The Evra-Suarez Judgement

[renandstimpyfan83]

Random question: Why is Evra fluent in Spanish? Was simply good in school/has talent for languages or some other reason/background?

That’s the thing that seems weird and inconsistent from his side. He’s competent enough in Spanish to converse with Suárez and understand what was said to him but apparently thought “negro” could be directly translated to the N word which is something even a speaker of rudimentary Spanish would know not to be correct.

This and the general character of both Evra and Suárez we have seen over the past 15 years or so makes neither a particularly reliable witness to me. I don’t think we’ll ever know what really happened between them.

 

[Maagge]

That’s the thing that seems weird and inconsistent from his side. He’s competent enough in Spanish to converse with Suárez and understand what was said to him but apparently thought “negro” could be directly translated to the N word which is something even a speaker of rudimentary Spanish would know not to be correct.

This and the general character of both Evra and Suárez we have seen over the past 15 years or so makes neither a particularly reliable witness to me. I don’t think we’ll ever know what really happened between them.

Yeah that's not what he thought.

 

[renandstimpyfan83]

I think a lot of the problem in the Cavani thread was that people cannot or will not distinguish between two different problems. It's obvious to anyone with a brain that the Cavani post was completely different in virtually every way to the Suarez incident, which was essentially straight up racial abuse.

What that doesn't mean, however, is that cultural references to race are a desired part of open discourse. I'll quote this bit of a post linked in the last thread which highlights the problems which exist with words like 'negrito' in their essence, even if they are used entirely with good intent.



I'm only posting this because my brother in law is a Ugandan currently living and working in Montevideo and made a post on his facebook page yesterday about why he disagrees with Cavani's use of the word and why he finds the constant need to refer to him by the colour of his skin from his work colleagues and friends as degrading. He doesn't want to be constantly reminded that he looks different, it's dehumanising and it's an acknowledgement that he's black first and a human second. If he'd grown up in that environment he would likely be desensitised to it, but that still wouldn't make it right.

So even in an intimate environment it can cause problems, now consider Cavani is an international superstar with a global following, posting on his public Instagram stories. He's got a responsibility to think of the bigger picture, which is what he evidently has done by removing it and releasing a statement. I think that's an adequate response and speaks extremely well of him as a person, but I'm not sure the "he did nothing wrong" argument is a particularly strong one given the context.

Edit: this is also pretty good

Interesting.

In the Philippines “negrito” is actually a native ethnic group who are almost black in appearance and have afro hair texture. The word is totally neutral and factual. Terms such as “negro”/“negra”, “moreno”/“morena” are commonly used and can be positive, neutral or offensive depending on intent. Also, in the Philippines “nigga” can often just be used to mean “dude” among younger people who have picked it up from hip-hop but are unaware of the social and historical context.

 

[Denis' cuff]

That’s the thing that seems weird and inconsistent from his side. He’s competent enough in Spanish to converse with Suárez and understand what was said to him but apparently thought “negro” could be directly translated to the N word which is something even a speaker of rudimentary Spanish would know not to be correct.

This and the general character of both Evra and Suárez we have seen over the past 15 years or so makes neither a particularly reliable witness to me. I don’t think we’ll ever know what really happened between them.

whatever the interpretation of the word, Suarez, following Evra around and calling him”blackie” and saying “I don’t talk to blacks” makes the intent abundantly clear, as does the look of shock on Evra‘s face.

This, in all context, is a ridiculous verdict but they have to be seen to be consistent in the current climate. They darent not.

 

[LARulz]

That’s the thing that seems weird and inconsistent from his side. He’s competent enough in Spanish to converse with Suárez and understand what was said to him but apparently thought “negro” could be directly translated to the N word which is something even a speaker of rudimentary Spanish would know not to be correct.

This and the general character of both Evra and Suárez we have seen over the past 15 years or so makes neither a particularly reliable witness to me. I don’t think we’ll ever know what really happened between them.

The context between the two is different. Cavani was clearly said differently to Suarez

Suarez said it whilst him and Evra were talking shit to each other. I don't see why skin colour would need to be bought up if you weren't trying to offend. Also if I am not mistaken (I may well be), but didn't Suarez pinch either his or Evra's skin whilst saying it?

 

[renandstimpyfan83]

whatever the interpretation of the word, Suarez, following Evra around and calling him”blackie” and saying “I don’t talk to blacks” makes the intent abundantly clear, as does the look of shock on Evra‘s face.

This, in all context, is a ridiculous verdict but they have to be seen to be consistent in the current climate. They darent not.

I won’t even bring the Cavani case into this as it’s so different in many ways. The more obvious comparison would be the Bernardo Silva issue last season.

However, according to the OP, there is no evidence that Suárez did say so those things to Evra aside from Evra testifying that he did. As I said, it’s literally one person’s word against another and both people involved have a history of dodgy behaviour so I don’t think it’s cut and dried one way or the other.

 

[Denis' cuff]

I won’t even bring the Cavani case into this as it’s so different in many ways. The more obvious comparison would be the Bernardo Silva issue last season.

However, according to the OP, there is no evidence that Suárez did say so those things to Evra aside from Evra testifying that he did. As I said, it’s literally one person’s word against another and both people involved have a history of dodgy behaviour so I don’t think it’s cut and dried one way or the other.

Maybe, mate. Maybe. We’ll probably never know but it’s a bit of a stretch to suggest Evra made that up. You only had to see the players reactions, right in front of you at the time. Sneering bile vs shock.

 

[DWelbz19]

This and the general character of both Evra and Suárez we have seen over the past 15 years or so makes neither a particularly reliable witness to me. I don’t think we’ll ever know what really happened between them.

Yes, Patrice Evra’s ‘general character’ over the past 15 years means that he would lie about somebody being racist to him.

Wobble your head a bit.

 

[thegregster]

This article was amended on 30 November 2020. An earlier version of this story suggested Suárez used the word “negrito” when addressing Patrice Evra. He later admitted he said “negro”.

Even the media had articles that had to be corrected.

 

[Jeppers7]

I won’t even bring the Cavani case into this as it’s so different in many ways. The more obvious comparison would be the Bernardo Silva issue last season.

However, according to the OP, there is no evidence that Suárez did say so those things to Evra aside from Evra testifying that he did. As I said, it’s literally one person’s word against another and both people involved have a history of dodgy behaviour so I don’t think it’s cut and dried one way or the other.

Other than Saurez’s own admission that he said it to him? His argument wasn’t that he didn’t say it, it was that he said it in a friendly manner. As a term of endearment.

I’m sick of seeing Evra’s character being degraded as a result of him suffering racial abuse. It’s sad.

 

[renandstimpyfan83]

Yes, Patrice Evra’s ‘general character’ over the past 15 years means that he would lie about somebody being racist to him.

Wobble your head a bit.

I mean Evra’s a weird guy who only a few weeks ago made up an obvious lie about Thierry Henry inviting him around his house to watch Arsenal and then turning the TV off because the man who was widely known to be Arsenal’s captain was captaining Arsenal.

Suárez obviously deserved to be punished for what he admitted to alone and it’s in no way a defence of him to suggest that both of them were stretching the truth in their statements.

As I said above, the idea that Evra had a decent enough level to converse with Suárez in the language but somehow originally thought “negro” and “n*gger” were analogous is questionable.

Other than Saurez’s own admission that he said it to him? His argument wasn’t that he didn’t say it, it was that he said it in a friendly manner. As a term of endearment.

I’m sick of seeing Evra’s character being degraded as a result of him suffering racial abuse. It’s sad.

Suárez’s admission was that he said “negro” once which is not the same as what he was accused of. Read the whole OP and it’s quite clear.

Evra’s character is degraded because of stuff like kicking supporters in the head and his role in the 2010 French national team fiasco. The use of “questionable character” is clearly a reference to that and not the Suárez incident.

 

[DWelbz19]

I mean Evra’s a weird guy who only a few weeks ago made up an obvious lie about Thierry Henry inviting him around his house to watch Arsenal and then turning the TV off because the man who was widely known to be Arsenal’s captain was captaining Arsenal.

Suárez obviously deserved to be punished for what he admitted to alone and it’s in no way a defence of him to suggest that both of them were stretching the truth in their statements.

As I said above, the idea that Evra had a decent enough level to converse with Suárez in the language but somehow originally thought “negro” and “n*gger* were analogous is questionable.

I’m assuming this is really low level bait and you’re quite obviously looking for bites, but how on earth does Evra speaking of anecdotes about Henry turning his telly off watching Arsenal have any, and I mean any, bearing on him calling out racist abuse against him?

Of course it isn’t. You know exactly what you’re doing.

 

[Doracle]

I won’t even bring the Cavani case into this as it’s so different in many ways. The more obvious comparison would be the Bernardo Silva issue last season.

However, according to the OP, there is no evidence that Suárez did say so those things to Evra aside from Evra testifying that he did. As I said, it’s literally one person’s word against another and both people involved have a history of dodgy behaviour so I don’t think it’s cut and dried one way or the other.

From the original judgment, as quoted in the OP:

Once more, we were troubled by the fact that Mr Suarez advanced this case to us and relied on it to the extent that he did, when it was unsustainable. The suggestion that he behaved towards Mr Evra at this time in a conciliatory and friendly way, or intended to do so in using the word "negro", is, in our judgment, simply not credible. His evidence is again inconsistent with the video footage. Once again, there was no satisfactory explanation for this inconsistency.

Whilst no one can be certain of exactly what was said, its clear that the tribunal did not just prefer Evra’s word over that of Suarez. They considered Suarez’s account that he was being concilliatory was “unsustainable” based on the video.

 

[Hailee]

Suarez did you use negrito, he used negro.

Can this be stickied? So sick of this misunderstanding.

Also Suarez was being antagonistic to an opponent on the pitch while he said it To rile him up And get a reaction. Then he refused to shake hands.

Cavani was saying thanks to a well wisher on Twitter. Apples and oranges.

So if I call someone a "blackie", I'm an evil monster?

But if I called someone a "little blackie", I'm just cute and endearing?


So for the people claiming the context is different, well even though that's the case, you can't exactly say it's racism just because it's antagonistic.
If Suarez called Evra "Shorty" instead of "little blackie", does he deserve to be fined and suspended? Because that's what people are claiming here, the intent is everything.

Think of it like you are back in Primary school. Imagine trying to tell your school principal that it's ok for you to call your pals "My Mutherfeckas", but it's not ok for someone else to call them a "motherfecker". You think that's gonna fly with the principal? No both of you are going to serve detention, even if your usage is a term of endearment.

Again, I don't agree with the ruling, but there is no way a consistent standard can be set if we are going to allow this and not that. Just ban the students from using swear words altogether, so Cavani is just an unfortunately victim of that even though his pals are cool being called little negroes.

 

[Sandikan]

I mean Evra’s a weird guy who only a few weeks ago made up an obvious lie about Thierry Henry inviting him around his house to watch Arsenal and then turning the TV off because the man who was widely known to be Arsenal’s captain was captaining Arsenal.

Suárez obviously deserved to be punished for what he admitted to alone and it’s in no way a defence of him to suggest that both of them were stretching the truth in their statements.

As I said above, the idea that Evra had a decent enough level to converse with Suárez in the language but somehow originally thought “negro” and “n*gger” were analogous is questionable.



Suárez’s admission was that he said “negro” once which is not the same as what he was accused of. Read the whole OP and it’s quite clear.

Evra’s character is degraded because of stuff like kicking supporters in the head and his role in the 2010 French national team fiasco. The use of “questionable character” is clearly a reference to that and not the Suárez incident.

Incredible victim blaming.

Do you not for a second think that if Suarez himself has ADMITTED he referred to Evra as "negro" once, that he most likely used it more than once?
More likely than Evra seemingly inventing other phrases used.

 

[Sandikan]

Other than Saurez’s own admission that he said it to him? His argument wasn’t that he didn’t say it, it was that he said it in a friendly manner. As a term of endearment.

I’m sick of seeing Evra’s character being degraded as a result of him suffering racial abuse. It’s sad.

Victim shaming is totally abhorrent.
The whole case shows that people generally refuse to change their mind whatever the evidence.

An independent body found Suarez guilty - Suarez himself admitted using "negro" and Dirk Kuyt was deemed unreliable. It was pretty clear and damning.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

So if I call someone a "blackie", I'm an evil monster?

But if I called someone a "little blackie", I'm just cute and endearing?


So for the people claiming the context is different, well even though that's the case, you can't exactly say it's racism just because it's antagonistic.
If Suarez called Evra "Shorty" instead of "little blackie", does he deserve to be fined and suspended? Because that's what people are claiming here, the intent is everything.

Think of it like you are back in Primary school. Imagine trying to tell your school principal that it's ok for you to call your pals "My Mutherfeckas", but it's not ok for someone else to call them a "motherfecker". You think that's gonna fly with the principal? No both of you are going to serve detention, even if your usage is a term of endearment.

Again, I don't agree with the ruling, but there is no way a consistent standard can be set if we are going to allow this and not that. Just ban the students from using swear words altogether, so Cavani is just an unfortunately victim of that even though his pals are cool being called little negroes.

What a long winded post of nonsense.

 

[cyberman]

So if I call someone a "blackie", I'm an evil monster?

But if I called someone a "little blackie", I'm just cute and endearing?


So for the people claiming the context is different, well even though that's the case, you can't exactly say it's racism just because it's antagonistic.
If Suarez called Evra "Shorty" instead of "little blackie", does he deserve to be fined and suspended? Because that's what people are claiming here, the intent is everything.

Think of it like you are back in Primary school. Imagine trying to tell your school principal that it's ok for you to call your pals "My Mutherfeckas", but it's not ok for someone else to call them a "motherfecker". You think that's gonna fly with the principal? No both of you are going to serve detention, even if your usage is a term of endearment.

Again, I don't agree with the ruling, but there is no way a consistent standard can be set if we are going to allow this and not that. Just ban the students from using swear words altogether, so Cavani is just an unfortunately victim of that even though his pals are cool being called little negroes.

Stop fecking translating. Thats the problem youre having

 

[Mindhunter]

So if I call someone a "blackie", I'm an evil monster?

But if I called someone a "little blackie", I'm just cute and endearing?


So for the people claiming the context is different, well even though that's the case, you can't exactly say it's racism just because it's antagonistic.
If Suarez called Evra "Shorty" instead of "little blackie", does he deserve to be fined and suspended? Because that's what people are claiming here, the intent is everything.

Think of it like you are back in Primary school. Imagine trying to tell your school principal that it's ok for you to call your pals "My Mutherfeckas", but it's not ok for someone else to call them a "motherfecker". You think that's gonna fly with the principal? No both of you are going to serve detention, even if your usage is a term of endearment.

Again, I don't agree with the ruling, but there is no way a consistent standard can be set if we are going to allow this and not that. Just ban the students from using swear words altogether, so Cavani is just an unfortunately victim of that even though his pals are cool being called little negroes.

Not sure of the point you are trying to make. Are you suggesting that anyone who uses a particular word should be punished irrespective of nuance and context?

That will only work if everyone in the world used the same language. Else, it's impossible to have a standard code of ethics. Cavani is new to England this is clearly a misjudgment on his part, not racism. He took the post off immediately and then apologized unconditionally unlike Suarez who was relentless in his agenda.

 

[Berbasbullet]

So if I call someone a "blackie", I'm an evil monster?

But if I called someone a "little blackie", I'm just cute and endearing?


So for the people claiming the context is different, well even though that's the case, you can't exactly say it's racism just because it's antagonistic.
If Suarez called Evra "Shorty" instead of "little blackie", does he deserve to be fined and suspended? Because that's what people are claiming here, the intent is everything.

Think of it like you are back in Primary school. Imagine trying to tell your school principal that it's ok for you to call your pals "My Mutherfeckas", but it's not ok for someone else to call them a "motherfecker". You think that's gonna fly with the principal? No both of you are going to serve detention, even if your usage is a term of endearment.

Again, I don't agree with the ruling, but there is no way a consistent standard can be set if we are going to allow this and not that. Just ban the students from using swear words altogether, so Cavani is just an unfortunately victim of that even though his pals are cool being called little negroes.

I don’t really understand what you’re on about. The analogy is ridiculous.

Stop trying to translate, what are you on about?

 

[Spoony]

Cavani called his white mate 'negrito' much in way hip hop artists use 'ma'nigga'. It's not difficult to work out.

 

[Handré1990]

This type of muddying the water in a pretty clear cut case, where a very respected and longstanding servant of the club was racially abused needs to stop. A good start would be banning these newbs who think it’s a good idea to discuss whether Suarez was guilty or not (he was, and it’s beyond question at this point).

It’s a Manchester United forum after all, and if we can’t clamp down on this sort of thing what’s the point of modding? If this is them as newbs, I don’t want to see them as members.

 

[Fridge chutney]

I mean Evra’s a weird guy who only a few weeks ago made up an obvious lie about Thierry Henry inviting him around his house to watch Arsenal and then turning the TV off because the man who was widely known to be Arsenal’s captain was captaining Arsenal.

Suárez obviously deserved to be punished for what he admitted to alone and it’s in no way a defence of him to suggest that both of them were stretching the truth in their statements.

As I said above, the idea that Evra had a decent enough level to converse with Suárez in the language but somehow originally thought “negro” and “n*gger” were analogous is questionable.



Suárez’s admission was that he said “negro” once which is not the same as what he was accused of. Read the whole OP and it’s quite clear.

Evra’s character is degraded because of stuff like kicking supporters in the head and his role in the 2010 French national team fiasco. The use of “questionable character” is clearly a reference to that and not the Suárez incident.

From your nightmare on this thread and comments on other threads, you are clearly a Liverpool supporter. At least put it in your profile.

 

[Fridge chutney]

So if I call someone a "blackie", I'm an evil monster?

But if I called someone a "little blackie", I'm just cute and endearing?


So for the people claiming the context is different, well even though that's the case, you can't exactly say it's racism just because it's antagonistic.
If Suarez called Evra "Shorty" instead of "little blackie", does he deserve to be fined and suspended? Because that's what people are claiming here, the intent is everything.

Think of it like you are back in Primary school. Imagine trying to tell your school principal that it's ok for you to call your pals "My Mutherfeckas", but it's not ok for someone else to call them a "motherfecker". You think that's gonna fly with the principal? No both of you are going to serve detention, even if your usage is a term of endearment.

Again, I don't agree with the ruling, but there is no way a consistent standard can be set if we are going to allow this and not that. Just ban the students from using swear words altogether, so Cavani is just an unfortunately victim of that even though his pals are cool being called little negroes.

Horrendous take.

 

[noodlehair]

I don't think the Suarez incident has much relevance to Cavani's ban as the rule Cavani has been punished under didn't even exist until this season, so the parameters are obviously very different.

Suarez was punished because he decided to be a nasty racist and got caught. Cavani has been punished because you're not allowed to say anything on social media now that might cause an angry idiot to decide you are a racist.

He's unlucky I think but it's kind of necessary to educate people since attempting to go about it sensibly will cause idiots on one side of the fence to get out the pitchforks, and ignoring it completely will encourage idiots on the other side of the fence to think they can be a Suarez and it's ok.

 

[Halftrack]

I mean Evra’s a weird guy who only a few weeks ago made up an obvious lie about Thierry Henry inviting him around his house to watch Arsenal and then turning the TV off because the man who was widely known to be Arsenal’s captain was captaining Arsenal.

Suárez obviously deserved to be punished for what he admitted to alone and it’s in no way a defence of him to suggest that both of them were stretching the truth in their statements.

As I said above, the idea that Evra had a decent enough level to converse with Suárez in the language but somehow originally thought “negro” and “n*gger” were analogous is questionable.



Suárez’s admission was that he said “negro” once which is not the same as what he was accused of. Read the whole OP and it’s quite clear.

Evra’s character is degraded because of stuff like kicking supporters in the head and his role in the 2010 French national team fiasco. The use of “questionable character” is clearly a reference to that and not the Suárez incident.

You're working overtime to defend someone who got banned for racism, mate.

Liverpool were left desperately trying to paint Evra as unreliable. They did this by first falsely claiming Evra had previously falsely accused others of racially abusing him. They then got even more desperate, and tried claiming Evra had changed his story with regards to how many times Suarez had called him "negro." Their basis for this was that Ferguson said Evra had told him Suarez had used the word five times, while in the Canal+ interview, Evra used the phrase "au moins dix fois" which literally translates to "at least ten times" but is often used to mean "several times" or "many times". Even Comolli acknowledged as much, but because of the seriousness of the topic it apparently had to be interpreted in a literal sense.

Then there was the fact that Comolli claimed Canal+ had phoned him up and told him Evra had sought them out and insisted they interview him about the incident. This did not happen, as per Canal+ statement on the matter.

All in all, Suarez and everyone who testified in support of him had differing versions of the events, made some fairly desperate claims to try and discredit Evra, and/or got caught lying. All the differing versions of the events also came from Suarez himself, because he seemingly couldn't keep his story straight. Not uncommon when you're trying to avoid having to face consequences after a wrongdoing.

Evra, on the other hand, was found to be a consistent and reliable witness.

 

[Hughie77]

Doesn't really matter, the FA have still banned himand fined him, even if the term used was offensive or not. FA was always going to ban him .

 

[Hailee]

You're working overtime to defend someone who got banned for racism, mate.

So are the people defending Cavani, they are working overtime to defend someone who got banned for racism, mate.

Seeing as to how nobody has any arguments left except to claim that the analogy is "horrendous take, poor analogy and a mistranslation", I guess that's the end of any objective arguments against the decision and the FA is probably right in this case.

Those who really think it's a mistranslation can always use wikipedia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito

Just shouting out that someone is wrong because you don't like it without being able to say why is a good sign for you to take a step back and re-evaluate your argument.

 

[Fridge chutney]

So are the people defending Cavani, they are working overtime to defend someone who got banned for racism, mate.

Seeing as to how nobody has any arguments left except to claim that the analogy is "horrendous take, poor analogy and a mistranslation", I guess that's the end of any objective arguments against the decision and the FA is probably right in this case.

Those who really think it's a mistranslation can always use wikipedia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito

Just shouting out that someone is wrong because you don't like it without being able to say why is a good sign for you to take a step back and re-evaluate your argument.

Haha, you're definitely on the windup.

Apart from the disingenuous comparison and false equivalence with the Suarez situation, let's all agree that Cavani was actually referring to ethnic groups in Southeast Asia with his post because wikipedia has an article on it, shall we?

It's barely worth my time engaging with you because you are deliberately spewing incorrect facts, but Cavani wasn't "banned for racism", he was banned for being in breach of FA Rule E3.2, because of his reference, whether express or implied, to colour and/or race and/or ethnic origin.

I'm so glad Manchester United as a club have handled this situation with class. It is in stark contrast to the racist and disgraceful way Liverpool Football Club handled the Suarez incident.

 

[fergieisold]

I’m sick of my scouser friends basically saying I’m biased because I defend Cavani as the Suarez case was the same. They’re so dumb it’s unbelievable.

 

[Fridge chutney]

I’m sick of my scouser friends basically saying I’m biased because I defend Cavani as the Suarez case was the same. They’re so dumb it’s unbelievable.

What do you expect? They are by and large the most deluded and sanctimonious fanbase in England.

 

[TheReligion]

So are the people defending Cavani, they are working overtime to defend someone who got banned for racism, mate.

Seeing as to how nobody has any arguments left except to claim that the analogy is "horrendous take, poor analogy and a mistranslation", I guess that's the end of any objective arguments against the decision and the FA is probably right in this case.

Those who really think it's a mistranslation can always use wikipedia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito

Just shouting out that someone is wrong because you don't like it without being able to say why is a good sign for you to take a step back and re-evaluate your argument.

You don't understand what racism is.

 

[Sandikan]

I’m sick of my scouser friends basically saying I’m biased because I defend Cavani as the Suarez case was the same. They’re so dumb it’s unbelievable.

They probably still believe "negrito" was the word Suarez said and it was all a big misundestanding.

 

[TheReligion]

When I think back to how Liverpool handled that I still cringe. Dalglish turning out in a Suarez t-shirt with the players. Urghhh. Could never imagine Sir Alex doing anything like that.

The whole lies and misinformation. It was truly disgusting.

 

[Damien]

That’s the thing that seems weird and inconsistent from his side. He’s competent enough in Spanish to converse with Suárez and understand what was said to him but apparently thought “negro” could be directly translated to the N word which is something even a speaker of rudimentary Spanish would know not to be correct.

This and the general character of both Evra and Suárez we have seen over the past 15 years or so makes neither a particularly reliable witness to me. I don’t think we’ll ever know what really happened between them.

122. Hernandez saw that Mr Evra was angry and upset. He said this:

"Although I was stood with the medical staff, I could clearly hear Evra as he was speaking loudly. He said that during the game, Suarez said to him words similar to "No voy a platicar contigo porque eres negro".

I understood from what Evra said that Suarez had been racially abusive towards him and that he had told Evra that he would not speak to him because he was black."

125. Mr Evra said in evidence that some of the other players could see that he was upset and asked him what was wrong. He said that Mr Suarez had called him a nigger and said that he had kicked him because of that. Mr Evra said that he told the other players that Mr Suarez had said "porque tu eres negro". We note that Mr Evra did not say in his own evidence that he had told his team-mates that Mr Suarez had said he would not speak to him because he was black. However, we accept that Mr Evra did say this to his team- mates after the match because that is what all four of them say in their statements and their evidence has been accepted in full by Mr Suarez. It is possible that Mr Evra also told them that Mr Suarez had said he had kicked him "porque tu eres negro", and this was not recalled by the players.

138. Mr Comolli said in his witness statement that Mr Suarez told him nothing happened. He said that there was one incident where he said sorry to Mr Evra and Mr Evra told him "Don't touch me, South American" to which Mr Comolli thought Mr Suarez said he had replied "Por que, tu eres negro?". Mr Suarez was emphatic that he had not said anything that could be classified as racial abuse. Mr Comolli confirmed under cross-examination that he believed that what he was told by Mr Suarez in this meeting was that the words he had used to Mr Evra translated as "Why, because you are black".

140. Mr Dalglish said that, having spoken to Mr Suarez, Mr Comolli explained to Mr Dalglish that Mr Suarez had said that Mr Evra had called him South American and that Mr Suarez had replied "Tu eres negro" which is "you are black". Mr Comolli reported the Spanish words to Mr Dalglish, that is he told him that Mr Suarez had said "Tu eres negro", and then Mr Comolli told Mr Dalglish that this meant "you are black", although Mr Dalglish already had an idea what it meant. Mr Suarez was still in the room when Mr Comolli told Mr Dalglish that Mr Suarez had said "Tu eres negro" to Mr Evra.

141. Mr Suarez's version of this conversation was as follows. He said that Mr Comolli explained to him that Sir Alex Ferguson and Mr Evra had complained to the referee that Mr Suarez had racially insulted Mr Evra five times during the game. Mr Comolli asked Mr Suarez to tell him what happened. Mr Suarez told him that Mr Evra had said to him "Don't touch me, South American". Mr Suarez had said "Por que negro?". Mr Suarez told Mr Comolli that this was the only thing he had said.

267. Once more, we were troubled by the fact that Mr Suarez advanced this case to us and relied on it to the extent that he did, when it was unsustainable. The suggestion that he behaved towards Mr Evra at this time in a conciliatory and friendly way, or intended to do so in using the word "negro", is, in our judgment, simply not credible. His evidence is again inconsistent with the video footage. Once again, there was no satisfactory explanation for this inconsistency.

268. In contrast, Mr Evra’s evidence was not shown to be inconsistent with the facts established by other evidence, such as the video footage, in any material respect.

289. With those matters in mind, we turn to consider what Mr Marriner was told. Mr Dalglish told him that Mr Suarez had said "you are black". Mr Comolli told him that Mr Suarez said "Tues negro". As Mr Dowd told us, Mr Comolli spelt "Tues negro" and Mr Dowd noted it down. In cross-examination on this point, Mr Comolli agreed that he told Mr Marriner that Mr Suarez had said "Porque tu es negro". But, he denied that he dictated all the words. He said that he just said "negro", that Mr Dowd asked Mr Comolli to spell "negro", and he did not remember dictating the full sentence. We were surprised by Mr Comolli's evidence that he only dictated the word "negro" in view of the contents of Mr Marriner's report, and his and Mr Dowd's witness statements. Mr Dowd stated that he asked Mr Comolli to spell "Tues negro" and Mr Dowd then noted it down. Those words appear in Mr Marriner's report. Mr Marriner's and Mr Dowd's witness statements were accepted in full by Mr Suarez. We find that Mr Comolli told Mr Marriner that Mr Suarez had said "Porque tu es negro" to Mr Evra, and that Mr Comolli spelt "Tues negro" for Mr Dowd, who wrote it down.

290. The difficulty this presents for Mr Suarez is that it appears to be inconsistent with the case that he advanced before us. He told us that all that he said to Mr Evra was "Por que, negro", and not "Porque tu es negro" or "Porque tu eres negro". If Mr Suarez had said "Porque tu es negro", then he would not be using "negro" as a noun to address Mr Evra, but as an adjective, meaning "Because you are black". At the end of his cross-examination, Mr Comolli agreed that he believed he was told by Mr Suarez that the words that he had used translated as "Why, because you are black". Of course, it is Mr Evra's case that Mr Suarez did say to him "Porque tu eres negro" meaning "Because you are black". It is, however, right to point out that Mr Evra contends that Mr Suarez said this to him in response to his question "Why did you kick me", whereas Mr Suarez maintains that he said "Por que, negro" in response to Mr Evra's comment "Don't touch me, South American".

297. According to Mr Kuyt, Mr Suarez said to him that he had touched Mr Evra on the head and he (Mr Evra) said something along the lines of "get away from me South American", to which Mr Suarez replied "because you're black can't...why can't I touch you then". The Dutch words which Mr Kuyt recalled Mr Suarez using were "omdat je zwart bent mag...waarom mag ik je daarom niet aanraken". Mr Kuyt explained to us that the initial phrase in this passage means "because you are black", i.e. omdat (because) je (you) zwart (black) bent (are).

All of those are excerpts from the FA judgment. Call Evra a liar all you want, but facts are that Marriner, Comolli, Dalglish and Kuyt all submitted evidence that in the end supported Evra's version of events and not Suarez's - and Evra was the one who was called a reliable witness in contrast to Suarez.

 

[Jeppers7]

All of those are excerpts from the FA judgment. Call Evra a liar all you want, but facts are that Marriner, Comolli, Dalglish and Kuyt all submitted evidence that in the end supported Evra's version of events and not Suarez's - and Evra was the one who was called a reliable witness in contrast to Suarez.

Brilliant post. Well done.

 

[jem]

I don't think the Suarez incident has much relevance to Cavani's ban as the rule Cavani has been punished under didn't even exist until this season, so the parameters are obviously very different.

Suarez was punished because he decided to be a nasty racist and got caught. Cavani has been punished because you're not allowed to say anything on social media now that might cause an angry idiot to decide you are a racist.

He's unlucky I think but it's kind of necessary to educate people since attempting to go about it sensibly will cause idiots on one side of the fence to get out the pitchforks, and ignoring it completely will encourage idiots on the other side of the fence to think they can be a Suarez and it's ok.

I think the biggest takeaway (at least from a business point of view) is to media train your players and make it very clear what they can and cannot say/do on social media. It won't make any inroads on actually addressing the very real problem of racism, but it will help protect the team's business interests (ie. keeping your players on the pitch.) If I were Cavani, I would feel aggrieved at receiving 3 matches and a 100k fine, whereas Dele only got one match and a 50k fine (for a post that was far closer to being racist,) but I guess it's just bad timing with the FA having instituted new, and evidently inflexible, sanctions for this sort of thing.

 

[Halftrack]

So are the people defending Cavani, they are working overtime to defend someone who got banned for racism, mate.

Seeing as to how nobody has any arguments left except to claim that the analogy is "horrendous take, poor analogy and a mistranslation", I guess that's the end of any objective arguments against the decision and the FA is probably right in this case.

Those who really think it's a mistranslation can always use wikipedia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito

Just shouting out that someone is wrong because you don't like it without being able to say why is a good sign for you to take a step back and re-evaluate your argument.

The actual feck are you on about? I was responding to some asshat who's trying to both-sides the Suarez/Evra incident.

Don't drag me into your weird-ass squabble.

 

[lex talionis]

That Suarez was found to have used the word in malice was established as a matter of fact. No one has even accused Cavani of using the word in malice.

 

[Iron]

I think suarez got triggered because he was called south american, and then suarez followed him around to remind him that he is black. School like behaviour from both.