Saurez [FA release investigation findings]

[Blandy69]

Re: Suarez (merged)

I cant see how liverpool fans can still be defending him, unbelivable

 

[Akai]

Re: Suarez (merged)

I cant see how liverpool fans can still be defending him, unbelivable

they know they will sink faster than the titanic without him.

 

[mindmyp's_n_q's]

Re: Suarez (merged)

I cant see how liverpool fans can still be defending him, unbelivable

It's just club loyalty that is all.

If Suarez played for the rags and Evra for the dippers then can you imagine that they would all be on Rawk saying that the rag Suarez has been hard done by and that their Evra has been a "cry wolf ****".

 

[carlos tevez is a blue]

Re: Suarez (merged)

bwhahahahahahahaha


<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=284310.0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/ind ... c=284310.0</a>

 

[mcfclovin88]

Re: Suarez (merged)

bwhahahahahahahaha


<a class="postlink" href="http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=284310.0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/ind ... c=284310.0</a>

 

[bluegorton]

Re: Suarez (merged)

I hope John Terry gets off his charge, he's clearly a c*nt but I want to be on RAWK when it's announced.

Actually that would be quite funny..

Although i fuckin hate this **** with a passion.

Bit of a win-win though innit?

 

[mancunial]

Suarez (merged)

Why didn't he just apologise, I didn't mean the way came out I've wrote to Patrice etc etc, does anyone think he would have got a shorter ban, the argument is one of them is telling porkies, I ended up in court a few years ago over a minor incident the only two witnesses were a police officer and myself the accused, so it was his word against mine, guess what, I was found guilty as charged, because they believed the policeman over me because he had basically more power than I did. I think this is becoming bigger than the actual charge.

 

[gregblag]

Re: Suarez (merged)

Sometimes human beings are fallible. Sometimes a human being's capacity for tolerance falls short. If you can honestly say you have never had a racist opinion, never been intolerant of another human being because of their ethnic origin, never formed an antipathy based on some kind of preconception all I can say is you are a better person than me.

Some of the opinions expressed on here - racism cannot be tolerated in any shape or form, is the worst thing ever etc. I find particularly unconvincing. It is as if the authors were trying to disguise their own inadequacies, their own racist tendencies by such absolute statements.

If you were a thief might you not make a tremendous deal condemning all dishonesty to convince others of your innocence? If you had a history of being cruel to animals might you not make a big show of caring for animals to convince others (and yourself) of how you love animals?

I am not a Christian but I do find this appropriate: take the beam out of your own eye before condemning your brother for the speck in his.

I am curious how you come to the conclusion that if you condemn an action you yourself must by definition be guilty of that action because by condemning it you are covering up your own inadequacies.

That is an incredible way of looking at things and basically makes everyone guilty of everything.

Look at the quality of the criticism. You find the idea that no one must ever do anything that can remotely be called racist and must be totally condemned for it convincing? But some of the posters have come across that way.

Suppose I said no-one must ever steal anything and theft is the worst thing that can ever be done. In fact if someone steals food to feed their family we sail them off to exile for life in Australia. Would you believe in my honesty? Or might you think there is something inherently wrong with my point of view, apart from it being a couple of hundred years old?

If you told me that you had never stolen anything ever and would never contemplate it and think thieves are nothing but evil I would think you were obsessed. And I wouldn't trust you. I would be much more likely to trust someone who said I used to do a bit of nicking but I straightened myself out.

If we want to kick out racism might the best strategy not be to understand what it is and define it first? Screaming out racism is wrong, I hate it, people who are racists are utter c**** etc. is not an adequate response. And I definitely would not trust such a person to have the breadth of view, to have developed the tolerance necessary to not be racist themselves.

 

[M18CTID]

Re: Suarez (merged)

from redcafe
"Evra should bring a case against LFC for defamation of character".

the defamation of evra`s character, as a person evra is probably the biggest twat in football.

I DONT CONDONE what suarez said far from it, i`m just curious to know who said what in the conversation between the two.

Evra is clearly a twat, however the FA have ruled that he was telling the truth and Suarez did indeed racially abuse him. Liverpool's, frankly farcical, statement essentially accuses the FA of being a kangaroo court and Evra of being a compulsive liar. They've said the FA had decided to ban Suarez before any evidence had been seen, and that as it was Suarez's word against Evra, and they are certain Suarez said nothing racist, by definition they are saying Evra has basically made this up. If I were Evra/United I'd be consukting my lawyers and seeing if what Liverpool have done is defamation of character.

Liverpool, like United, think that, because of their name and trophy haul, they can do and say whatever they like. Someone needs to set them straight on this.

especially as suarez admitted the charge but claimed 'cultural differences' were to blame for the interpretation. calling someone who isn't your mate 'negrito' upwards of 10 times in a game & then claiming it's a friendly term in uruguay is transparently complete bollocks.

Great post (as was Matty's) and sums up my feelings exactly. This is why I don't understand Liverpool's statement moaning that the guilty decision was based on Evra's evidence alone - Suarez himself admitted calling Evra something and has basically stitched himself up as a result. He can claim it was used in a "friendly manner" all he wants but in the context of that particular game, between 2 teams that are fierce rivals, I doubt very much that he was having a "friendly" chat with Evra.

Putting local rivalries with United and any dislike for Evra aside, that Liverpool statement is astonishing and oversteps the mark by a long way. For once, and I can't believe I'm saying this, I can honestly say that so far United have behaved better than Liverpool in all this but I can see this getting increasingly messy. I'll also add that Dalglish's blind defence of Suarez on this and other matters has made him look rather silly too. I've nothing against managers defending their players but when it comes to said player doing something that is indefensible then it's time to stop digging and keep quiet.

 

[bluemonkey71]

Re: Suarez (merged)

Gregblag: You have yet to address the issue at hand. Rather than making sweeping statements and generalisations etc why not comment on the facts.