So Suarez admitted to saying to Evra, "why, Black?" using Evra's colour as opposed to saying "why, Evra" which is his name. So, he referred to Evra by his colour, not his name, but you don't find that a tad racist?
Why is it when you transport something by car it’s called a shipment but when you transport by ship it’s called cargo?
Neither Shipment or Cargo refers to the vehicle it is being transported in
------------------------
To further clarify, cargo is the contents/freight of a ship or any vehicle which may include multiple shipments.
That's why I use Bicycle couriers.
Less confusion
comment by sw6bluez (U8294)
posted 53 seconds ago
So Suarez admitted to saying to Evra, "why, Black?" using Evra's colour as opposed to saying "why, Evra" which is his name. So, he referred to Evra by his colour, not his name, but you don't find that a tad racist?
-----------------------------------------
It is not racist nor even racial abuse to call a black person black. This isn't want he was banned for. He was banned when the FA chose to believe Evra, who said that Suarez said something like "Porque tu eres negro" which Evra says means "Because you are black". However this is not proper Spanish and no native speaker of Spanish would say that, only somebody who has learnt Spanish to a not fluent level, ie. Evra. He could have made it up. Regardless, the FA chose to believe Evra.
"So Suarez admitted to saying to Evra, "why, Black?" using Evra's colour as opposed to saying "why, Evra" which is his name. So, he referred to Evra by his colour, not his name, but you don't find that a tad racist? "
Evra said 'don't touch me (dirty?) South American.' Making a clear reference to Suarez nationality, therefore he set the terms of the conversation and why Suarez said 'why, black' as a resonse. If he had said don't touch me Suarez, then the reply I'm sure would have been, why Evra?
TOOR
drives me insane how easily led everyone is by the British rags and Sly Sports
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
No it's not racist to call a black person black, however if you say to someone, "what do you want, black/white etc" you are singling out their colour, which is racist!
That would be called a Groupage or LCL cargo
I think a lot of people, myself included, are as more berating the flawed system than defending Suarez. It's impossible to defend someone when you don't know the facts. We have what was in the report and for my part that's what I base my comments on. We will never really know who said what - but based on what we do know there was as much evidence to give out 2 charges as there was to give out 1.
I busted a mirror and got seven years bad luck, but my lawyer thinks he can get me five. The FA gave Suarez ten and he doesn't even own a mirror.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by sw6bluez (U8294)
posted 2 minutes ago
No it's not racist to call a black person black, however if you say to someone, "what do you want, black/white etc" you are singling out their colour, which is racist!
-----------------------------------------
No it is not. It is not racist abuse either. To abuse somebody you have to say something derogatory to them. To racially abuse somebody you have to say something derogatory in reference to their skin. Therefore it is not even abuse, nevermind racist abuse.
Are you starting to get it yet?
Alex is Ferguson is "probably" a racist..he got rid of Viv Anderson, Paul McGrath amongst others
Can someone please translate this thread into Spanish for me, then translate it into Italian please as I want to see if I can be offended by anything written here!
Also, can you translate it ten times for me, I will deny that I have just said that and say I asked you to do it 5 times, the Admins will correct me and say I said it seven times!
comment by johnsonsbaby (U10461)
posted 2 minutes ago
I think a lot of people, myself included, are as more berating the flawed system than defending Suarez. It's impossible to defend someone when you don't know the facts. We have what was in the report and for my part that's what I base my comments on. We will never really know who said what - but based on what we do know there was as much evidence to give out 2 charges as there was to give out 1.
-------------------------------------------------
For me this is the problem. Something racist could have been said. Evra could be 100% right but the problem is, there was no proof of it and judging by his "reliable" words which said Suarez said "porque tu eres negro" it seems Evra was in fact unreliable as no Spanish speaker speaks like that, it seems he made it up, after changing his story which was initially Suarez called him n**ger.
So for me, judging by the evidence they provided, both were unreliable. Something certainly happened, if both witnesses are unreliable, however what that was, we don't know as the was no evidence, however the FA went with one side, over the other.
aaaaarrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh
comment by Fairfieldred aka Assorted World Class Youth 24... (U7714)
posted 49 seconds ago
aaaaarrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh
--------------------------------------------
Is that your pirate impression?
So TOOR are you more berating the system than defending Suarez too?
no, it's the noise i make before I take two sharpened pencils, put them up my nose and headbutt my desk because I've reached the end of another promising thread to find people discussing Evra-Suarez AGAIN.
It's over. Can we let it go now?
(As it happens, it does make a pretty good pirate impression)
Fairfield - it is a thread about racism.
comment by johnsonsbaby (U10461)
posted 6 minutes ago
So TOOR are you more berating the system than defending Suarez too?
-----------------------------------------
Yes. I believe the hearing was farcical. I am not suggesting Suarez was innocent, just there was no evidence to prove him guilty, yet they somehow did.
comment by Fairfieldred aka Assorted World Class Youth 24... (U7714)
posted 6 minutes ago
no, it's the noise i make before I take two sharpened pencils, put them up my nose and headbutt my desk because I've reached the end of another promising thread to find people discussing Evra-Suarez AGAIN.
It's over. Can we let it go now?
(As it happens, it does make a pretty good pirate impression)
--------------------------------------
For some it's obviously not over as there has been continued debate on it since the decision, which died down, then raised again when we played United in the FA Cup, which died down and has now raised again because we play United on Saturday. This is normal. Pipe down.
How did this turn into a Suarez/Evra conversation?
I thought it was about Terry and the FA?
Sign in if you want to comment
Blown out of proportion?!
Page 4 of 6
6
posted on 9/2/12
So Suarez admitted to saying to Evra, "why, Black?" using Evra's colour as opposed to saying "why, Evra" which is his name. So, he referred to Evra by his colour, not his name, but you don't find that a tad racist?
posted on 9/2/12
Why is it when you transport something by car it’s called a shipment but when you transport by ship it’s called cargo?
Neither Shipment or Cargo refers to the vehicle it is being transported in
------------------------
To further clarify, cargo is the contents/freight of a ship or any vehicle which may include multiple shipments.
posted on 9/2/12
That's why I use Bicycle couriers.
Less confusion
posted on 9/2/12
comment by sw6bluez (U8294)
posted 53 seconds ago
So Suarez admitted to saying to Evra, "why, Black?" using Evra's colour as opposed to saying "why, Evra" which is his name. So, he referred to Evra by his colour, not his name, but you don't find that a tad racist?
-----------------------------------------
It is not racist nor even racial abuse to call a black person black. This isn't want he was banned for. He was banned when the FA chose to believe Evra, who said that Suarez said something like "Porque tu eres negro" which Evra says means "Because you are black". However this is not proper Spanish and no native speaker of Spanish would say that, only somebody who has learnt Spanish to a not fluent level, ie. Evra. He could have made it up. Regardless, the FA chose to believe Evra.
posted on 9/2/12
"So Suarez admitted to saying to Evra, "why, Black?" using Evra's colour as opposed to saying "why, Evra" which is his name. So, he referred to Evra by his colour, not his name, but you don't find that a tad racist? "
Evra said 'don't touch me (dirty?) South American.' Making a clear reference to Suarez nationality, therefore he set the terms of the conversation and why Suarez said 'why, black' as a resonse. If he had said don't touch me Suarez, then the reply I'm sure would have been, why Evra?
posted on 9/2/12
TOOR
drives me insane how easily led everyone is by the British rags and Sly Sports
posted on 9/2/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 9/2/12
No it's not racist to call a black person black, however if you say to someone, "what do you want, black/white etc" you are singling out their colour, which is racist!
posted on 9/2/12
That would be called a Groupage or LCL cargo
posted on 9/2/12
I think a lot of people, myself included, are as more berating the flawed system than defending Suarez. It's impossible to defend someone when you don't know the facts. We have what was in the report and for my part that's what I base my comments on. We will never really know who said what - but based on what we do know there was as much evidence to give out 2 charges as there was to give out 1.
posted on 9/2/12
I busted a mirror and got seven years bad luck, but my lawyer thinks he can get me five. The FA gave Suarez ten and he doesn't even own a mirror.
posted on 9/2/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 9/2/12
comment by sw6bluez (U8294)
posted 2 minutes ago
No it's not racist to call a black person black, however if you say to someone, "what do you want, black/white etc" you are singling out their colour, which is racist!
-----------------------------------------
No it is not. It is not racist abuse either. To abuse somebody you have to say something derogatory to them. To racially abuse somebody you have to say something derogatory in reference to their skin. Therefore it is not even abuse, nevermind racist abuse.
Are you starting to get it yet?
posted on 9/2/12
Alex is Ferguson is "probably" a racist..he got rid of Viv Anderson, Paul McGrath amongst others
posted on 9/2/12
Can someone please translate this thread into Spanish for me, then translate it into Italian please as I want to see if I can be offended by anything written here!
Also, can you translate it ten times for me, I will deny that I have just said that and say I asked you to do it 5 times, the Admins will correct me and say I said it seven times!
posted on 9/2/12
posted on 9/2/12
comment by johnsonsbaby (U10461)
posted 2 minutes ago
I think a lot of people, myself included, are as more berating the flawed system than defending Suarez. It's impossible to defend someone when you don't know the facts. We have what was in the report and for my part that's what I base my comments on. We will never really know who said what - but based on what we do know there was as much evidence to give out 2 charges as there was to give out 1.
-------------------------------------------------
For me this is the problem. Something racist could have been said. Evra could be 100% right but the problem is, there was no proof of it and judging by his "reliable" words which said Suarez said "porque tu eres negro" it seems Evra was in fact unreliable as no Spanish speaker speaks like that, it seems he made it up, after changing his story which was initially Suarez called him n**ger.
So for me, judging by the evidence they provided, both were unreliable. Something certainly happened, if both witnesses are unreliable, however what that was, we don't know as the was no evidence, however the FA went with one side, over the other.
posted on 9/2/12
aaaaarrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh
posted on 9/2/12
comment by Fairfieldred aka Assorted World Class Youth 24... (U7714)
posted 49 seconds ago
aaaaarrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh
--------------------------------------------
Is that your pirate impression?
posted on 9/2/12
So TOOR are you more berating the system than defending Suarez too?
posted on 9/2/12
no, it's the noise i make before I take two sharpened pencils, put them up my nose and headbutt my desk because I've reached the end of another promising thread to find people discussing Evra-Suarez AGAIN.
It's over. Can we let it go now?
(As it happens, it does make a pretty good pirate impression)
posted on 9/2/12
Fairfield - it is a thread about racism.
posted on 9/2/12
comment by johnsonsbaby (U10461)
posted 6 minutes ago
So TOOR are you more berating the system than defending Suarez too?
-----------------------------------------
Yes. I believe the hearing was farcical. I am not suggesting Suarez was innocent, just there was no evidence to prove him guilty, yet they somehow did.
posted on 9/2/12
comment by Fairfieldred aka Assorted World Class Youth 24... (U7714)
posted 6 minutes ago
no, it's the noise i make before I take two sharpened pencils, put them up my nose and headbutt my desk because I've reached the end of another promising thread to find people discussing Evra-Suarez AGAIN.
It's over. Can we let it go now?
(As it happens, it does make a pretty good pirate impression)
--------------------------------------
For some it's obviously not over as there has been continued debate on it since the decision, which died down, then raised again when we played United in the FA Cup, which died down and has now raised again because we play United on Saturday. This is normal. Pipe down.
posted on 9/2/12
How did this turn into a Suarez/Evra conversation?
I thought it was about Terry and the FA?
Page 4 of 6
6