Hypothetical situation

http://toffeeweb.com/season/03-04/comment/fans/fans31_Cox.asp

The Telegraph - 23 December 2011 - " Dr Manuel Barcia, Senior Lecturer in Latin American Studies and Deputy Director of the Institute for Colonial and Postcolonial Studies at University of Leeds, has been in touch and has a couple of points to make, largely in defence of Suarez.

First I think that the FA has blown the whole thing out of proportion. If indeed they agreed that Suarez was guilty, they should have warned him against future similar incidents. The lad just arrived and the whole idea that living in Holland is anything like living in the UK is total nonsense, at least for a Latin American immigrant who does not speak Dutch (that was my case and having lived in both in Holland and the UK I can tell you, they are as close as water and oil to me).

My second point refers to what I would call the very biased British perception of what constitutes racism and what doesn't.

Suarez was charged for calling Evra "Negr-", a term that across Hispanic speaking countries in Latin American is frequently used. I've been called Negr- several times; my best friend calls his brother "negri" just because he grew up using the term, and neither of them is black. Now, I am wondering why Patrice Evra can call Luis Suarez, in a very pejorative manner if we are to believe to the articles published by the Daily Telegraph, "a South American" and get away with it. Just think about it.

Had Suarez been an Arab or an Asian, would Evra had dared to tell him, "don't touch me you Asian" or "don't touch me you Arab". I don't think so. In my opinion there is very little understanding of the discrimination that Latin Americans suffer in places such as the USA and more close to home, Spain, where especially for people like Luis Suarez, born in the southern part of the Americas, they have the very offensive term "sudaca", which is the equivalent of "Pak-i" here in the UK. So, the FA considers discrimination based on the colour of the skin as racist, but discrimination based on your place of origin a fine thing? "

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/8969738/Liverpools-Luis-Suarez-guilty-of-racially-abusing-Patrice-Evra-live.html

The ensuing poll found these results :
What do you think of the FA's judgment of Luis Suarez?

Too lenient - 1,188
Firm but fair - 2,064
Satisfactory - 1,169
Too harsh - 2,515
Completely wrong - 6,615
Other - 12

13, 563 votes cast - which means that Kemlyn was absolutely correct in the assertion that people are 2-1 in favour of it being the wrong decision.

I wonder what the people voting other thought??

13, 563 votes cast
-----------------------

Of whom at least 6,615 are obviously kopites you belter.

Take a read of the press today & tell that the 2:1 'majority' exists outside of your own clubs fanbase?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/jan/07/race.world

http://www.nsno.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=16043.15

TB - Do you seriously think Liverpool fans were falling over themselves to vote in a Telegraph poll? Which most probably don't even read. I suppose all the ones who said it was too lenient were all utd fans, because we all know only utd and Liverpool fans would have been reading it

You are shameless in you biased views. I know how bitter you are but come on, to suggest only Liverpool fans voted that it was 'completely wrong' is a stretch even for you!

Read the press this morning for the general consensus on what the press consider the T shirt embarrassment to be.
===========================================================================

Yes, I’m happy to concede that. The Press is pretty much unanimously in favour of the FA.
My point was that the general public appears not to be (Yeah, right, they’re all Kopites, you whopper . You do seem capable of debate at times, but then you mix it up with the spiteful playground stuff).

I’m quite interested in that, because the Press now seem to be saying that 66% of the population supports racist abuse (or at least, doesn’t care about it). I doubt that’s the case. I would guess that they see more to it than that. But if it is the case, I wonder how strong a position we are in to be lecturing South Americans about the use of their own language?

This has become an unholy mess. And we now have the equally interesting spectacle of people condemning Glen Johnson for adhering to views which are not approved of by the Press and the anti-racist organisations.

Er….any particular reason why they singled out Glen Johnson? I know they condemned all of them, but Glen Johnson was mentioned in particular. What the hell is that all about? He’s some kind of Uncle Tom because he formed his own opinion? And that’s not racist? Or maybe he did as he was told by LFC because he knows his place? Jesus, what year is this? 1964?

Glen Johnson, like many of the people in that Telegraph poll, does not believe in the verdict, and he’s entitled to that opinion, regardless of his skin-colour or race.
(I would sincerely doubt that he’s saying racist abuse is ok when it’s my mate who does it, as some dingbats in the Press have suggested).

If it does turn out that Evra used the word “sudaca”, it’s going to get even messier, because that word equates to something like “Sp ic”. Liverpool are saying that whatever word he did use is contained in his own testimony, so the sh.1t could soon be hitting the fan with the Spanish-speaking world if that turns out to be true, because that word is unambiguously and indisputably racist.

What a mess. The FA wanted to make a stand, and that’s fair enough. They’ve done it with Suarez because he was one of the first players to be honest about what he said. (Players have got away with it in the past by simply denying it, and it’s almost impossible to prove if they do that). Fair enough again, but the English FA look like they may have walked themselves into a massive row, and the smell of it will be global.

Sepp Blatter, I suspect, will be delighted.

TB - watch it with all that hating mate, it can't be good for you.

Anyway Merry Christmas one and all, blues, reds and all other colours

Haha, so now one of you are proclaiming that the Press are acting in order to defend the FA (as opposed to saying it as they see it )

& the other is maintaining that reds don't read the Guardian (& presumably don't read new stories on the net either).

Quality lads

You've only had to listen to some of the sports phone ins & speak to people outside of the red / blue fanbases to grasp that the majority are appauled at the way LFC have dealt with this issue since the verdict. It's even in danger of eclipsing the original case!

Your PR team have dropped a massive clanger imo, both with the hasty & poorly thought out initial statement, the T shirt embarrassment & the comments of KD. Your club has come across as totally lacking in dignity as a result.

Anyway lads, all the best, we're not that different I mean you lads can;t help your red blood lines.

Have a good one fellas - I always enjoy the banter.

Haha, so now one of you are proclaiming that the Press are acting in order to defend the FA (as opposed to saying it as they see it
=================================================
Who the hell said that? It certainly wasn't me. I think they are saying it as they see it, they're just at variance with their own opinion polls

Have a good Christmas, yer blurt

Are you sure mate?

"Yes, I’m happy to concede that. The Press is pretty much unanimously in favour of the FA."

All the best fella, you're one of the better ones

The Press is pretty much unanimously in favour of the FA."
==================================================
Yes. But where does it say they are only doing it to defend them?
All that says is that they agree with the FA's stance.

I don't believe for a minute they're just sucking up to the FA, and I don't believe I said it.