Football
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 188 comments are related to the topic:
John Terry charged by the FA
John Terry charged by the FA
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 188
|
By:
Utter madness
so Not guilty off the law = guilty off the FA I can only assume the fact that mr Terry mentioned the words 'bl@ck c*nt' at all will be enough for Paul Goulding QC to hand out a ban Even if his claim he only used them to deny saying them in the first place was good enough for m'lud This case wont do a damn thing to improve the wretched record of racism in this country And as for on-field abuse When you see the likes of rooney, gerrard, carroll, cole effing and blinding at hapless EPL refs just makes you wonder what the FA are up to here |
|
By:
thelatarps, what you are missing is the fact that the burden of proof in criminal cases and civil cases (as in FA tribunals) is different. In order to be proven guilty in a criminal case, the burden of proof required is beyond all reasonable doubt, whereas in civil cases it is on the balance of probabilities. To that end, it is possible to convince a tribunal of guilt without being able to convince a jury of guilt.
|
|
By:
.... whilst ferdinand stood up in court admitted some stuff, lied about other stuff until shown video , and isnt charged by anyone
|
|
By:
The hypocrisy of people in this country is staggering. Suarez is accused of racially abusing Evra and a witch hunt ensues - every man and his dog wants Suarez hung out to dry. The context in which he said it is apparently irrelevant, the mere fact that he said it is enough. Meanwhile, Terry claims what he said was merely repeating what Anton said, and all of a sudden context is vital, he should be taken at his word and let off. It stinks.
|
|
By:
Not really. Suarez admitted calling hima negarito repeatedly and was even grabbing his skin to make the point
|
|
By:
Read the report sj.
|
|
By:
Though, even if he had admitted to using the word 'negrito' - which he didn't - that proves nothing. Unless you are claiming the whole Argentinian side in this photo are racially abusing their friend?
http://m24digital.com/en/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/negro.jpg |
|
By:
No need to read a report mate I saw it when they showed it over and over again. Why does he keep grabbing his arm? Dont try and compare the two cos there is no comparison
|
|
By:
You saw him say the word negrito? Why did nobody else see that? Pinching someone's arm means nothing. You're right, there's no comparison, there is no evidence that Suarez racially abused Evra whereas there is evidence that Terry racially abused Ferdinand. Throw the book at the scumbag.
|
|
By:
That burden of proof argument is utter bull
Used, I believe to whop a wacking great fine on OJ simpson for the death of his wife, I dont think he paid barely 10% of it The Suarez case was pathetic SUarez was not done for racism, but for abusive conduct Indeed the adjudication noted that 'we dont believe mr Suarez is racist', nor did mr evra in the same report The point being Suarez, had his case gone to the law courts, would undoubtedly have got off scot free, his testimony was no more shaky than mr Evra's after all. The 8 game ban was a result of outside pressures and influences applied to the kangaroo court headed by Paul GOulding QC In short it was politically expedient to ban Suarez No lover of chelsea but I really hope they take the FA to town on this one Hope abramovic gets a team of lawyers that blows the FA out the water. Got a feeling the FA wont be dealing with the shambles that was LFC under king kenny |
|
By:
Your assessment of the Suarez case is spot on (though your assessment of the burden of proof argument less so). However, the FA set a dangerous precedent when they caved in to pressure and banned a man for 8 games for something most players get away with on a weekly basis without even a yellow card. Therefore, they have no choice than to ban Terry for an equally long time, otherwise they face rebuttal from the legal team at Anfield, though, if that team was worth anything Suarez would never have received such a ludicrous ban in the first place.
|
|
By:
Suarez did admit to saying it. He said he was calling him what one of his team mates (Hernandez) calls him. Suarez is a little rat, and clearly knew what he was doing. Evra blew it out of all proportion because he, equally, is a rat. Id bet far worse goes on on a regular basis that we never hear of as its left on the pitch. All the FA have done is come down hard on it which is exactly what they have to do, and this means Terry will get some sort of punishment similar to Suarez. Any player is responsible for their actions on the pitch. Neither of them needed to do what they did and deserve what they get imo.
|
|
By:
Suarez admitted to saying 'negro', a word which, as depicted above, is used in Spanish as a term of endearment. The FA, completely unacceptably, given their lack of knowledge on the subject, interpreted it to mean something different. Meanwhile, there are no linguistic challenges in interpreting "black c**t", so I look forward to their verdict.
|
|
By:
Suarez pinched his skin to reaffirm he doesn't talk to people of that colour.
|
|
By:
How do you know? In my youth, I pinched many a young lady's backside whilst on a night out. It had nothing to do with their race.
|
|
By:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCGG2_hNB4A&feature=related
I don't know, but I'd back it at 1.01 to be true. No problem if you want to delude yourself. |
|
By:
You are taking the word of a man who was proven to have lied throughout the whole sorry affair, I'm happy to take my chances with the one who told the truth.
|
|
By:
The issue here is not racism but on field behaviour
Suarez acted like a right turd in that game and ought to have been dismissed, Evra too perhaps THe ref gave the pair of them a warning and they continued bickering Seems to me that refs in the EPL are reluctant to send players off, especially the big names for what is very bad behaviour Even in spain Barca and Real M players arent immune Seem to remember 5 madrid players and staff getting sent off in 1 game last season. |
|
By:
You are quite right thelatarps. The FA, and indeed Evra himself, concluded that "Mr Suarez is not a racist" (as you mentioned earlier). So how can an unprecedented 8 game ban be justified? It cannot. Like Suarez or not - I appreciate that 99% do not - the punishment was unfair, draconian and just plain wrong. But now the FA have given it, they have to give it to Terry too.
|
|
By:
You're saying Evra just made it all up. Mind boggling
 |
|
By:
That's not what I said at all, he lied about what he had been called though and the evidence is clear to see in the FA's own report in to the affair. By default, having been shown to lie about something, the rest of what he said can't be believed. I'd show you if I thought you had the slightest intention of approaching the matter with an open mind.
|
|
By:
Evra made it all up. You're right.
|
|
By:
Evra reported that he had been called a n***er. He knew that not to be true. Why did he do that?
|
|
By:
The mind boggles.
|
|
By:
Like I said, the evidence is there in the report. If you have the open mind to go and read it is completely down to you.
|
|
By:
Evra made it all up, you're right. Suarez was just pinching his skin to diffuse the situation, that's normal, you're right.
Mind boggling.  |
|
By:
Haha and I'm the deluded one. You're just doing the same as Evra and the FA did - putting words in someone's mouth.
|
|
By:
In case you decide to engage your brain...
90. Mr Evra's evidence was that, in response to his question "Why did you kick me?", Mr Suarez replied "Porque tu eres negro". Mr Evra said that at the time Mr Suarez made that comment, he (Mr Evra) understood it to mean "Because you are a n*gger". He now says that he believes the words used by Mr Suarez mean "Because you are black". We shall consider further below Mr Evra's understanding of the Spanish word "negro". 92. Mr Evra said that he followed up Mr Suarez's reply "Because you are black" by saying "Habla otra vez asi, te voy a dar una porrada", which means "Say it to me again, I'm going to punch you". Mr Suarez replied by saying "No hablo con los negros". Mr Evra said that at the time, he understood this to mean "I don't speak to n*ggers", although he now says it means "I don't speak to blacks". 153. Mr Marriner's report was contained in an Extraordinary Incident Report Form which he filed with the FA. His report is in the following terms: "I have to bring to your attention an unsavoury event which happened today and was reported to me in my dressing room after the above game. Sir Alex Ferguson and Patrice Evra entered my dressing room to register an official complaint about a comment made to Patrice Evra by Liverpool player Luis Suarez. During a coming together in the penalty area in the second half of play, Luis Suarez is alleged to have said to Patrice Evra "I don't talk to you because you n*ggers". So those are 3 paragraphs taken word for word from the FA’s report. So, let us assume this is correct and Patrice Evra has told the truth in all 3 quotes. See then, the following evidence, again from Patrice Evra but also confirmed by Ryan Giggs: 103. Mr Evra's evidence was that while he was walking towards the referee he said "ref, ref, he just called me a f**king black". He said that he did not know whether the referee heard his comment. The referee said something like "Calm down, Patrice, the game has been brilliant, stop the pushing between you and Suarez, the game is going well." 114. Mr Giggs gave evidence before us. He said that he was reasonably close to the referee and after he had shown Mr Evra the yellow card, Mr Giggs approached the referee and asked him why he had booked Mr Evra. The referee said to Mr Giggs "just calm Patrice down". Mr Giggs then moved away from the referee and towards Mr Evra. It was obvious to Mr Giggs from looking at Mr Evra that he was upset. He said that Mr Evra did not seem quite with it, you might call it red mist. Mr Giggs said to Mr Evra "what's happened?". Mr Evra replied "he called me black". Mr Giggs assumed that Mr Evra was speaking about Mr Kuyt since he had just been booked for some kind of tussle with Mr Kuyt. Mr Giggs said to Mr Evra "did the ref hear it?", to which Mr Evra replied "I don't think so". Mr Giggs then told Mr Evra to calm down and not get himself sent off. The contradiction – Patrice Evra confirms that he understood the words he attributes to Luis Suarez at the time as meaning "Because you are a n*gger" and "I don't speak to n*ggers". He confirms this in the evidence given along with Sir Alex Ferguson immediately after the game, and again in paragraph 180 it is confirmed by the commission: 180: The experts noted that, in interview, Mr Evra translated the word "negro" as French "nègre", which is translatable as both "Negro" and "n*gger" and in current French usage is clearly a racially offensive term. The more neutral term in French is "noir". He accepts at the hearing that his translation is wrong “He now says that he believes the words used by Mr Suarez mean "Because you are black".” (paragraph 90) If this is the case why does Patrice Evra and Ryan Giggs’ evidence in paragraphs 103 and 114 quote the word “black” prior to both the evidence given in paragraph 153 and confirmed only at the hearing? There are only two possible explanations – 1) The evidence in paragraphs 103 and 114 is correct meaning Patrice Evra and Sir Alex Ferguson gave false evidence to the referee as quoted in paragraph 153. If Patrice Evra knew the translation was “black” on the pitch, why is he quoting “n*gger” later in the Referee’s room? Why did he repeat the accusation in the interview with Canal+ if he knew the correct translation whilst complaining to the referee at the time of the incident? 2) The evidence contained in paragraphs 103 and 114 is false as provided by both Patrice Evra and Ryan Giggs. If the evidence given to the Referee after the game in paragraph 153 is true then both pieces of evidence given in paragraphs 103 and 114 has to be false. It is not possible for the evidence from paragraphs 103, 114 and 153 to all be correct simultaneously. The panel accepted as true all three pieces of evidence but it is impossible for them to do so. Either Patrice Evra and Sir Alex Ferguson have provided false evidence in paragraph 153 or Patrice Evra and Ryan Giggs provided false evidence in paragraphs 102 and 114 as the paragraphs are a clear contradiction of the other. |
|
By:
You're right Ben. He was pinching his skin to diffuse the situation. Perfectly normal. Where do these turnips turn up from?
God save us. |
|
By:
I haven't mentioned skin pinching, only Evra's proven lies. I'm not saying Suarez wasn't racist, never have and never will. My position is that I don't know, just like every person in the world other than Suarez and Evra. I'm happy to maintain that position, however, whilst most are happy to condemn a man as a racist when they have no idea whether he actually is or not. The point is that the FA chose to believe Evra's turn of events, despite the fact that, according to their own report, he lied. You can't believe the word of a liar.
|
|
By:
Evras reactions, and Suarezs actions certainly coincide with Evras belief that Suarez was being racist. Just watching the incident that becomes abundantly clear.
|
|
By:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCGG2_hNB4A&feature=related
|
|
By:
No they don't, they coincide with them both being little c*nts, which everybody knew before this incident. Nothing to see here.
|
|
By:
Lol. Fingers in the ears, no wonder the likes of sj gave up reasoning with you. Very sad indeed.
|
|
By:
Yet I'm the only one to put any black and white evidence on the table. Deluded indeed.
|
|
By:
Sorry sj, I tried, lad is just deluded.
|
|
By:
sj gave up 'reasoning' with me as soon as he realised he didn't actually have a clue what had happened
. Suarez admitted to saying 'negrito' indeed. |
|
By:
Let's just hope you don't do jury service, mind boggling.
|
|
By:
Yeah, heaven forbid we have someone on the jury that pays attention to the facts instead of the papers. Whatever would we do?!
|
|
By:
Nothing wrong with living in a cloud of delusion, no doubt you wake up thinking your James Bond every morning.
What do you think happened, or do you have no view on the chain of events? |