Other than the monkey chanter, I don't see what Liverpool fans have done that is so wrong.
So they booed Evra. Hardly worthy of comment, surely, let alone condemnation?
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Victimpool FC - Klopp leaving, grown men crying
- Thread starter southstand1882
- Start date
Other than the monkey chanter, I don't see what Liverpool fans have done that is so wrong.
So they booed Evra. Hardly worthy of comment, surely, let alone condemnation?
butcherboy
Gilberto
By booing Evra they are showing their support for racism as they are supporting what that scum of a player did , also LFC so called " community football club " are surly alienating against a section of there own supporters in the way they back that clown shoe of a player .
spurspinter1
Steve Carr
They boo Evra anyway, most people boo Evra.
Evra's reputation as a bit of a clam has nothing to do with the Suarez thing.
By lapping up the propaganda spewed out by their pathetic self pitying club, and celebrating a man convicted of racially abusing an opponent. The stuff on Twitter was disgusting, and if this was happening at Spurs, I believe there would be widespread condemnation within our club and supporters.
It feels like 99% of Pool fans have backed Suarez despite the case. Vile.
Try looking at this from Liverpool fans' point of view.
Do they think that they are supporting a racist? Absolutely not. They believe that what Suarez said to Evra was, at worst, ignorant. They believe that Suarez used a word that, in his home country (and continent, for that matter), is commonly used and not in the least bit offensive. They believe this to be a case of cultural misunderstanding.
Whether or not you agree with them about that is unimportant. The point is that they believe that their man has been unfairly maligned and treated and they are consequently standing by him. I am quite certain that Spurs fans would do the same in similar circumstances.
Meanwhile, Evra provoked the whole affair. He has admitted that he said some vile things to Suarez. Yet he got off scott free. Add the fact that he also happens to be an unlikeable, fractious player for Liverpool's most hated rivals and......bingo.....you have your recipe for a bit of a booing.
Storm in a teacup.
If there was sound evidence to prove that a Spurs player was guilty of racist behaviour, then yes.....we would condemn whichever of our players was guilty.
But when the evidence consists of nothing more than one man's word against another's; and when there is a clear cultural difference which could have led to misunderstanding, then I firmly believe that we would stand by our man.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Honestly I think this is a blatant case of selective ignorance (by them, certainly not on your part) with regards to it being a misunderstanding.
I do not need to speak Spanish or be fully informed on Uruaguayan culture to see the scowl on Suarez' face. Context is everything. If I were to say to you "You silly fudger" with a smile on my face you would know I was being jovial and most likely poking fun, if I were to say it with anger - with a scowl on my face - you would know full well it wasnt meant with innocence. You wouldnt need to understand English to get the gist of my intentions in either case.
Suarez was abusing him, trying to offend and/or wind Evra up. It really is that simple.
Whether or not he was justified in doing so is another matter, what counts is that he was caught. He wasnt misunderstood, and he has been found guilty.
That Liverpool fans do not see it that way is not a genuine belief, or blind ignorance, its a concious choice to twist the situation to allow them to continue supporting their player. It also plays perfectly into their persecution complex as well.
I am 100% confident that had the same incident happened with Suarez as a Spurs player he would not have had that support at all. He would have been vilified by the majority. Ive not doubt that he would hav ebeen afforded the chance to apologise, move on, and win back our affection for most of that majority. Though I suspect a vocal minority would be against him no matter what from that moment on.
I am also 100% certain Levy and Redknapp would not have reacted like LFC, with those ridiculous T-Shirts and Libelous statements on the website. Most likely Levy would have kept his own counsel, and Redknapp try and diffuse the situation, but nothing to that level. I also think he would have released a statement of apology (on Levys order) and probably had some in house punishment - if only for show.
Agreed that Spurs and Levy would have handled things far better than the people at Liverpool.
But I have to disagree with you about Suarez's intent. His facial expression is not evidence enough to convict.
We know that Suarez would have been angry because Evra had just made some vile comments about Suarez's family. Hence the scowl. Evra made those comments in fluent Spanish. So it was natural for Suarez to be replying in his own language and thinking from his own cultural standpoint. It would have been very easy to assume that a fluent Spanish speaker (as Evra had proved himself to be) shared the same cultural understanding of the word "negro".
And in those precise circumstances, it is perfectly plausible for Suarez to have been angry with Evra, to have used the word "negro" but still not to have meant any racist intent.
And yes, I'm sure you're right that Liverpool fans are predisposed to believe Suarez. But they're doing nothing that any other set of fans wouldn't do in the same circumstances, IMO. And the reason for that is that there is no evidence which conclusively proves what happened, what was said or what was meant. It was one man's word against another's. Nothing more. In a proper court of law, there wouldn't have been a prayer of getting a conviction. In fact, the case wouldn't have got anywhere near court.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Sorry mate, but his entire defence was built upon a supposed cultural misunderstanding where he was being somehow cordial. He wasnt, thats clear as day.
Had we seen them make a seemingly civil exchange, followed by all the fall out, I would be in full agreement with your comments here. However, they didnt - as I said - context is everything.
I have no duobt that after what Evra said Suarez wanted to give as good as he got. Ive no doubt his mouth ran away from him. Id also easily buy into the idea he isnt actually 'a racist' but used racist language to cause offence.
None of which counter that he is alleged to have made racist comment, was clearly trying to offend Evra, got caught and his 'defece' is completely illogical (unless Im really missing the point!).
There isnt a defence of him for the fans, particularly since the club has not had him make an apology and instead tried to perpetuate this idea that he is somehow an innocent in it all.
Had we seen them make a seemingly civil exchange, followed by all the fall out, I would be in full agreement with your comments here. However, they didnt - as I said - context is everything.
I have no duobt that after what Evra said Suarez wanted to give as good as he got. Ive no doubt his mouth ran away from him. Id also easily buy into the idea he isnt actually 'a racist' but used racist language to cause offence.
None of which counter that he is alleged to have made racist comment, was clearly trying to offend Evra, got caught and his 'defece' is completely illogical (unless Im really missing the point!).
There isnt a defence of him for the fans, particularly since the club has not had him make an apology and instead tried to perpetuate this idea that he is somehow an innocent in it all.
You seem happy to dismiss the fact he was found guilty at a tribunal. You dont know what led him to say something, nor, exactly what he said and how. The people who found him guilty obviously do know, and blew that theory out of the water.
Suarez IS NOT the victim, and the sooner people stop acting like he did nothing wrong the better. Its this head in the sand bollox that causes 30,000 people to boo a man for getting called a "n#gger".
F365's mailbag
http://www.football365.com/mailbox/7466375/Mailbox
Its good the majority of people can see the reality
http://www.football365.com/mailbox/7466375/Mailbox
Its good the majority of people can see the reality
Agreed again that LFC have handled the whole thing poorly.
But (yet again!) I have to disagree with you about Suarez's facial expression conclusively betraying his guilt. It does nothing of the sort, IMO.
Let's take the facts in isolation:
1. Evra made some vile comments about Suarez's family. We know this because Evra has admitted as much in his testimony.
2. Evra made those comments in fluent Spanish.
3. Suarez responded in Spanish, using the word "negro".
4. In Latin American Spanish, "negro" is a commonly used slang word that doesn't have the racist connotation or intent that it does in England.
5. The only evidence in this case is one man's words against another's.
6. Misunderstandings can and do occur - especially when cultural and linguistic differences are added to the mix.
So what can we deduce?
Suarez had good reason to be angry. No doubt about that. Hence the scowl on his face.
But can we assume that, just because he was angry, his use of the word "negro" was intended to be racist? Absolutely not. It's still perfectly plausible that, in the course an angry exchange, Suarez could have used the word "negro" in its traditional Latin American sense.
Do you think that the following angry tirade, in vernacular English, is possible....?
"For fudge's sake, mate, you really tinkle me off sometimes. You're acting like a complete clam. fudge off."
I think it is.
Now "mate", in England, doesn't have the same precise, same meaning as "negro" in Latin America. But the point is that an apparently friendly word can still legitimately be used in the midst of an angry exchange.
And we have no way....absolutely no way....of knowing for a fact that this wasn't the case in the Suarez / Evra exchange.
There is a point of principle that is at the core of our justice system in this country. I know that I don't have to say what it is. Suffice to say that, in this case, the necessary proof simply isn't there.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Fair points. Also consider though that this is a man who has been living in europe for several years and should be very aware of the local do's and dont's.
That aside, Im not entirely sold. But you have certainly given me food for thought.
That aside, Im not entirely sold. But you have certainly given me food for thought.
spurspinter1
Steve Carr
He was born with that though, and to be fair I'd be angry having to play with "Hendo" Carroll and Charlie fudging Adam
You're right.
I have no way of knowing exactly what Suarez said or how he said it or what he really meant.
But neither do you.
And neither do the people who were on the tribunal.
There is only one person who knows.
This is a case of one man's word against another's, complicated by cultural and linguistic differences.
I repeat, in the real world, this case wouldn't have got within a million miles of court, let alone securing a conviction.
You say we have no way of knowing, but we dont need to. What came out in the tribunal convicted him as guilty, and he was banned for 8 games. Do you really think the trial consisted of a few bullet points that the panel read in the newspaper?
You are defending him because you dont think there was enough evidence? Yet there is ZERO evidence that would suggest he said it as "mate" or "clam". Just say "clam" then, and not "nigger".
Yeah, totally agreed that Suarez should have known better. I suspect that had Evra made his comments in English, this whole furore would never have occurred.
By the way, I also fully accept that there is the possibility that Suarez is guilty as charged.
I just don't believe that the "prosecution" has come remotely close to satisfying the burden of proof.
I also believe that because we, in this country, have so frequently (and with some justification) lectured the rest of Europe about treating racism in football seriously, there was an unstoppable train set in motion that was determined to secure a guilty verdict.
The tribunal struck me as something of a kangaroo court. It convicted on the basis of one man's word. Nothing else.
And after all the recent lectures about racism within football from those in the game in this country directed at those in the game in the rest of Europe, there was an overwhelming sense that a guilty verdict was preordained.