Luis Suarez

[W.C.]

This. I don't think he is a racist either. He is, and I don't mean this in a nasty way, simple and uneducated and from a pretty poor background. Watching him is like watching an excited and very talented kid play football - always wants the ball, always giving it 100%, gets pissed with his team-mates when they don't pass to him etc. Also seems to have learned his lessons (for now at least). Could watch him all day. We simply don't have anyone with his talent in our pool of players.

That's a perfect summary of his footballing skills.

 

[drew]

I think Luis gave evidence too. I could get this very wrong here: didn't he admit referring to Evra as a negro, and that he saw nothing wrong with that, as it wasn't a racist term in his country?

Isnt' the point not whether he and his ethnic background consider it racist but whether the 'negroes' in Uruguay feel it is demeaning?

 

[Soulman]

Isnt' the point not whether he and his ethnic background consider it racist but whether the 'negroes' in Uruguay feel it is demeaning?

Obdulio Varela, the 1950 World Cup-winning captain and one of the more famous footballers in Uruguayan history, is revered as El Negro Jefe (The Black Chief). Fernando Cáceres, who was in the Argentina squad at the 1994 World Cup, is another El Negro, as is Héctor Enrique, the Argentinian who played the pass for Diego Maradona to slalom through the England team in Mexico 1986.
Nor is this just a football thing. Rubén "El Negro" Rada is one of Uruguay's more successful musicians, appearing in a sitcom called La Oveja Negra (The Black Sheep) and with a compilation of his work entitled El Album Negro. Héctor Lescano, Uruguay's minister of sport and tourism, is known in politics as El Negro Lescano.

 

[Weststander]

The Suarez haters in NSC will never get the chance to boo him - whether he's at LFC, Real or Barca, we won't be playing at that refined level for some time to come!

 

[Goldstone1976]

The Suarez haters in NSC will never get the chance to boo him - whether he's at LFC, Real or Barca, we won't be playing at that refined level for some time to come!

League or FA Cup could happen this season...

 

[Leighgull]

Isnt' the point not whether he and his ethnic background consider it racist but whether the 'negroes' in Uruguay feel it is demeaning?

From wiki...

"In Portuguese, negro is an adjective for the color black, although preto is the most common antonym of branco (white). In Brazil and Portugal, negro is the most respectful way to address people of Black African descent, with preto sometimes being considered politically incorrect or a racial slur."

 

[Weststander]

League or FA Cup could happen this season...

True, but very low odds.

 

[Triggaaar]

In Brazil and Portugal, negro is the most respectful way to address people of Black African descent

Presumably that's if you're not talking directly to someone whose name you know. Just the same as black is the correct word to use for a race of people in our country, but you wouldn't actually use the word when talking to a black person you know.

Isnt' the point not whether he and his ethnic background consider it racist but whether the 'negroes' in Uruguay feel it is demeaning?

Indeed. And on this occasion I think the point is whether Evra found it demeaning. It doesn't matter if the word itself isn't racist, it's the context. If and English footballer called Evra a black tw@, that's racist. Same thing. There's just no need to be mentioning colour/race at all.

 

[Soulman]

I believe that Evra also admitted abusing Suarez, it was a term used about the undesirables and low life's that come from Uruguay. Fortunately for Evra he never looked like being punished or banned.

 

[Kevlar]

I thought the story was Evra asked him why did you kick me?
Suarez answering because you are negro
if that is true it was not used just as a description
but a reason for violence

 

[Soulman]

I thought the story was Evra asked him why did you kick me?
Suarez answering because you are negro
if that is true it was not used just as a description
but a reason for violence

How Events Transpired

The conversation began with Evra saying "Concha de tu hermana" which translates as "your sister's pussy". Evra says he meant “****ing hell”. There is no dispute about who started the argument: it was Evra. There is no dispute about who threw the first insult: Evra. The dispute is whether Suarez’s reaction used racially offensive words. The FA ruled that it did.

So, how unreliable a witness was Suarez, and how reliable was Evra?

Immediately after Evra’s insult, the video evidence that can be lip-read shows Suarez saying "What did you say?" Suarez, before this video evidence came out, told the FA he said “What did you say?" That is a reliable statement.

They both agree that Evra then said "Why did you kick me?" What they dispute is the answer. Evra claims Suarez said "Because you are black". Suarez claims he said "it was just a normal foul" then shrugged his shoulders. The video evidence shows Suarez shrugging his shoulders, backing up his testimony.
There are inconsistencies in Evra’s testimony. In his evidence, Evra states that he told the players after the game that Suarez said he kicked him "porque tu eres negro" (“because I am black”). None of the four Spanish speaking Manchester United players recalled Evra saying this in their witness testimonies. In the FA’s report, they confirm this is the case but state that it is possible the players simply forgot he said it. They do not point to the other possibility: that he did not say it. Under this scenario, it could be used as evidence that Evra is an unreliable witness.
Another inconsistency is Evra's use of the term "ten times" to describe how many times Suarez allegedly said "negro". Evra has retracted this claim and said it was a "figure of speech". Really?
What about previous form? Suarez has no history of any form of racism and is an ambassador for racial equality. Evra, on the other hand, has been at the centre of a racism scandal in the recent past. It was alleged that ground staff at Chelsea racially abused Evra in 2008. The allegation was thrown out and here is how the panel described Evra's testimony:
"We find Mr Evra's description exaggerated... There was no good reason for Mr Evra to have run over and barged Mr Griffin as he did. It was unnecessarily and gratuitously aggressive of Mr Evra... Mr Evra's suggestion that he was concerned about Mr Strudwick's safety is farfetched. They were two grown men having an apparently strong verbal disagreement but no more than that. The clear implication by Mr Evra that Mr Griffin's pitchfork gave some reason for concern about Mr Strudwick's safety is ridiculous...We find Mr Evra's account exaggerated and unreliable. It is an attempt to justify a physical intervention by him which cannot reasonably be justified..."
Compare this to the conclusions drawn by the panel in the Suarez case:
"We considered it improbable that Mr Evra would act in such a dishonest way in order to damage the reputation of a fellow professional whose footballing skills he admires, with whom he had had no previous run-ins, and who he does not think is a racist."

 

[Leighgull]

How Events Transpired

The conversation began with Evra saying "Concha de tu hermana" which translates as "your sister's pussy". Evra says he meant “****ing hell”. There is no dispute about who started the argument: it was Evra. There is no dispute about who threw the first insult: Evra. The dispute is whether Suarez’s reaction used racially offensive words. The FA ruled that it did.

So, how unreliable a witness was Suarez, and how reliable was Evra?

Immediately after Evra’s insult, the video evidence that can be lip-read shows Suarez saying "What did you say?" Suarez, before this video evidence came out, told the FA he said “What did you say?" That is a reliable statement.

They both agree that Evra then said "Why did you kick me?" What they dispute is the answer. Evra claims Suarez said "Because you are black". Suarez claims he said "it was just a normal foul" then shrugged his shoulders. The video evidence shows Suarez shrugging his shoulders, backing up his testimony.
There are inconsistencies in Evra’s testimony. In his evidence, Evra states that he told the players after the game that Suarez said he kicked him "porque tu eres negro" (“because I am black”). None of the four Spanish speaking Manchester United players recalled Evra saying this in their witness testimonies. In the FA’s report, they confirm this is the case but state that it is possible the players simply forgot he said it. They do not point to the other possibility: that he did not say it. Under this scenario, it could be used as evidence that Evra is an unreliable witness.
Another inconsistency is Evra's use of the term "ten times" to describe how many times Suarez allegedly said "negro". Evra has retracted this claim and said it was a "figure of speech". Really?
What about previous form? Suarez has no history of any form of racism and is an ambassador for racial equality. Evra, on the other hand, has been at the centre of a racism scandal in the recent past. It was alleged that ground staff at Chelsea racially abused Evra in 2008. The allegation was thrown out and here is how the panel described Evra's testimony:
"We find Mr Evra's description exaggerated... There was no good reason for Mr Evra to have run over and barged Mr Griffin as he did. It was unnecessarily and gratuitously aggressive of Mr Evra... Mr Evra's suggestion that he was concerned about Mr Strudwick's safety is farfetched. They were two grown men having an apparently strong verbal disagreement but no more than that. The clear implication by Mr Evra that Mr Griffin's pitchfork gave some reason for concern about Mr Strudwick's safety is ridiculous...We find Mr Evra's account exaggerated and unreliable. It is an attempt to justify a physical intervention by him which cannot reasonably be justified..."
Compare this to the conclusions drawn by the panel in the Suarez case:
"We considered it improbable that Mr Evra would act in such a dishonest way in order to damage the reputation of a fellow professional whose footballing skills he admires, with whom he had had no previous run-ins, and who he does not think is a racist."

Mr Evra is clearly a Bellend as is Mr. Suarez.

 

[Southwest Seagull]

The whole Evra/Suarez thing was a complete farse, no doubt. Unfortunately no one seemed to care because of Suarez's reputation and Evra playing for a then powerful Manchester United team.

As for his talent, well, he is something else. I don't think there's a better out and out number 9 in the world.

 

[Kevlar]

I don't think Suarez is racist
evra's testimony would not it seems stand upon court
but I would not describe someone's colour when arguing with them

 

[Theatre of Trees]

[yt]RT6tUK1WbC4[/yt]

A recent Uruguayan advert which suggests Saurez is not averse to taking the piss out of himself

 

[portslade seagull]

According to some dreamers on here we probably have a transfer pot big enough to sign him