Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Not quite sure how you can compare the two, but there you go.


I'm going to say this one last time. IF Suarez intended racism against Evra, then he deserved his ban. But I don't think it has ever been proven that he did.


Liverpool have been very loyal to their player, and he threw it back at them by not shaking Evra's hand. That was stupid. However, he will spend the rest of his life labelled as a racist by people like you, and that can't be a very nice feeling. So, if he believes that Evra lied, and is responsible for that, you can kind of see how he wouldn't want to shake the man's hand.


I've never exactly defended him, I've just said that no one knows for sure what happened, and he could be innocent.


You immediately decided he was guilty, but have never been able to show any proof.


Either way, sitting and watching a manager's interview over 20 times is just weird.

Even Evra said Suarez wasn't a racist. He was found guily of making racist comments I believe. There is a difference. If you read the report of the case on the FA website Otta you will probably find yourself as well informed of what happened as you possibly could be. It is a very well structured report.


As I said UDT, learn Scottish. It's as clear as day to me what Ferguson said.

Having seen the aerial view in slo-mo I have a small grenade to lob into the discussion. It's not intended to excuse amything but may, I think, help explain why Suarez would do something so stupid.


As Suarez approaches you can clearly see Evra drop his right hand. He lowers it from the position it was in to shake the hand of the man in the line before Suarez but then drops to his hip although it is still held horizontally in a 'let's shake' position.


This is an old playground ploy. When teacher asked two boys who had been fighting to "shake", one way of retaining the upper hand was to offer ones hand as close to ones body and as low down as possible. This makes your foe reach further and lower than they would normally have to. It's a kind of "I'm not gonna reach for you, you b*st*rd, I'm gonna make you reach for me".


Suarez saw this happen as he approached and, as he passes, he is careful to keep his hand at the same height as before in a kind of "my hand's here to shake but if you think you are going to make me stoop/grovel/reach-out to an unnatural degree you've got another think coming. If you withdraw your hand to a different level then it is you who are at fault" and so passes on maintaining his hand at that height so it next automatically comes into contact with DeGea's hand.


Suarez should have 'reached' but if - as has been suggested - he was still smarting because he believed that what he said was not racist and that he had been punished unjustly the it is easy to see how stubborn pride together with a sense of injustice may have taken over in that brief instant.


I know this pov is doing the rounds amongst disgruntled LFC supporters but what I saw on MOTD from that one angle certainly seemed to show that it was not as clear cut as it first appeared.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Either way, sitting and watching a manager's

> interview over 20 times is just weird.


This is something that I don't normally do. But I felt it was worth spending five minutes of my time to clarify what was actually said.


@Maxxi,


Interesting theory but if you look at the other Man Utd players they mostly all had their handshake hands at hip level as well.

Too late? Maybe


Much too late? Don't think so. Better late than

Never in this case. Leaves a lot of Liverpool flat earther fans (I'm not including otta here btw. Think he has presented his arguments well) looking very silly. But like japanese fighters post ww2, some will carry on

It was interesting hearing Ian Ayre, Liverpool's managing director, claiming that Suarez had misled Dalglish and him over the hand shake incident. This leaves me to think that Suarez is a compusive liar and willing to lie just about anything including his testimonial to the FA last December.


I was wondering if Liverpool FC lacked a moral compass until Ian Ayre had spoken.

It was interesting hearing Ian Ayre,

Liverpool's managing director, claiming

that Suarez had misled Dalglish and him

over the hand shake incident. This leaves

me to think that Suarez is a compusive liar

and willing to lie just about anything

including his testimonial to the FA last

December.



If anyone else wrote that, I'd find it funny, as they'd probably be joking. In your case though, I suspect you really mean it.


PS. It LEADS you to think.

Am I small minded now too? Not sure what the hell that would have to do with language anyway, but there you go.


It's a shame for Suarez that you were not sitting on the investigation panel, as by your own logic, Evra's evidence would have had to have been thrown out, as he has lied in the past, so is clearly a compulsive liar. Suarez would have walked away, and you'd have been his hero.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • So top of Lane. Local Sainsbury, middle Co Op and M and S and bottom Tesco Express…..now everyone should be happy except those that want a Waitrose as well…0h and  don’t forget M and S near ED Station….
    • Direct link to joint statement : https://thehaguegroup.org/meetings-bogota-en/?link_id=2&can_id=2d0a0048aad3d4915e3e761ac87ffe47&source=email-pi-briefing-no-26-the-bogota-breakthrough&email_referrer=email_2819587&email_subject=pi-briefing-no-26-the-bogot_-breakthrough&&   No. 26 | The Bogotá Breakthrough “The era of impunity is over.” That was the message from Bogotá, Colombia, where governments from across the Global South and beyond took the most ambitious coordinated action since Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza began 21 months ago. Convened by The Hague Group and co-chaired by the governments of Colombia and South Africa, the Emergency Conference on Palestine brought together 30 states for two days of intensive deliberation — and emerged with a concrete, coordinated six-point plan to restrain Israel’s war machine and uphold international law. States took up the call from their host, Colombian President and Progressive International Council Member Gustavo Petro, who had urged them to be “protagonists together.” Twelve governments signed onto the measures immediately. The rest now have a deadline: 20 September 2025, on the eve of the United Nations General Assembly. The unprecedented six measures commit states to:     Prevent military and dual use exports to Israel.     Refuse Israeli weapons transfers at their ports.     Prevent vessels carrying weapons to Israel under their national flags.     Review all public contracts to prevent public institutions and funds from supporting Israel’s illegal occupation.     Pursue justice for international crimes.     Support universal jurisdiction to hold perpetrators accountable. “We came to Bogotá to make history — and we did,” said Colombian President Gustavo Petro. “Together, we have begun the work of ending the era of impunity. These measures show that we will no longer allow international law to be treated as optional, or Palestinian life as disposable.” The measures are not symbolic. They are grounded in binding obligations under international law — including the International Court of Justice’s July 2024 advisory opinion declaring Israel’s occupation unlawful, and September 2024’s UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/24, which gave states a 12-month deadline to act. UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory Francesca Albanese called them “a momentous step forward.” “The Hague Group was born to advance international law in an era of impunity,” said South Africa’s Foreign Minister, Ronald Lamola. “The measures adopted in Bogotá show that we are serious — and that coordinated state action is possible.” The response from Washington was swift — and revealing. In a threatening statement to journalists, a US State Department spokesperson accused The Hague Group of “seeking to isolate Israel” and warned that the US would “aggressively defend our interests, our military, and our allies, including Israel, from such coordinated legal and diplomatic” actions. But instead of deterring action, the threats have only clarified the stakes. In Bogotá, states did not flinch. They acted — and they invite the world to join them. The deadline for further states to take up the measures is now two months away. And with it, the pressure is mounting for governments across the world — from Brazil to Ireland, Chile to Spain — to match words with action. As Albanese said, “the clock is now ticking for states — from Europe to the Arab world and beyond — to join them.” This is not a moment to observe. It is a moment to act. Share the Joint Statement from Bogotá and popularise the six measures. Write to your elected representative and your government and demand they sign on before 20 September. History was made in Bogotá. Now, it’s up to all of us to ensure it becomes reality, that Palestinian life is not disposable and international law is not optional. The era of impunity is coming to an end. Palestine is not alone. In solidarity, The Progressive International Secretariat  
    • Most countries charge for entry to museums and galleries, often a different rate for locals (tax payers) and foreign nationals. The National Gallery could do this, also places like the Museums in South Kensington, the British Library and other tax-funded institutions. Many cities abroad add a tourist tax to hotel bills. It means tourists help pay for public services.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...