fouled by Ferdinand, but that didn’t matter to Fergi he had just started the smear campaign against Luis Suarez, and at the same time Patrice Evra who had 90 minutes to mention it to the Referee who had called Suarez & Evra over on two separate occasions failed to mention that he is constantly been racially abused. But decided to mention it in a French TV interview that Suarez was racially abusing him throughout the game.
And so it begins!
Evra initially accused Suarez of calling him a N****r on “at least” 10 different occasions, this was put to Suarez after the match and he denied it saying I said Negro once. The FA then walked Evra through the video’s of the game from every angle, Evra then changed his story that Suarez said the word Negro to him on maybe 7 occasions and said he didn’t think Suarez was a racist but still went ahead with the charge anyway, The first statement Evra gave has never been released by the FA. Then the FA says we believe Luis Suarez is not racist but we ban him for 8 games for racial abuse?
Liverpool were then told that they could appeal the severity of the ban but not the decision, which would be heard by the same “Independent Panel” & that the ban could be increased, makes sense to drop the appeal don’t you think & reluctantly take your medicine?
I don’t think in any situation, Negro is a racist word, not even if somebody insults you by saying your sisters p***y or get away from me you South American or I will punch you, all of which Evra admitted to saying, yet the FA have let Evra get away with this because he said he thought he was saying something else, you could not make this stuff up for God sake.
I think the FA has branded the whole continent of South America as racist by this decision, because how else could you look at it from a Spanish speaking perspective.
I am Irish, I go to matches in England & have visited England on many occasions I watch British TV and films I hear black English people calling white people “white boy” all the time, never ever taught of it as a racial slur before. Is it a racial slur?
As for defending your woman’s Honour if somebody from South American called her Negro, I suppose by that rational I should also do the same if they called my girlfriend Blanco?
Blanco – English translation = White.
Just been reading the article and the subsequent comments. There’s some I agree with and some I don’t.
Personally I think the Club and Suarez were very poorly advised. I wont deny that Suarez’s account of what happened changed but Evra’s version was far from straightforward, the full report was littered with inconsistencies that were never picked up on, far too many to list right now. To me this is where the problems lies. The FA issued a report that was always going to be scuitinised by fans and media and unfortunately this has led to the misinterpretation of many points contained in it.
Trial by media seems to have ensued and as a result fans are chanting the Suarez song replacing his name with ‘Racist Bastard’. If Liverpool fans support their player they’re also racist, and incidents such as the Oldham game which involve the minority change to the majority.
To quote the original article….
“If the debate was governed under the sole banner of racism and what it constitutes rather than petty squabbles between the press and the club, the FA and Blatter and LFC and United we may actually take something from this whole sorry affair”
The fact that Suarez was found guilty to me wasn’t the main problem, it was how he was found guilty. This to me is where the problem lies. It feels like Evra and the FA made a mockery of what is a serious issue.
I can’t quote individual responses but Carlos, if someone had said that word to me in the heat of a Lpool-MU game and I was fucked off with the refereeing decisions (as Evra had been narked all day) I wouldn’t be thinking about the context of it being a Spanish word being used in a certain way. I don’t think Suarez was being aggressive, I think it was more of a mock concilatory tone as that would anger an already fired up Evra the more.
The rest of your post has baffled me. Which country am I blaming? You’ve lost me there.
As for me being hard as nails I’m anything but but if someone abuses someone close to you you tend not to think about that sort of thing.
The truth and the tribalism is this: a panel of white Englishmen condemned a brown foreigner on zero evidence, to stick it to another foreigner.
We might never see FA treat one of their own this way.
If Terry gets convicted, it will be on hard evidence.
If it would be one of their own, they won’t be so quick on destroying man’s reputation and career just on a word of another.
With Suarez, you got a feeling that he didn’t matter that much, that they couldn’t conceive it would’ve cost that much for him. Their comments in the end of the verdict, about his charity work and socially conscious reputation and that it should be embarrassing for him to be exposed with their verdict, were almost derisive.
He should be just grateful he’s not living in the gutter, ain’t he, being from developing world and all.
Who cares about his image, and him being Suarez the biter, the handballer, the diver, they just don’t get what’s all the fuss is about. The image of a patriot, a model citizen, a family man enlightened on social issues, a guy who brought so much joy to his country for 2 years in a row – because he’s “the other”, it’s not breaking through.
Terry has a bit of bad reputation too, and while being much older did much less for his country than Suarez, but he’s British, he’s family.
I wouldn’t blame British public for supporting Terry even if he gets convicted – it’s natural reaction to relate more to one of your own.
As I’m sure that Uruguayans wouldn’t have turned on Suarez even if there was evidence for him saying those vile things that Evra accuses him of. They would be sad and disappointed, but supportive in the end, because he’s one of their own, their child.
Tribalism is everywhere, I just wish people were honest about it.
As for the verdict and this whole sorry mess: Liverpool handled the matter to bring the most harm on themselves and Suarez.
But then, they just did what everyone was doing when someone accused their player of racial insult: treated the accusation with incredulity and disdain towards the accuser, and after it emerged that there’s no evidence, they just assumed it would go away.
It worked for Man Utd and Schmeisel, it worked for Newcastle and Emre, would have worked for Liverpool if not for those Blatter comments. That’s what Kenny meant I think by being in the wrong place at a wrong time.
In that sense, the whole thing was educational.
Liverpool response to Oldham player abuse was impeccable, and could be taken as a template by FA and other clubs on how to address such incidents. If only they treated Evra the same, and not being so flippant about it as per the report.
Other things which became obvious for me from that report:
– There was only one occasion of Suarez calling Evra “negro”. Everyone interviewed at the time of the incident spoke of one occasion – Suarez, Evra’s teammates, the refs. Other occasions were added later by Evra, to justify French TV outburst about being called N word 10 times.
Also, Evra visibly reacts to Suarez words only once, at a time when Suarez himself confirms the occasion.
Evra was giving his first interview to FA with various video footage available, and it’s then I believe he tried to stuff as many “negro” as he could into moments when Suarez mouth was obscured from all angles.
– I believe Evra was genuinely offended by what Suarez said to him, whether due to misunderstanding or because Suarez really said more than “Por que Negro”, something closer to what was reported by Comoli and Kenny or Kuyt. I don’t believe Suarez said something outright rasist like ” I don’t talk to blacks” but he might have been wound more than he admitted by “Don’t touch me South American”. And he toned it down from initial “sudamericano” or allegedly “sudaca” – either not to appear to be provoked by Evra, or not to appear to tattle on Evra and break the codes.
Evra was already wound up by the game and by Suarez dick challenge on him, this thing just tipped him over the edge.
It could be Evra really thought Suarez said something like “I don’t talk to blacks”. I’m curious whether the Spanish phrase containing “porque tu eres Negro” could be misheard into the former.
If Evra’s complaints were treated more seriously and respectfully by Liverpool, it could have been resolved then or at least it could have put Liverpool in much better position.
I wonder, if the case was indeed that initial misunderstanding, if the issue could still be resolved by talks between the players.
I’m an optimist I know, but sentiment of Alvaro Pereira, that Evra should wear armour now, could be shared by more than just Uruguayans. Other players in PL could be looking at Evra and thinking – am I next? Evra might get it rough as well in the coming months. He would benefit from the peaceful resolution too.
– It could be that FA hoped to get confession from Suarez on what he really said to Evra on that one occasion, by accusing him of 7 usages of “Negro”, and expecting him to appeal, to get them to forgo those 6 fake usages in exchange of him admitting what he really said.
They clearly didn’t believe that he said just “por que Negro” at that time but their other 6 cases were really farfetched.
Especially when they called the unversal gesture of “you talk too much crap, shut up” a “puzzling gesture” and dismissed it because it didn’t fit Evra’s account.
It’s a pity Liverpool decided not to appeal and that they were so belligerent with their initial statement.
But it’ also a pity FA choose to destroy a man on such a flimsy evidence and to spark up such a fire.
If they gave a maximum verdict on what Suarez admitted like 4 matches, they would have satisfied the Evra’s grievance, educated Suarez and Liverpool, but didn’t destroy his image and career. Instead, they accused him of saying horrible things on no evidence, and this injustice outweighs everything else,
Crip: I cannot agree when you say “…it’s not too relevant what language was used.”
That’s exactly the relevant point. If Suarez says something like that word in English he must be fired from UK. But the conversation was in Spanish, both parts were talking or shouting or whatever… in Spanish.
Can you understand this? With due respect, I guess you can’t.
More than that, I’m sure Evra knows exactly that the use of that word in Spanish is not racist.
And finally: what “process of education was adressed” with this witch hunt?
Carlos,
We could go on forever on this. I full understand that it was in Spanish but just as your giving credence to the language used, then you also must give credence to the geographic location/culture in which it was used. Because it was Spanish I am able, in my mind to extend a degree of the benefit of doubt in Suarez’s favor. I can counter with the same question, can you understand it took place in England not in Uruguay or any other Spanish speaking nation?
I think both factors need to be acknowledged but ultimately for me, the fact it took place in England supersedes the language.
Also, while the language was Spanish, it was also used between a Spaniard and Frenchman, had it been between two Spaniards we may well not have had this issue. Just because Evra speak’s Spanish does not necessarily mean he understands the culture.
As for “process of education”, my point here there appears to be none. The FA had made a rod for their own back with their position on Sepp Blatter and his comments and Liverpool made a rod for their own back with the position they took.
In the end and this is crucial; none of us know Suarez or Evra to be able to vouch for them. Neither have we heard the evidence to have a real more informed viewpoint. We have no idea what Suarez really said and with what intent and equally no idea how Evra translated whatever he heard.
What we do know is, Suaraz happens to be employed by LFC and Evra by MUFC. As a result, prior to any judgment as supporters of those respective clubs we were always likely to extend the benefit of doubt to the man employed by the club we happen to support. That is what divides this argument. If Suarez played for MUFC and Evra LFC its very probably we would still be on opposite sides to this argument with a reversal of points being made.
Don’t pull my legs, Crip. You know very well that if a controversial argument take place in English in a non English speaking country, British press, reasonably, wouldn’t give a damn about the geographic point.
They’d just say: “How can they judge this matter in that way if the language used was English?”
Just imagine a panel of uruguayans, arabs, mexicans or vietnamese so-called “wise men” judging something like that in English.
What would say The Sun? What would say Foreign Office? What would say you?
Personally I don’t care what the FO would say or the media would say. My barometer of judgement is not set by those institutions and neither have I alluded to such in my previous posts.
This is my opinion. How the press or the government would act I can’t know and as to what I would say, I can’t speculate on something that has not taken place but I suspect my argument would be consistent. If it was me, in a foreign country who had offended those that reside there, I think a swift apology would be the order of the day.
So you don’t know how British media would deal with that situation…
One or two decades of politically correct speech cannot hide hipocrisy.
The order of the day -in a country where law is not a joke- is to conduct a proper investigation with an independent court, not a kangaroo one.
Before, you said “If Suarez played for MUFC and Evra LFC its very probably we would still be on opposite sides to this argument with a reversal of points being made.”
That’s not the point either. Who cares if Liverpool falls to a lower division or MUFC plays and wins like Barcelona? We are not talking about football.
At the end of the day, the “barometer of judgement on this” was the British media crying wolf.
But as you said before “We could go on forever on this.”
Just in case, I want to clarify something: I didn’t try to imply you are an hypocrite. I was talking specifically about the media circus.