• Liverpool Message Board

  • OldBill OldBill Dec 31, 2011 20:31 Flag

    FA Report

    I've only read 50 pages so far but it looks to me like a lot of he said / she said wrapped up in a lot of legalese (almost). I think this could drag on for quite a while.
    It's still not proven and there are a few anomolies in there.
    Whether the term 'n1ggers' or 'negro' were used?
    Was it 5 or 7 or 10 times? (exaggeration is another word for lying and not knowing is not conclusive evidence)
    No-one apparently backs up what was said - they are just taking it on say-so.
    Why aren't there more witnesses than the 2 players involved?
    Why did Marriner hear nothing - when he was focussed on the 2 of them jostling in the penalty box?
    Why did he rip up Dowd's notes if he did not think this was a serious issue

    I'm really disappointed this has got this far between 2 great clubs & the inference (on BBC teletext) that Suarez has tarnished the English game is a statement too far - the FA has done that itself.

    The even bigger disappointment is that this is/was a football game. Not any more.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I see you missed the part about video evidence and also the part where Suarez admitted he pinched Evra, which laughably he tried to say was to diffuse the situation. Winding up players by pinching them is something that only the lowest of the low do and not something that would have gone down well with the Liverpool legends of the past.

    • In all honesty I read the report waiting for the shoe to drop having already seen a few comments about how the report nailed Suarez, but I could not find it.

      It really did come down to a simple one man's word against another, and the board found Evra more believable because Suarez did not have perfect re-call on what he actually said, while Evra pretty much stuck to his guns in all official statements (even if he did exaggerate between what he told the ref, - his words again, then to his manager - 5 times, then to the French press - 10 times).

      That maybe enough for some on here to be sure that Suarez has been a naughty boy and should therefore get a serious sanction. It was obviously enough for this panel. But personally while it does clear up a few things (Evra did complain during the game although the ref's seem to have paid no attention to it, missed it, or ignored it - which in itself is a major problem imo) and we now know what Suarez has admitted he said, even if it does not jive what Evra accuses him of saying, its not to me an overall convincing document.

      However it’s most likely not going to be overturned on appeal. To me the document says the panel thinks he might have said it so we assume he did say it. While on appeal it will be Suarez who has the burden of proof and I doubt the FA will back down, even if their conclusions in this report are thin,

      So the question is where to go from here. It seems two paths are open; one is to appeal the punishment but not the verdict in the hopes of getting a reduced ban. To be honest I'm not sure that is viable, because if you accept the verdict, then the punishment while maybe harsh is not over the top. I think the best he could hope for is a couple of the 8 games ban being suspended. But basically he'd then have to say "yes I did call him black 5 times, I'm sorry and did not mean it as a racial slur". After standing so firm up to now that will sound like crocodile tears.

      The alternative if Suarez really does believe he did not racially abuse Evra is to look past the FA appeal process. That means this thing drags on even longer, and might actually last longer than the Terry case, but considering this decision really came down to the judgment that the panel thought it more probable that Suarez was not being truthful than it was Evra making it up, based on the judgment that Suarez was not a perfect witness, it might be a real option the player is considering. If he really does believe he did nothing wrong I can't say I blame him.

      • 2 Replies to dsteer_lfc_68
      • Dave, I think your enthusiasm to exonerate your man has led you to both misrepresent the report and argue things beyond even the arguments of the Liverpool lawyer.

        "It really did come down to a simple one man's word against another"

        On the contrary, the report explicitly said it didn't, and that the legal representatives on both sides agreed that it didn't. In my view, Suarez is guilty simply on his own testimony and the video evidence. Take away everything Evra said and you still have Suarez abusing Evra with a racial element to it. That is all that is needed for him to be guilty. Remember the charge is actually quite narrow.

        "Suarez did not have perfect re-call on what he actually said"

        That's being too generous. Suarez changed his story a number of times, apparently to fit new evidence as it arose. His story doesn't match the video evidence. His claim that he was being conciliatory in his use of language and actions did not persuade the panel and was even dismissed eventually by his lawyer. (Hardly surprising, it's a laughable claim.) His evidence was contradicted by the evidence of Comolli and Dalglish. This is not simply imperfect recall - it's failing to be a credible witness.

        "the document says the panel thinks he might have said it"

        The document says that it is their decision that he did repeatedly abuse Evra with a racial element to the abuse. It doesn't say the panel thinks he might have done.

        "I doubt the FA will back down, even if their conclusions in this report are thin,"

        I think the conclusions are pretty fat but it's not the FA's conclusions, it's the conclusions of an independent panel approved by the various parties and agreed by the Liverpool lawyer to be competent to decide. It wasn't Evra against Suarez, it was the FA against Suarez. Having won its case, the FA is unlikely to simply say "oh okay, we went too far". Suarez has the right to appeal but the thoroughness, detail and professionalism of the procedure so far as compared to the rather poor defence put up for Suarez makes it seem rather unlikely (to me) he could get the verdict overturned.

        "the panel thought it more probable that Suarez was not being truthful than it was Evra making it up"

        Suarez plainly wasn't being truthful. His evidence contradicts itself and is contradicted by the video evidence and by Liverpool statements.

        "based on the judgment that Suarez was not a perfect witness"

        No, based on the evidence. The report talks about the problems of witnesses - the stress of it, the difficulty of remembering fast-moving events, and so on, and gives witnesses significant scope for imperfection. But what doesn't work is making up a story as you go along and having your main argument (I was being conciliatory) being dismissed even by your own lawyer.

        "If he really does believe he did nothing wrong"

        then he needs better advice than it looks like he has so far had.


      • Suarez was found guilty of racially abusing another player. Yet steer, who was absolutely shocked at what Rooney said,shocking though it was for young children I don't want a whole page of denial . Just accept it. Suarez is a racist. Or do your children accept racism steer ?

    • So read the whole thing. It basically comes down to Suarez's evidence being not credible in a variety of ways, and Evra's complaints being credible and, at least, partially confirmed by the statements of Suarez, and Comolli.

      To me, the FA report is detailed, thorough, extremely well argued and convincing. I cannot see that Suarez has any chance of a successful appeal other than on the size of the penalty.

      It also nails a number of inaccurate allegations made on this forum about Evra. In particular the claim, lent on heavily by a number of you, that Evra didn't make any complaint of racial abuse during the game.

      I hope Liverpool fans take the FA report in a better spirit than united fans took the FA report into the "battle of the bridge". Their response of denial and abuse of the FA showed they had no interest in dealing with it in anything other than a completely partisan and self-interested way, to the point of arguing that black was white.


      • 1 Reply to Robert M
      • Hey Robert

        Ignore my question on the other forum - you've answered it here.

        Could you elaborate on "It basically comes down to Suarez's evidence being not credible in a variety of ways".

        The headline example I see reported (on the very reliable Yahoo blog!) is

        "For example Mr Suarez said he pinched Mr Evra's skin in an attempt to defuse the situation. He also said his use of the word 'negro' to address Mr Evra was conciliatory and friendly. We rejected that evidence,"

        Were there others?

    • Ive read roughly 2/3 pages and gave up, a lot of bibble babble that the FA are coming up with, he said/she said nonsence deemed to be the gospell truth......


      United players words are being taken over a Liverpool players simple as that......


      YNWA Luis Suarez.

    • Hey , devonnortham , how's your day?


      Now let the Suarez thing rest. You and all the yapping morons like you have got what you wanted. But that's not enough , is it? Keep yapping and I'll point out a few more items that I'm sure you don't want exposed.

    • :-)

      Yep - particularly interested in the "two weeks for abuse". Consistency problems for anyone who can be seen mouthing "f*ck off" to another player/official then? Can't see it myself.

    • Yes, good legal advice would be: don't keep changing your story to try to match new bits of evidence coming in from elsewhere. Start and finish with the truth and content yourself with presenting it in the best light.

      To me it looks like when Suarez was approached by dalglish and Comolli right at the end of the match when the referee asked for their version, Suarez's reaction was to deny everything. This set in motion the Liverpool mindset of he's innocent and Evra must be making it up. But when the enquiry looked at it in detail and took evidence from lots of people that approach unravelled rather too much, in particular Suarez's claim that what he said and did was acting in conciliation.


    • In fact so much so that it is quite suprising that anyone knows anything about anything anymore.............but the FA are absolutely convinced that Evra's statements are spot on but Suarez's are not acceptable to wit £40000 and 8 games.....it beggers belief!

    • What baffles me and still does. Is that verbal abuse is considered more serious than violent abuse..

      When a player punches or stamps or kicks another player,they don't get as a lengrthy ban as Saurez will get, as he only used words.. Yet violent physical abuse could result in the end of a players career..does that get the same length of ban.

      Very unlikely..
      The inconsstiency lies with the F'A's own punishments..

      Whatever happened to "sticks & stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me"?

    • The clubs, and Suarez's stance has appalled me. No way to behave at all. It has made me ashamed to be a fan, and Kenny is really upsetting me with the way he talks about this.

      There is them and us, an approach that can help team spirit, and I understand that................but there is also right and wrong, and what is being lost here is Suarez was wrong. There are easy ways to mitigate that, and still back Luis, but the cub has taken an inflexible, and disgraceful approach to the issue as a whole.

      I've read every page of the report, and whilst the outright backing of Evra is not the right outcome either, it doesn't change the fact Suarez was in the wrong.

    • View More Messages