B
BigBlueBalls
Guest
A witch only has a pair of tits, that shower have a squad full, and the state of them suggest they may be recalled to France for not being all they seem.
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.
ECHO Comment: "Fears of Witch-hunt Against Liverpool FC"
- Thread starter davek
- Start date
- Status
The Equaliser
Player Valuation: £50m
Here's the latest attempt at defending him....http://www.thisisanfield.com/2012/01/professor-in-hispanic-studies-dissects-the-fas-suarez-report/
Matt Damon
Player Valuation: £60m
Well they'd have to appeal, otherwise he is guilty as he was found guilty.
They can try and deny it all they like. But the mask has slipped.
B
BigBlueBalls
Guest
They won't appeal on the grounds they don't want to sully the 'kick racism' campaign.
Shame they didn't respect the 'kick hooliganism out' campaign in 1984.
Still, ''respect'' for tuning in eventually.
Shame they didn't respect the 'kick hooliganism out' campaign in 1984.
Still, ''respect'' for tuning in eventually.
Matt Damon
Player Valuation: £60m
Kenny Dalgish. Stoking the paranoia on RAWK there.
"hasn't he done this before" ....
Etc.
Instead of dealing with the FACTS. Dalglish has done nothing but tried to wage some sort of campaign.
Neglecting his legal duties under Race Relations and Equality Legislation. i.e. acted illegally in my view
Nailed in The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition
At last Liverpool have seen sense. At least that was the initial reaction when news broke that the club would not be appealing against the eight-match ban and £40,000 fine imposed on Luis Suárez for racially abusing Patrice Evra. What we soon learned, however, was that Liverpool had no intention of showing any contrition, Suárez would not be apologising and, in the eyes of the club, the Football Association is to blame for damaging the reputation of a man that was found to have used the word "negro" seven times.
The blind loyalty that Liverpool have shown towards Suárez throughout this sorry saga continues to shine through despite the verdict two weeks ago and the publication of a remarkable 115-page document, compiled by the FA's independent panel, that presented a compelling case against Suárez and, at the same time, highlighted the shambles that the Merseyside club had made of trying to defend the player.
Accepting the guilty verdict represented a chance to move on; instead Liverpool have poured fuel on the fire and thrown in a couple of sticks of dynamite for good measure. In Liverpool's statement, the FA and the three-man panel it selected is accused of constructing "a highly subjective case" against Suárez. There is also stinging criticism of the report, which is described as "clearly subjective" and, as a result, held responsible by Liverpool for tainting Suárez's image.
And then we come to Suárez, whose own statement screamed his innocence and flew in the face of everything the linguistic experts told the FA panel when they analysed what the player said to Evra at Anfield, the context in which it was said and how his comments would be interpreted in his homeland and beyond. The experts' conclusion, lest it be forgotten, was that Suárez's remarks would be "considered racially offensive in Uruguay and other regions in of Latin America".
The report pointed out that while this information was useful it "is the commission's task to decide whether the use of the word in England is abusive or insulting". Suárez, judging by his statement, has still not grasped this fundamental point and also conveniently ignored the acrimonious context in which he used the word "negro" when he disputed the findings of the language experts, Professor Peter Wade and Dr James Scorer.
"In my country, 'negro' is a word we use commonly, a word which doesn't show any lack of respect and is even less so a form of racist abuse," Suárez said. "Based on this, everything which has been said so far is totally false. I will carry out the suspension with the resignation of someone who hasn't done anything wrong and who feels extremely upset by the events."
This was merely in keeping with Liverpool's approach throughout, which has smacked of arrogance at times, no more so than when those ridiculous T-shirts supporting Suárez were worn at Wigan, and on other occasions raised questions about how seriously they took the issue.
We learn in the report that when Phil Dowd, the fourth official at Anfield, knocked on the home dressing room door shortly after the Manchester United match to ask Dalglish – who had been made aware of the allegations at this point – that Andre Marriner, the referee, needed to see him and Suárez in the officials' room, the Liverpool manager, alluding to the rules that are normally in place, "made a joke about having to wait 30 minutes before speaking to the referee." When Dalglish did eventually visit Marriner (without Suárez), his response to Evra's accusations was: "Hasn't he done this before?"
Liverpool should have spent less time worrying about discrediting Evra and more time getting their testimonies right. Suárez, after being asked the same question six times in the hearing, was forced to admit it was not true that he had pinched Evra to defuse the row, as he had claimed in his witness statement. Peter McCormick, Suárez's representative, tried to explain this confusion, that cast further doubt on the credibility of the player's evidence, on "bad drafting".
Every bit as bad was the moment in the report when we learn that Damien Comolli, the club's director of football, and Dirk Kuyt, the Liverpool midfielder, changed their statements after realising that Suárez had given a different account to them. It is cringeworthy reading Kuyt's attempt to deal with this discrepancy in his witness statement. "I am aware that LS will state in evidence that what he actually said in response to the remark from PE was (translated into English) "Why, black?" or "Why, negro?" and I am perfectly happy to accept that this is what he said. I may have misunderstood what he was saying or perhaps sought to interpret what he was saying as what I thought LS might have said when, in fact, it was not what he said."
Yet according to Liverpool's statement before the Manchester City game, the mistakes have been made by the commission rather than the Anfield club or Suárez. If Liverpool truly believed that was the case they would have appealed. Instead they took the sensible decision before pressing the self-destruct button. Again.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jan/03/liverpool-loyalty-luis-suarez-contrition
At last Liverpool have seen sense. At least that was the initial reaction when news broke that the club would not be appealing against the eight-match ban and £40,000 fine imposed on Luis Suárez for racially abusing Patrice Evra. What we soon learned, however, was that Liverpool had no intention of showing any contrition, Suárez would not be apologising and, in the eyes of the club, the Football Association is to blame for damaging the reputation of a man that was found to have used the word "negro" seven times.
The blind loyalty that Liverpool have shown towards Suárez throughout this sorry saga continues to shine through despite the verdict two weeks ago and the publication of a remarkable 115-page document, compiled by the FA's independent panel, that presented a compelling case against Suárez and, at the same time, highlighted the shambles that the Merseyside club had made of trying to defend the player.
Accepting the guilty verdict represented a chance to move on; instead Liverpool have poured fuel on the fire and thrown in a couple of sticks of dynamite for good measure. In Liverpool's statement, the FA and the three-man panel it selected is accused of constructing "a highly subjective case" against Suárez. There is also stinging criticism of the report, which is described as "clearly subjective" and, as a result, held responsible by Liverpool for tainting Suárez's image.
And then we come to Suárez, whose own statement screamed his innocence and flew in the face of everything the linguistic experts told the FA panel when they analysed what the player said to Evra at Anfield, the context in which it was said and how his comments would be interpreted in his homeland and beyond. The experts' conclusion, lest it be forgotten, was that Suárez's remarks would be "considered racially offensive in Uruguay and other regions in of Latin America".
The report pointed out that while this information was useful it "is the commission's task to decide whether the use of the word in England is abusive or insulting". Suárez, judging by his statement, has still not grasped this fundamental point and also conveniently ignored the acrimonious context in which he used the word "negro" when he disputed the findings of the language experts, Professor Peter Wade and Dr James Scorer.
"In my country, 'negro' is a word we use commonly, a word which doesn't show any lack of respect and is even less so a form of racist abuse," Suárez said. "Based on this, everything which has been said so far is totally false. I will carry out the suspension with the resignation of someone who hasn't done anything wrong and who feels extremely upset by the events."
This was merely in keeping with Liverpool's approach throughout, which has smacked of arrogance at times, no more so than when those ridiculous T-shirts supporting Suárez were worn at Wigan, and on other occasions raised questions about how seriously they took the issue.
We learn in the report that when Phil Dowd, the fourth official at Anfield, knocked on the home dressing room door shortly after the Manchester United match to ask Dalglish – who had been made aware of the allegations at this point – that Andre Marriner, the referee, needed to see him and Suárez in the officials' room, the Liverpool manager, alluding to the rules that are normally in place, "made a joke about having to wait 30 minutes before speaking to the referee." When Dalglish did eventually visit Marriner (without Suárez), his response to Evra's accusations was: "Hasn't he done this before?"
Liverpool should have spent less time worrying about discrediting Evra and more time getting their testimonies right. Suárez, after being asked the same question six times in the hearing, was forced to admit it was not true that he had pinched Evra to defuse the row, as he had claimed in his witness statement. Peter McCormick, Suárez's representative, tried to explain this confusion, that cast further doubt on the credibility of the player's evidence, on "bad drafting".
Every bit as bad was the moment in the report when we learn that Damien Comolli, the club's director of football, and Dirk Kuyt, the Liverpool midfielder, changed their statements after realising that Suárez had given a different account to them. It is cringeworthy reading Kuyt's attempt to deal with this discrepancy in his witness statement. "I am aware that LS will state in evidence that what he actually said in response to the remark from PE was (translated into English) "Why, black?" or "Why, negro?" and I am perfectly happy to accept that this is what he said. I may have misunderstood what he was saying or perhaps sought to interpret what he was saying as what I thought LS might have said when, in fact, it was not what he said."
Yet according to Liverpool's statement before the Manchester City game, the mistakes have been made by the commission rather than the Anfield club or Suárez. If Liverpool truly believed that was the case they would have appealed. Instead they took the sensible decision before pressing the self-destruct button. Again.
Superb stuff Toffeedan, cannot believe Kuyt isnt being charged, what they were doing borders on a conspiricy to avert the course of justice.
Matt Damon
Player Valuation: £60m
Trouble is you know what their response to that will be...
T-shirts with the racist on.
B
BigBlueBalls
Guest
Not that the FA are any great shakes, but anyone expecting anything different from a self blameless club like the excuse over the road needs their head examining.
Matt Damon
Player Valuation: £60m
This wasn't the FA though. This was an independent commission setup by the FA to investigate.
Dalglish's first response was (referring to Evra) "hasn't he done this before".
Its a disgrace. Instead of investigating he was trying to deflect and undermine Evra. Which is illegal under UK Employment law. He had an obligation to investigate fairly.
It's really hard to find anything in the whole affair where Liverpool can - to the man on the Clapham Omnibus (as the legal jargon goes) - be said to have emerged with ANY credit. Not that their fans see it that way nor the club. There are smatterings in the proceedings where occasionally you get a sense of unease somewhere within LFC but it's not really evident - nor is it the case in any noteworthy person naturally pre-disposed to support Liverpool (i.e. those ex-LFC players who have put their heads over the parapet, barring the obvious example of Collymore) which bears witness to their maintaining "The Liverpool Way" with the significant presence they enjoy in the media via their pantheon of famous ex-players - their press friends (McNulty, Green?) however seem to have largely deserted them on this occasion.
Matt Damon
Player Valuation: £60m
Dalglish's insane comments "we know what wasn't released" and his facial expressions and body language show his annoyance and desire not to be embarrassed at having to make a climb down.
They are embarrassed though. The news that they apparently tried to change their evidence is devastating.
I'm glad to say if this was Everton, we'd of said nothing until an investigation had taken place (internally as well) and then if guilty action would be taken.
Why is it only that lot seem to think the normal rules of UK law and common decency don't apply to them?
There has always been a sense of Liverpool (the place) being pre-disposed to a contrary view on life. I can only imagine that this stand alone position they have taken is another example of this (foolish) behaviour. Dalglish's comments look like a veiled climbdown to me by suggesting "it's all ok boys, despite the findings it's only because it's not quite what it should be.. so let's just move on and maintain the high moral ground we've built"
Everton, for all their faults, are however cast from a different mould. For a start we're the original club in the city so there was, at least for a long period in our history, a sense that we were innovative, onside, owned by (let's call it) 'older money' which, whilst inhibitive in progress in some ways was a boon in other ways (the stadium as it was once thought of as a great venue & the way we did things once upon a time). LFC had I suppose to cast themselves in a different light - they became (first of all) a populist movement & built on that with the Shankly myth & the worldwide admiration that their success deserved. They have this socialist myth built by Shankly & maintained thereafter. I often feel - living over in The Wirral - that Everton are absolutely (by a wide margin) the more popular side round many of these parts. I have my theory on that score based on some of the exodus of aspiring middle class families to the peninsula in the 1930s-1960s. In that period Everton were most certainly the big side & consequently that (family) legacy is maintained to this day. I'm not saying Everton are the middle class club - merely that those who moved over here just happened to be (aspiring) middle classes &, because we were the popular/bigger side, more Blues made that exodus than Reds. In a similar vein the decimation (actually it's a much bigger percentage) of the districts of Everton & the surrounding areas in the 50s & 60s to the new towns would perhaps also have removed a larger trance of Blues than Reds (as things stood at the time).
Matt Damon
Player Valuation: £60m
I also think they've been spoilt by recent history in which they've been accustomed to getting their own way on pretty much anything, and like some child that is told "NO" they suddenly don't know how to respond.
Sometimes I get the impression that they really do think they're above the rules.
davek
Player Valuation: £150m
Please read: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/ar...-W-Henry-stand-Luis-Suarez-Martin-Samuel.html
Liverpool FC gutted and filleted by Martin Samuel.
No hiding place for the classless Klansmen.
Liverpool FC gutted and filleted by Martin Samuel.
No hiding place for the classless Klansmen.
- Status