Apparently LFC put out some propaganda?

Oh deary me.

I just finished reading the report and although Evra's testimony probably wouldn't have been accepted in full in a court of law, the commission were clear in specifying that for these cases it is only "probability" that needs to be established. From the report, I would say that it definitely was. Suarez changed his testimony (which was vague and unspecific from the outset) numerous times, and his final account differed to the ones Dalglish, Kuyt and Comolli (their Director of Football) had heard off him as well as the video evidence provided. It was likely that on several occasions he changed his account to support the video evidence and the enquiry into South American cultural use of the word in question, whereas Evra's was consistent throughout and in concordance with the video evidence provided as well as with the referee's, SAF's and several other United players' accounts.

The accusation that Evra accused the referee of booking him for being black was made solely by Dirk Kuyt, and was denied by Evra, the referee and Ryan Giggs, who was in earshot of the incident.

In the dressing room after the game, Suarez told Kuyt (in Dutch) and Comolli and Dalglish (in Spanish) what he said to Evra. Each of them reported that he said "because you are black". Suarez still maintains that he said "por que, negro?" ("why, black?".

His explanation for the discrepancy is that they all misheard him. I really doubt that that is the case.

That was not meant to be a smiley. I just meant to close brackets.

perfect translation WAYNE.

I translated it in exactly the same way when i read it

Totally classless club.

i thought fergy would be lsoing his marbles sometime soon, but it looks as though dalgleish has already lost his.

The following is a transcript from the Liverpool press conference after the Anfield club's 3-0 defeat at Manchester City on Tuesday night:

Reporter: "Kenny, the wider world is pretty shocked that, if a player can call someone 'negro' and the player who is the victim in this takes offence, that there is no apology or contrition offered from your club."

Dalglish: "I would have thought that, if you pronounced the word properly, you maybe understand it better. I think it was Spanish he was speaking and I don't think you were speaking Spanish there."

Reporter: "OK, if a player calls someone 'negro' [Spanish pronunciation], surely the player who takes offence deserves an apology?"

Dalglish: "Ask a linguistic expert, which certainly I am not. They will tell you that the part of the country in Uruguay where he [Luis Suárez] comes from, it is perfectly acceptable. His wife calls him that and I don't think he is offended by her. We have made a statement and I think it is there for everybody to read. Luis has made a brilliant statement and we will stand by him."

Reporter: "But the FA verdict said it was 'simply incredible' to suggest it wasn't used in an offensive way when they were clearly arguing and it wasn't friendly."

Dalglish: "There's a lot of things we'd like to say and a lot we could say but we would only get ourselves in trouble. We are not trying to be evasive … well, we are being evasive because we don't like getting ourselves in trouble. But we know what has gone on. We know what is not in the report and that's important for us. So without me getting ourselves in trouble, I think that's it finished."

Reporter: "Why take the ban now and not play the next three games, including the Carling Cup semi-final against Manchester City?"

Dalglish: "He could have played for a fortnight but he has to serve eight games at some stage and this time is as good as any, isn't it? It was better to get the situation over and done with."

Reporter: "Mark Lawrenson was saying on the radio that you've got to fear now whether Suárez may feel unsettled playing in England. Is that a concern?"

Dalglish: "Because Mark Lawrenson said it? No. I don't see why we have to reply to anybody. If you're asking if I have any concern about Luis playing in England, then no."

Reporter: "Is he strong enough?"

Dalglish: "I don't have a problem with Luis playing in England."

Reporter: "Do you regret wearing the T-shirts?"

Dalglish: "You see, if one of you guys were in trouble, would you help him? Would you support him if you knew the truth and you knew it was right? Would you support him?"

Reporter: "But not with T-shirts when he has been found guilty …"

Dalglish: "Why not? If they want to show their support for their team-mate, what's wrong with that? It was a fabulous statement to make visually of their support for a guy who is endeared in the dressing room, one of their closest friends in the dressing room, and all of his friends in the dressing room can speak up adequately and perfectly well for him. And I think it is very dangerous and unfortunate that you don't actually know the whole content of what went on at the hearing. I'm not prepared, and I can't say it, but I am just saying it is really unfortunate you never got to hear it. That's all I'm saying."

Reporter: "Kenny, given how the wider public are so opposed to your view, what do you have to lose by telling us and revealing what you're saying was not included in the FA statement?"

Dalglish: "It's up to the club to decide what they want to do."

Reporter: "But if you have something to say, surely say it – because the alternative is you are digging a bigger hole for yourself?"

Dalglish: "I don't think we are digging a bigger hole but I just think it's unfortunate we can't be more forthcoming. That's the unfortunate thing."

Reporter: "In your two statements you basically accused the FA of a conspiracy against your club."

Dalglish: "So they have made a statement then …"

Liverpool press officer intervenes and asks for no more questions on Suárez.

Reporter: "The hearing was to lay out all the evidence, 115 pages of evidence, and you have said they [the FA] have done it subjectively. So why do you think the FA are targeting Liverpool and Suárez?"

Dalglish: "Maybe wrong place, wrong time. It could have been anybody. I can't answer for the FA, you ask them."

Reporter: "You think there is an agenda against Liverpool?"

Dalglish: "No. You said that. I never. You get yourself in trouble, I'm all right."

Reporter: "Are you concerned Suárez's first game back could be at Old Trafford?"

Dalglish: "I'll just be delighted to get him back."

comment by peter reid (U12228)

Seems pretty ridiculous to me. If he has something to say, then surely he should say it. It wouldn't surprise me if he hasn't got anything else, and that there is nothing further that should have been included in the report. It is simply a way of the club trying to save face.

trying to save face and failing miserably.

let's be honest, suarez is their best player and they can ill afford to lose him forever so they back him so much that they embarrass themselves.

They are pretty toothless up front without him.

HOW DEEP is that hole now?

That they haven't contested the ban says everything.

LFC were once proud bastions of honour and fair play, they are now an embarrassment to football, a laughing stock.

peter reid - "They are pretty toothless up front without him."