"Suarez is like the A team."
Any one of them in particular?
Billy, I re-iterate, you clearly know nothing about Civil court proceedings.
In a civil court, the burden of proof requirement is quite different to a criminal court and unfortunately for poor Luis, his admission of using the term got him done. You guys make fun of Evra for being unreliable as a witness and the panel found Luis even more unreliable. He must have had a shocker. Didn't help he accepted statements from other witnesses without contest and also admitted using foul and abusive language. Something the clubs lawyer in the case accepted too.
Acceptance of guilt by the party and his lawyer = admission of guilt.
It's not rocket science
daredevil
Since when has the FA been the civil court?
That's twice you have said that...you do realise that the FA is not the civil court don't you?
Answer this, I will not see you answer as I am going to bed, but anyway....
How far would the Suarez/Evra case got if it was subject to our democratic law? Do you really think that the CPS would have pursued the case based on the evidence available? My guess is that with no evidence except 'opinion', the case would have been dismissed, what do you think?
Do you really think that using one man's version of events over another's is democratic? No witnesses, no evidence of the alleged abuse, nothing to go on but supposed credibility, when that credibility has been found to be questionable in the past...tell me that that is reason enough to convict!
Example: You are charged with murder, no witnesses, no video evidence, nothing to suggest that you did it except one other person's point of view! Would you be happy that 3 people thought you did it, thus you did it and are then guilty, because you 'probably' did it? I would be livid if that happened to me, yet you think it is okay, fair enough!
As I said Billy, Im done with this topic so Im not responding to your last remarks before I left.
Workout went well although Ab Ripper was tough. Had a hot-tub in the rain too just to relax a bit. Always great when its cold.
Cheers Billy, I enjoy debating with you too.
Billy, the FA is also not a criminal court so you can't use the criminal system requirement. The closest thing to the independent tribunal set up by the FA is a civil court. They also explained how they arrived at their decision. I'm pretty sure if it was as flawed and as worthless as you believe, your lawyers would have got it thrown out.
The key thing you keep avoinding is your own players admission of using the word and your own lawyer accepting the charge. That they say is a slam dunk. That's why your club after all the posturing didn't appeal because your player and lawyer accepted it.
I like your example, you would expect the club and the player to be livid and still fight the case after all they didn't agree with these 3 men.
So why aren't they appealing this decision
Billy, I'm off to bed as well, it's been fun as always
just to add my two penneth to this sorry saga, the most analogous legal process to the FA disciplinary procedure is the employment tribunal. This can affect someone's livlihood and reputation, but not liberty (as in a criminal case). The burden of proof is balance of probabilities and cases are decided on the basis on one persons word against another every day.
Mancs. Just read all your comments on this article. You are a bunch of whiney crying girls
Embarrassing.
Not as embarassing as wearing tshirts supporting a person found guilty of racially abusing a fellow professional (something he admitted doing as well) and the shameful behaviour of a once great club.
The allocation thing is a joke and another cck up by lfc. Ridiculous behaviour
We're whiny? Er who runs off to the admins at the first sign of banter and gets posters banned off your board?
According to vidics chin, there has to be an incident which would trigger a reduction in allocation. Basically something has to happen which is serious enough to warrant the measures taken.
Which is complete lunacy!
What vidics "small time" chin fails to realise is there are risk assessments completed all the time, near misses documented etc in every scenario where public safety could be compromised.
The reason why there has been an excellent safety record in the premier league is because of the preventative actions taken. So the allocation has been reduced due to safety concerns, the away allocation is still over double what was given in the league match.
Maybe vidicschin has an issue with the health and safety officer at his place of education... No need to bring it to JA606 small time
Suarez admitted saying a word because he believed it wasn't an offensive word. If he didn't realise it was offensive how could he mean to cause offence?
It's lunacy, while Evra did mean to cause offense with what he said. You didn't see the bastion of morality come out and say, "I directed abuse about suarez but then he retaliated with something I thought was racist"
If you know what you have done / said is wrong, you would deny everything. As per John terry.
"Maybe vidicschin has an issue with the health and safety officer at his place of education... No need to bring it to JA606 small time"
Do you really think that the CPS would have pursued the case based on the evidence available?
.......................
The very fact that they are prosecuting John Terry suggests that they would.
Admission of guilt from Suarez would be pretty good evidence to back it up as well.
As usual Billy, you typed without tinking it through first.
comment by Redinthehead -at least we didn't finish 13th (U1860) posted 3 hours, 31 minutes ago
Suarez admitted saying a word because he believed it wasn't an offensive word.
...............
You really would have to be a bit of a moron if you think calling a black person a negro would not offend them.
Why don't you go along to a black area where you live and call someone a negro, just for an experiment, to see if anyone gets offended.
You would of course be a moron if you called someone a negro (negrito?) and think it wouldnt cause offence, IF you were brought up where it is unacceptable. Where Suarez hails from it is used plentifully without intention of insult or causing and insult. Just see Gus Poyets views on it.
of course if Suarez was to hail from these parts he would of course think it would cause offence thus he wouldnt say it.
As for the CPS able to pursue it and drawing a comparison with John Terry, you've missed the mark.
Suarez volunteered what he said.
Terry has denied what is being alleged.
CPS are pursuing the case v Terry. Which means they are relying on other sources of evidence.
VC
"The very fact that they are prosecuting John Terry suggests that they would."
That makes no sense, the two cases are different!
You seem to think that because the CPS have in the past went ahead with let's say a robbery charge, then all cases of suspected robbery will be pursued in the future! That's nonsense, and you know it!
Also, what if I went to Montevideo and called a black person a negro, would that be offensive?
And would the person I said it to translate my comments into Italian to see if he could take offence? And would he go around and lie to everyone saying that I called him a n***er, before changing his mind because it would make him look ridiculous if he continued lying? And would he lie about the number of times I said it, then change his moind again and make up a nonsensical story about 'figure of speech'!
Hmmm, if he did those things I would really doubt his credibility, wouldn't you?
of course if Suarez was to hail from these parts he would of course think it would cause offence thus he wouldnt say it.
**
unless he is a moron who called someone a negro (negrito?) and think it wouldnt cause offence, as you describe.
He does hail from these parts. Probably lives in Cheshire. Used to live in Holland. He's and adult and responsible for his own actions, as all of us are.
RBW
"He does hail from these parts."
Wrong! Completely wrong, and you know it!
He lives here, he hails from Uruguay!
You seem to think that because the CPS have in the past went ahead with let's say a robbery charge, then all cases of suspected robbery will be pursued in the future!
..............
It would be more logical to assume this than to assume they will not.
You would of course be a moron if you called someone a negro (negrito?) and think it wouldnt cause offence,
....................
There you go then, case closed, as in fact it is in this case, as Liverpool and all their lawers decided not to appeal.
I wonder why.
comment by BillyBobTaunton (U4886) posted 29 minutes ago
RBW
"He does hail from these parts."
Wrong! Completely wrong, and you know it!
He lives here, he hails from Uruguay!
................
Stop being a pleb Billy, you know exactly what he means.
Suarez has been here long enough to know the difference between what is and what is not acceptable, and you fully well know it.
The guy is a dispicable humen being, and there is plenty of evidence to back it up.
Nope Suarez hails from Uruguay... He might live in the north west of England. Who are you to say someone has been somewhere long enough? Are you a sociologist?
Also the language they spoke to each other in was Spanish.
Like I said before, if he knew what he said was wrong he would never have volunteered to any press what he had said and denied everything like John Terry.
It's funny how Evra despite having admitted to actually abusing Suarez gets off scot free.
Nope Suarez hails from Uruguay... He might live in the north west of England. Who are you to say someone has been somewhere long enough? Are you a sociologist?
As has been documented Suarez has black genealogy through grandparents, if it was offensive in Uruguay he'd certainly know about it.
Also the language they spoke to each other in was Spanish.
Like I said before, if he knew what he said was wrong he would never have volunteered to any press what he had said and denied everything like John Terry.
If people are having problems with the term "hails from" they should certainly be stepping out of any issues resulting from a foreign language and context of terms from such.
It's funny how Evra despite having admitted to actually abusing Suarez gets off scot free.
Like I said before, if he knew what he said was wrong he would never have volunteered to any press what he had said and denied everything like John Terry
.................
Maybe you should accept the fact that the guy might just be a moron.
After all, both parties were told to keep quiet by the FA.
United kept quiet, Liverpool and Suarez chose not to do so. Either the pair of them are morons, or they were taking advice from an escapee from Billy Smarts Circus.You know who I mean, big red shoes, pointy hat and a nose twice as red as SAF.
give it up Vidic,
Liverpool's fans record time for pursuing injustices so far stands at over 20 years so don't expect them to accept things any time soon.
Sign in if you want to comment
United allocation reduced!
Page 14 of 26
15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19
posted on 20/1/12
"Suarez is like the A team."
Any one of them in particular?
posted on 20/1/12
Billy, I re-iterate, you clearly know nothing about Civil court proceedings.
In a civil court, the burden of proof requirement is quite different to a criminal court and unfortunately for poor Luis, his admission of using the term got him done. You guys make fun of Evra for being unreliable as a witness and the panel found Luis even more unreliable. He must have had a shocker. Didn't help he accepted statements from other witnesses without contest and also admitted using foul and abusive language. Something the clubs lawyer in the case accepted too.
Acceptance of guilt by the party and his lawyer = admission of guilt.
It's not rocket science
posted on 20/1/12
daredevil
Since when has the FA been the civil court?
That's twice you have said that...you do realise that the FA is not the civil court don't you?
Answer this, I will not see you answer as I am going to bed, but anyway....
How far would the Suarez/Evra case got if it was subject to our democratic law? Do you really think that the CPS would have pursued the case based on the evidence available? My guess is that with no evidence except 'opinion', the case would have been dismissed, what do you think?
Do you really think that using one man's version of events over another's is democratic? No witnesses, no evidence of the alleged abuse, nothing to go on but supposed credibility, when that credibility has been found to be questionable in the past...tell me that that is reason enough to convict!
Example: You are charged with murder, no witnesses, no video evidence, nothing to suggest that you did it except one other person's point of view! Would you be happy that 3 people thought you did it, thus you did it and are then guilty, because you 'probably' did it? I would be livid if that happened to me, yet you think it is okay, fair enough!
posted on 20/1/12
As I said Billy, Im done with this topic so Im not responding to your last remarks before I left.
Workout went well although Ab Ripper was tough. Had a hot-tub in the rain too just to relax a bit. Always great when its cold.
Cheers Billy, I enjoy debating with you too.
posted on 20/1/12
Billy, the FA is also not a criminal court so you can't use the criminal system requirement. The closest thing to the independent tribunal set up by the FA is a civil court. They also explained how they arrived at their decision. I'm pretty sure if it was as flawed and as worthless as you believe, your lawyers would have got it thrown out.
The key thing you keep avoinding is your own players admission of using the word and your own lawyer accepting the charge. That they say is a slam dunk. That's why your club after all the posturing didn't appeal because your player and lawyer accepted it.
I like your example, you would expect the club and the player to be livid and still fight the case after all they didn't agree with these 3 men.
So why aren't they appealing this decision
Billy, I'm off to bed as well, it's been fun as always
posted on 20/1/12
just to add my two penneth to this sorry saga, the most analogous legal process to the FA disciplinary procedure is the employment tribunal. This can affect someone's livlihood and reputation, but not liberty (as in a criminal case). The burden of proof is balance of probabilities and cases are decided on the basis on one persons word against another every day.
posted on 21/1/12
Mancs. Just read all your comments on this article. You are a bunch of whiney crying girls
Embarrassing.
posted on 21/1/12
Not as embarassing as wearing tshirts supporting a person found guilty of racially abusing a fellow professional (something he admitted doing as well) and the shameful behaviour of a once great club.
The allocation thing is a joke and another cck up by lfc. Ridiculous behaviour
posted on 21/1/12
We're whiny? Er who runs off to the admins at the first sign of banter and gets posters banned off your board?
posted on 21/1/12
According to vidics chin, there has to be an incident which would trigger a reduction in allocation. Basically something has to happen which is serious enough to warrant the measures taken.
Which is complete lunacy!
What vidics "small time" chin fails to realise is there are risk assessments completed all the time, near misses documented etc in every scenario where public safety could be compromised.
The reason why there has been an excellent safety record in the premier league is because of the preventative actions taken. So the allocation has been reduced due to safety concerns, the away allocation is still over double what was given in the league match.
Maybe vidicschin has an issue with the health and safety officer at his place of education... No need to bring it to JA606 small time
posted on 21/1/12
Suarez admitted saying a word because he believed it wasn't an offensive word. If he didn't realise it was offensive how could he mean to cause offence?
It's lunacy, while Evra did mean to cause offense with what he said. You didn't see the bastion of morality come out and say, "I directed abuse about suarez but then he retaliated with something I thought was racist"
If you know what you have done / said is wrong, you would deny everything. As per John terry.
posted on 21/1/12
"Maybe vidicschin has an issue with the health and safety officer at his place of education... No need to bring it to JA606 small time"
posted on 21/1/12
Do you really think that the CPS would have pursued the case based on the evidence available?
.......................
The very fact that they are prosecuting John Terry suggests that they would.
Admission of guilt from Suarez would be pretty good evidence to back it up as well.
As usual Billy, you typed without tinking it through first.
posted on 21/1/12
comment by Redinthehead -at least we didn't finish 13th (U1860) posted 3 hours, 31 minutes ago
Suarez admitted saying a word because he believed it wasn't an offensive word.
...............
You really would have to be a bit of a moron if you think calling a black person a negro would not offend them.
Why don't you go along to a black area where you live and call someone a negro, just for an experiment, to see if anyone gets offended.
posted on 21/1/12
You would of course be a moron if you called someone a negro (negrito?) and think it wouldnt cause offence, IF you were brought up where it is unacceptable. Where Suarez hails from it is used plentifully without intention of insult or causing and insult. Just see Gus Poyets views on it.
of course if Suarez was to hail from these parts he would of course think it would cause offence thus he wouldnt say it.
As for the CPS able to pursue it and drawing a comparison with John Terry, you've missed the mark.
Suarez volunteered what he said.
Terry has denied what is being alleged.
CPS are pursuing the case v Terry. Which means they are relying on other sources of evidence.
posted on 21/1/12
VC
"The very fact that they are prosecuting John Terry suggests that they would."
That makes no sense, the two cases are different!
You seem to think that because the CPS have in the past went ahead with let's say a robbery charge, then all cases of suspected robbery will be pursued in the future! That's nonsense, and you know it!
Also, what if I went to Montevideo and called a black person a negro, would that be offensive?
And would the person I said it to translate my comments into Italian to see if he could take offence? And would he go around and lie to everyone saying that I called him a n***er, before changing his mind because it would make him look ridiculous if he continued lying? And would he lie about the number of times I said it, then change his moind again and make up a nonsensical story about 'figure of speech'!
Hmmm, if he did those things I would really doubt his credibility, wouldn't you?
posted on 21/1/12
of course if Suarez was to hail from these parts he would of course think it would cause offence thus he wouldnt say it.
**
unless he is a moron who called someone a negro (negrito?) and think it wouldnt cause offence, as you describe.
He does hail from these parts. Probably lives in Cheshire. Used to live in Holland. He's and adult and responsible for his own actions, as all of us are.
posted on 21/1/12
RBW
"He does hail from these parts."
Wrong! Completely wrong, and you know it!
He lives here, he hails from Uruguay!
posted on 21/1/12
You seem to think that because the CPS have in the past went ahead with let's say a robbery charge, then all cases of suspected robbery will be pursued in the future!
..............
It would be more logical to assume this than to assume they will not.
posted on 21/1/12
You would of course be a moron if you called someone a negro (negrito?) and think it wouldnt cause offence,
....................
There you go then, case closed, as in fact it is in this case, as Liverpool and all their lawers decided not to appeal.
I wonder why.
posted on 21/1/12
comment by BillyBobTaunton (U4886) posted 29 minutes ago
RBW
"He does hail from these parts."
Wrong! Completely wrong, and you know it!
He lives here, he hails from Uruguay!
................
Stop being a pleb Billy, you know exactly what he means.
Suarez has been here long enough to know the difference between what is and what is not acceptable, and you fully well know it.
The guy is a dispicable humen being, and there is plenty of evidence to back it up.
posted on 21/1/12
Nope Suarez hails from Uruguay... He might live in the north west of England. Who are you to say someone has been somewhere long enough? Are you a sociologist?
Also the language they spoke to each other in was Spanish.
Like I said before, if he knew what he said was wrong he would never have volunteered to any press what he had said and denied everything like John Terry.
It's funny how Evra despite having admitted to actually abusing Suarez gets off scot free.
posted on 21/1/12
Nope Suarez hails from Uruguay... He might live in the north west of England. Who are you to say someone has been somewhere long enough? Are you a sociologist?
As has been documented Suarez has black genealogy through grandparents, if it was offensive in Uruguay he'd certainly know about it.
Also the language they spoke to each other in was Spanish.
Like I said before, if he knew what he said was wrong he would never have volunteered to any press what he had said and denied everything like John Terry.
If people are having problems with the term "hails from" they should certainly be stepping out of any issues resulting from a foreign language and context of terms from such.
It's funny how Evra despite having admitted to actually abusing Suarez gets off scot free.
posted on 21/1/12
Like I said before, if he knew what he said was wrong he would never have volunteered to any press what he had said and denied everything like John Terry
.................
Maybe you should accept the fact that the guy might just be a moron.
After all, both parties were told to keep quiet by the FA.
United kept quiet, Liverpool and Suarez chose not to do so. Either the pair of them are morons, or they were taking advice from an escapee from Billy Smarts Circus.You know who I mean, big red shoes, pointy hat and a nose twice as red as SAF.
posted on 21/1/12
give it up Vidic,
Liverpool's fans record time for pursuing injustices so far stands at over 20 years so don't expect them to accept things any time soon.
Page 14 of 26
15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19