Liverpool FC

[smashedagain]

Lol. Sky sports are pretty conclusive in their coverage of what happened. The evidence of the striker is unreliable and an appeal is not going to have a favourable outcome.

[Josedinho]

Lol. Sky sports are pretty conclusive in their coverage of what happened. The evidence of the striker is unreliable and an appeal is not going to have a favourable outcome.

Lol. That isn't sky that's what the report basically says. It's 2 peoples view of what happened and they thought one was more believable than the other. Guilty on the basis of probability.

[MANTIS01]

The verdict cannot be overturned 77Dave.

Cliffs:
 - Evra complains to ref during the game about racial abuse - supported in evidence by the ref who later recalls his complaints
 - Evra complains to various ManU players after the game who all testify to support how angry he was
 - Evra feels so strongly he complains to his boss Alex Ferguson
 - Ferguson and Evra visit the referee's room to make an official complaint and ref compiles a report to the FA
 - Evra is interviewed by French TV after the game and complains again. At this point he is sure video evidence will be available to prove his allegations.
 - Evra initiates a full enquiry with FA and testifies at length

In defence Liverpool FC submit that the reason Evra was so angry and did all this was to get revenge on Suarez for kicking him in the knee. The FA reject this.

 - Suarez admits he called Evra "negro" but was trying to be friendly
 - Kenny Dalglish confirms to ref that Suarez called Evra "negro" but says it was in retaliation for being called South American
 - Comolli confirms to ref that Suarez called Evra "negro" in retaliation (Comolli disputes and changes his recollection of the words used later, but that is rejected)
 - Dirk Kuyt says Suarez referenced Evra's colour when speaking to him in Dutch
 - Suarez says both Comolli and Kuyt misheard him and he was trying to be friendly. "Mr Comolli and Mr Kuyt understood Mr Suarez to have told them that when he spoke to Mr Evra he said words which translate into English as, "Because you are black". According to Mr Suarez, Mr Comolli misheard what Mr Suarez said in Spanish, and Mr Kuyt misheard what Mr Suarez said in Dutch."
 - Suarez says he talked to a number of the Spanish speaking Liverpool players about the incident after the game...but none of those players testified.

FA reject the friendly comment defense chiefly because the video evidence clearly shows the two players are in conflict. "His facial expression was hostile towards Mr Evra, he was speaking forcefully to him, he looked Mr Evra up and down and then reached out and pinched Mr Evra's bare left forearm." Moreover Dalglish and Comolli say the comment was in retaliation for being abused himself. Suarez always maintained that pinching Evra's skin was to reconcile the situation but this was proved false."Having said in his witness statement that he was trying to defuse the situation when he touched Mr Evra's left arm in a "pinching type movement", Mr Suarez eventually answered, after persistent questioning, that he was not trying to calm down the situation by doing so. This was one example of where Mr Suarez's witness statement was demonstrated to be inconsistent with the facts as shown in the video footage. No satisfactory explanation was given for this inconsistency."

 - FA employ various linguistic experts to explain the true meaning of these words. They conclude the words used in this context are racially offensive.
 - FA state that Suarez changed his evidence to fit in with the video footage. "He had put forward an interpretation of events which was inconsistent with the contemporaneous video evidence. He had changed his account in a number of important respects without satisfactory explanation." They go on to say "Not only did we reject this evidence of Mr Suarez, but we found it remarkable that he sought to advance a case that was so clearly inconsistent with any sensible appreciation of what happened."
 - Linguistic experts state they have never heard the expression "South American" being used as a term of abuse
 - FA state Evra was an impressive witness being detailed and consistent. They also say he was generous in his concessions towards Suarez.
 - FA state Suarez was elusive and inconsistent with his evidence
 
- Liverpool players and manager wear t-shirts in support of Suarez.

I will be interested to hear LFC's views on this once they have considered the evidence.

[david3103]

Read it all. It's pretty much a best guess. Utd have done their homework far better it seems.

Would it really hurt to put your hands up and accept that Suarez was guilty as charged?

Or would that be too much of a climb down given some of your comments about Evra in earlier posts?

[TightEnd]

Have no axe to grind either way, but on the basis of the report I see no grounds for an appeal or overturn

I don't suppose they will, but I would hope LFC man up, move on and accept their player is very much in the wrong here 

[The Baron]

Read it all. It's pretty much a best guess. Utd have done their homework far better it seems.

Would it really hurt to put your hands up and accept that Suarez was guilty as charged?

Or would that be too much of a climb down given some of your comments about Evra in earlier posts?

He is guilty in the opinion of the FA. For me, it's "we think this, it's probably that". "We'll take 10 times as a figure of speech, oh he said nigger now? Oh ok then." lots of that.

I'm convinced Suarez isn't blameless. Do i think it happened how they said it? Probably not. But the guy is crucified as a commission basically is pulling apart 3 very similar sentences (to me anyway) that happened in a period of minutes. Basically his inconsistent report made them come up with, " he said it 7 times.... Probably"

I too can't see an appeal being any good.

I still think Evra is a prize twat with a huge chip on his shoulder.

[The Baron]

As an example... Do I think any comments started before they got to the ref? Yes. It appears so. To then run with this to "he probably said 'blackie blackie blackie' as we found his statement inconsistent" to be a bit of a stretch. Like Kin said though this isn't a criminal trial so their opinion counts. Sigh

[Acidmouse]

I liked the BBC summary on this:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/16375963.stm

No one comes out of this great, esp Liverpool and people blindly defending him.

[George2Loose]

Pretty clear he could have called him a dirty "n*&*&&*" and some Liverpool fans would still be defending him. Shameful

[The Baron]

http://joescouse.blogspot.com/2012/01/suarez-evra-reliable-witnesses.html

[The Baron]

Pretty clear he could have called him a dirty "n*&*&&*" and some Liverpool fans would still be defending him. Shameful

Pretty idiotic guess.

[George2Loose]

Pretty clear he could have called him a dirty "n*&*&&*" and some Liverpool fans would still be defending him. Shameful

Pretty idiotic guess.

U've read the report. It's pretty obv he's used it as a derogatory term and yet you continue to defend him. Liverpool obv trying to cover it up. None of them are able to get their stories straight yet you continue to focus on Evra as a villian

[smashedagain]

its shamefull that a football club can support a player who is in the wrong. to be fair tho utd do it with Rooney and Chelsea will with Terry.

[The Baron]

So people disagreeing with you/the FA on their OPINION on what happened means they defend racism? How do you come to that outrageous statement? I find it really quite offensive as its obviously aimed at me. I am mixed race.

Well done you. I'll happily never reply to one of your moronic posts ever again.

[George2Loose]

So people disagreeing with you/the FA on their OPINION on what happened means they defend racism? How do you come to that outrageous statement? I find it really quite offensive as its obviously aimed at me. I am mixed race.

Well done you. I'll happily never reply to one of your moronic posts ever again.

Suits me