Some outright loons in this thread 
FA to investigate Edinson Cavani | This thread is taking a break
- Thread starter MyOnlySolskjaer
- Start date
- Status
If you read the Suarez/Evra ruling by the FA, it seems to me that it includes four relevant points.
1. Rule E3(1) refers to language that is "Abusive, indecent or insulting". It's only after that is established
to be the case that the use of ethnicity kicks in as an exacerbating factor.
Does this use fall under that category, given that...
2.Para 353 notes that Chicharito gave evidence that the diminutive term used by Cavani can be used "with
close friends and in certain situations without it being offensive", which was accepted by the FA.
but
3 The ruling established that the relevant context is not how it would be interpreted in Uruguay, but how it is regarded in the UK.
but
4. Para 367 notes that Suarez's use of the term that he used was "neither conciliatory nor friendly". Is that also true of
Cavani, and if not, will the judgment be different?
So it seems to me that it will probably hinge on whether they think the term used by Cavani is
inherently insulting in the UK, or whether the diminutive form that he used can be interpreted
here in the way that Chiharito said it could be used in South America.
btw why are so many reports saying that the word used by Suarez was the one that Cavani used,
when the whole of the FA report repeatedly says otherwise throughout its 115 pages?
1. Rule E3(1) refers to language that is "Abusive, indecent or insulting". It's only after that is established
to be the case that the use of ethnicity kicks in as an exacerbating factor.
Does this use fall under that category, given that...
2.Para 353 notes that Chicharito gave evidence that the diminutive term used by Cavani can be used "with
close friends and in certain situations without it being offensive", which was accepted by the FA.
but
3 The ruling established that the relevant context is not how it would be interpreted in Uruguay, but how it is regarded in the UK.
but
4. Para 367 notes that Suarez's use of the term that he used was "neither conciliatory nor friendly". Is that also true of
Cavani, and if not, will the judgment be different?
So it seems to me that it will probably hinge on whether they think the term used by Cavani is
inherently insulting in the UK, or whether the diminutive form that he used can be interpreted
here in the way that Chiharito said it could be used in South America.
btw why are so many reports saying that the word used by Suarez was the one that Cavani used,
when the whole of the FA report repeatedly says otherwise throughout its 115 pages?
With social media being what it is, and teams and leagues likely encouraging social media interaction through proxies, is it really fair to ban the players when an employee they are pressured into employing fecks up?
Of course. The guy is a cretin. He’ll turn up on celebrity big brother or something soon. Anything for attention.
It's not racist remark, so why wouldn't we moan about it?
In most south american countries, to say "negrito" is not even related to the skin colour. You can say it even to the white people. Its affective, just like say "my brother" or "my mate".
Why?Some outright loons in this thread
Typical fecking English, trying to tell other cultures what their language means.
My lord, PC pricks.
My lord, PC pricks.
Oyh! There's a pecking order here of that coveted victimhood status, didn't you know?
If he truly said "negrito" then that's not a racial slur. No more than gringo.
He always tries to come across as the tough man who would run through a brick wall, until somebody actually asks him to of course.
I get what your saying. I do. What were talking about here is having respect for black culture. The word 'can' be interpreted in a negative way depending on its context. That is a fact. But what I dont get with it is that spanish people are being asked to respect others culture, rules etc but why cant people respect it for what it is in Spanish culture.? We live in a world where racism is rife, there is no denying that. But to punish someone under the guise of racism using a word in a non racist way seems barmy to me.
Bernardo Silva used the word and from what I can remember, he was fined heavily and banned so I expect Cavani to get the same. The PL can't backtrack on there own stance.
Because the guidelines are there. Precedent has already been set before.
He’s realised that it could be taken that way in the U.K. as he’s since deleted the post. If this had been a Liverpool player we’d all be laughing about it
Is this PabloFer2222 even black?
It was certainly defamation (though at the time there were other strange reports about this guy/if I recall, some even came from his fellow divers). Musk would have been advised to settle for $10m.
He might not have known though, it might have been the club who told him to delete it.
You don’t know the media used.
You don’t know the country referenced.
But we should listen to your opinion on the language of South America.
Sorry. But no. Just stop.
Which precedent are you referring to, can you be a bit more specific in your posts when you're making claims.
You should see it, lots of people just jump on it calling Cavani "idiot", that he should be banned/fined or apologise although he did nothing wrong. Society is fecked, whether you agree with it or not. The fact that this nonsense got so much attention and that there are so many people believing Cavani really did something wrong here just proves it. Most hilarious part here is the English trying to teach other cultures what they can say and what they can't by quite literally translating the words using a dictionary without knowing what it really means and how it's used. Pure arrogance and ignorance.
It was just a silly mistake or two, though. Guy knows his stuff and has never, EVER done anything wrong in his life. A true warrior in the fight against social injustices.
Uruguayans should stop using such phrases of casual racism. Non western countries are very casual in using racial, ethenic terms. But that doesn't mean the West should accept those terms within their boundaries. Immigrants must respect the local culture and be aware of local issues regarding racisim. Having said that I hope FA take context into consideration and pass the judgement, and we all can move on.
However, pool fans comparing this with Suarez is going bit over the top. First, the context was different, and second, that cannibal psycho bit two people in public, on camera, and God knows how many he tasted in private.
However, pool fans comparing this with Suarez is going bit over the top. First, the context was different, and second, that cannibal psycho bit two people in public, on camera, and God knows how many he tasted in private.
Well he’s also commented that players should be able to decide for themselves if they have a concussion or are ok to carry on playing, so his views should generally be ignored.
If a South American poster referred to a black poster on the caf as "negrito" in a friendly way, would it get flagged?
That’s as English as it gets in fairness.
I did not give any opinion on the language of South America, as much as I should read about this incident, you should read what I wrote.
Read on the BBC website that the rules changed at the start of this season at that any reference to somebody’s skin color, ethnicity, sexuality, etc, is a automatic 3 match ban minimum..
Did you hear that as well, thought I was imagining it at first? What an absolute idiot.
All hail the amazing "Western" people. I wonder where the world would be without their divine interventions around the planet...
Well "etc." doesn't make it half vague
Good rules are always vague. These are sort of people we should ask to come up with a definition of handball.
So a footballer can’t say “I was out with my gay mate Mark and had the most wonderful funny night”?
Or “my brother is gay and he’s the most incredible human being I know”?
The inclusion of "face" is a figment of that posters' imagination. It does relate to skin colour though, whether you can extend that to "race" it's an entirely different thing.Thanks for that calm, detailed response.
Just to clarify something. A lot of the arguments on this thread seem to be around whether (1) he said something that isn't racist in his country/culture but is in the UK or (2) he said something that WHEN translated to English (which isn't always a perfect swap), is a racist term.
For example, someone said it literally means 'black face' and hence (as a term linked to the colour of the skin) is racist.
Is thata correct translation?
You have to remember we (Southern Cone at least) mostly descend from Mediterranean immigrants from the poorest parts of Spain/Italy, i.e. the south, and anyone who has been to Sicily or Andalucia can tell you people's skin isn't precisely "white", nor "black", but the result of centuries of various mixtures between Europeans and the Ottomans/Maghreb.
Skin "tone" would be more precise. Actually, as I wrote this it dawned on me (literally, throughout the entire Suarez saga I didn't notice it even once) that I've spent my entire life calling my brother "Negro". Not consistently, I tend to use his name, certainly do when in the company of others. I'm actualy trying to work out the context I very occasionally use it in and it tends to be when relaxed, alone, but each minding our own thing, if I call him over for a chat, to share a beer, that sort of thing. It's a nothing word really, just call him that because he is the darkest one in the household, both skin and hair, which doubles up. During the Summer people usually mix us up, during the Winter they definitely wouldn't, that's all there is to the "origins" of it.
No.
It’s all noise. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the post. Some little-Englander has linked it to Suarez and its blown up.
A whole fcuking continent uses a word. English people apply a literal translation to that word and deem it racist.
Yet if anyone tries to apply a far slacker standard of language to criticise Churchill?..... whoah nelly!
England telling other cultures what to do is disgusting. We’re an inward looking little piss-pot nation of selfish idiots. We look for the world to shrink because we don’t have the humility to grow beyond the idea that ‘Britain is best’
This shit is exhausting. Yes I’m pissed off. This country is a shower.
https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/sp...ussion-substitutes-after-david-luiz-plays-on/
Watford striker Troy Deeney believes it should ultimately be down to the player to decide if he is able to continue.
“Things have already been taken away from the players,” he told talkSPORT.
“You’re already told how much you can run, how much you can’t, by sports scientists. At some point there has to be an element of trust between player and doctor. As a player you know when something is not right.
“What I would say from watching David Luiz, for the next 20 minutes afterwards, he never looked shaky on his feet, his legs weren’t gone from underneath him. They followed all the protocols (and) he has ticked every box.
“Then afterwards you don’t see anything other than blood to suggest he’s in a bad way at all.”
It's somewhat ironic that he's asking for others to be educated.
Those aren’t the rules, those are my words to summarize what I readWell "etc." doesn't make it half vague
Good rules are always vague. These are sort of people we should ask to come up with a definition of handball.
Out celebrating Paddys Day with McLean. Nobody drinks as much as the Irish..
Get's worse, Sky Sports implying that Instagram/Facebook has been approached to investigate as well. Ridiculous virtue signaling at its finest. Chase the real racists and paedo's that lurk on the web, not a guy who used the term that is non-offensive in his homeland at a guy who is also from that country.
Didn’t hear it first hand, saw it on Twitter
Oh god, now it's our fans' turn to become experts on South American linguistics. Maybe the scousers can help us out here.
That's why I mentioned earlier in the thread about him wanting to come across as a tough guy.
A true man of culture. Respect.
- Status