Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

  • Participation within this subforum is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

ECHO Comment: "Fears of Witch-hunt Against Liverpool FC"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Matt Damon said:
To be honest, Dalglish's comments could be considered to be in violation of the Equality Act 2010, given that he didn't seem prepared to investigate the complaint and was infact trying to defame Evra's character on baseless evidence.

Dalgish's response is disgraceful really. He SHOULD of said to the ref. "Ok Ref I'm going to investigate this myself on behalf of LFC as Suarez's employer"

He was LEGALLY OBLIGED to do that. But didn't. Ergo Dalglish broke UK law.
Click to expand...

The comparison between SAF's behaviour and Dalglish's is there for all to see and contrast.
 
I've got to admit I've got my tail between my legs a bit because when I first saw the headline on Sky News it looked as if the FA had called the case 'inconsistent and unreliable', it took about 10 minutes to clock on. That restaurant Spanish line made me laugh though.
 

Oh dear. All the kopite linguistic experts need some retraining.

The experts reviewed the paragraphs in Mr Evra's witness statement where he described
what happened in the goalmouth, together with video clips of the goalmouth coming
together. They proceeded, for the purpose of this part of their report, on the basis that the
substance of Mr Evra's account was accurate (ie allowing for linguistic errors made by a
non-native speaker of Spanish). Having done so, the experts provided the following
observations on Mr Evra's account.
178. Mr Evra stated that the goalmouth incident started when he addressed Mr Suarez,
beginning with the phrase "Concha de tu hermana". According to the experts, the literal
translation is "your sister's ****" and it can be taken as a general swear word expressing
anger, although the word "concha" is not as taboo as the English word "****". It is thus
equivalent to "****ing hell" or "**** me". If directed at someone in particular, it can also be
understood as "[you] son of a bitch".
179. Assuming Mr Suarez responded with "Porque tu eres negro", this would be interpreted in
Uruguay and other regions of Latin America as racially offensive. When the noun is used
in the way described by Mr Evra, it is not a friendly form of address, but is used in an
insulting way: it is given as the rationale for an act of physical aggression (the foul), as if
the person deserved such an attack since they are black

The experts concluded their observations on Mr Evra's account as follows. If Mr Suarez
used the words "negro" and "negros" as described by Mr Evra, this would be understood
as offensive and offensive in racial terms in Uruguay and Spanish-speaking America more
generally. The physical gesture of touching Mr Evra's arm would also, in the context of the
phrases used, be interpreted as racist.
 
I'd say that the FA has covered itself fairly well in complying with the law. Investigated. Transparent. Judgement based on the facts presented.

LFC's response has been woeful. They've got absolutely no chance at appeal.

Plus they'd be wide open to accusations of not taking RRA, and other laws seriously with a non-transparent policies. Which is itself illegal.

I'd also personally think they'd be wide open to civil action if Evra decided to take it further.
 
Matt Damon said:
I'd say that the FA has covered itself fairly well in complying with the law. Investigated. Transparent. Judgement based on the facts presented.

LFC's response has been woeful. They've got absolutely no chance at appeal.

Plus they'd be wide open to accusations of not taking RRA, and other laws seriously with a non-transparent policies. Which is itself illegal.

I'd also personally think they'd be wide open to civil action if Evra decided to take it further.
Click to expand...

Reading that report I'd be surprised if Liverpool appealed and surprised if it went any further. I'm just glad it's over in a way because we're in a half-decent position on the pitch going in to the New Year.
 
Antonio Barragan said:
Reading that report I'd be surprised if Liverpool appealed and surprised if it went any further. I'm just glad it's over in a way because we're in a half-decent position on the pitch going in to the New Year.
Click to expand...

You're going to have NGO's and other groups up your arse mate on your policies on racism and discrimination.

Not covered yourselves in any glory whatsoever. Infact I'd say that you're in for a very bumpy ride the next few months.


Specifically it could be argued Kenny Dalglish and your club's press releases incited your fans. Before the investigation was completed. Which is illegal.
 
I think you're being to optimistic to be honest. The FA have dealt with it and that should be that really. As flippant as the club's response was, I doubt there'll be any action taken against it.
 

On top of his other tags, he's also one bad blagger.


"
MR GREANEY: Mr Suarez, the first thing I would like to ask you, now that we have
seen those again, is: is it correct, as you say in paragraph 27 of your witness
statement, that you were trying to defuse or calm down the situation in the goal
mouth?
A. That's why I was explaining to him that it was a normal foul.
Q. Let me be as clear as I can. Was your aim, when you were in the goal mouth, and
speaking to Mr Evra, to calm down the situation? 63
A. I wasn't thinking about speaking to anyone. He was the one to come to me and
speak to me.
Q. What we want to know, or at least I do, is what was in your mind? Was it in your
mind to try to calm down the situation?
A. He was asking me, "Why did you kick me?" Those were football conversations,
and I replied, "This is a normal foul. What do you want me to do?"
Q. Do you see paragraph 27 of your statement? Does it read: "I was trying to defuse
or calm the situation"?
A. By the gesture I was doing with my hands, I could show that I was trying to
explain the situation, because these are conversations that you have in the field.
Q. Mr Suarez, I have to suggest to you that my question is really a very simple one.
In the goal mouth, and in particular as you pinched the skin of Mr Evra, do you say
you were trying to calm the situation?
A. Not after the pinch, because he was saying that he was going to hit me.
Q. I'll just make one more attempt, and then we will move on. In your statement,
over which we have understood you took some care, you have said of the pinching:
"I was trying to defuse the situation." All I wish to know is whether that is true or
not.
A. I was not trying to calm down the situation, but trying to explain to Evra why I
was doing this foul, and when - then he replied, "I'm going to hit you", and I was
trying to show him that he was not untouchable, not in the foul and not by the
gesture that I did with the - by the pinch I was doing to his arm, that he wasn't
untouchable."
247. 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.
248. It was plain to us that Mr Suarez's pinching of Mr Evra's arm was not an attempt to defuse
the situation. It could not conceivably be described in that way. In our judgment, the
pinching was calculated to have the opposite effect, namely to aggravate Mr Evra and to
inflame the situation. We infer that this was Mr Suarez's intention. Mr Suarez's face
reveals hostility towards Mr Evra, the pinching is preceded by Mr Suarez looking Mr Evra 64
up and down, and Mr Suarez steps away having pinched Mr Evra as Mr Kuyt steps in to
face up to Mr Evra.
249. What concerned us also was that Mr Suarez should have made what we considered to be
such an unarguable assertion in his witness statement, ie that the pinching was an attempt
to defuse the situation when it plainly was not.
250. The Commission asked Mr McCormick whether he accepted that the pinching could not
reasonably be construed as an attempt to defuse the situation. He did. The Commission
then asked Mr McCormick what, if anything, we were to infer from the fact that the
assertion was made in Mr Suarez's signed statement in the first place, there being no basis
whatsoever for it. Mr McCormick submitted that it was down to bad drafting. Mr Suarez
was intending to say that his response to Mr Evra's question "Why did you kick me?" was
an attempt to defuse the situation in that Mr Suarez put out his hands as people do when
they say "Look, there's no problem. There's nothing to get excited about".
251. We did not accept that that was a satisfactory explanation for Mr Suarez's plainly incorrect
assertion that the pinching was an attempt to defuse the situation. Mr McCormick had
already explained to us the care that was taken over the preparation of Mr Suarez's
witness statement. An English draft was prepared based on detailed notes of instructions
which had been given by Mr Suarez. That draft was translated into Spanish. There was a
further meeting with Mr Suarez with the two drafts, in English and Spanish in front of
him, and the interpreter present. The witness statement was then finalised and signed.
252. 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.
Click to expand...
 
Witch-hunt my f***in' hole.

LFC should be a pariah club after this.

Fair play to Antonio, he seems pretty balanced about it all. Very different from most of the kopites on my Facebook.
 
Antonio Barragan said:
I think you're being to optimistic to be honest. The FA have dealt with it and that should be that really. As flippant as the club's response was, I doubt there'll be any action taken against it.
Click to expand...

Mate. Do you know how many NGO's, associations and other groups exist which lobby for greater application of penalties application for non compliance with Discrimination laws?


GOOD LUCK! Is all I'll say. Your lot will need it with this being published. **** storm heading your way!
 
This sums up the mood on RAWK; They've dug in so deep they have to keep shoveling;

Dr Iving Home For Xmas on Today at 06:09:14 PM
I genuinely didn't think that after reading this I'd be even more disappointed and disgusted by the FA's verdict. I was wrong.

I really wanted to be able to say with absolute confidence that I can stand by Luis Suarez and his claim to be innocent in this matter, and thankfully I can. Anyone who can't clearly isn't reading the same pages I've just read most of. This is an incredible verdict, littered with inconsistencies, double standards, discrimination, and even bias. I'm ****ing appalled reading it. Every page makes it worse than the one before, and every other page sees a potential headline from a red top over the course of the next week.

This absolutely MUST now be taken further.
http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=284714.280
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register
Back
Top