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

    • Callout for help from any local experts here. Looking to find out more about the history of the property on the corner of Whateley Road and Ulverscroft road. Now a residential property, i'm told it was a bottle shop in days gone (the house was built around 1900) by and i'd like to learn more about the history of the business that was once here - name, photos, anything at all really! Seems to be very little from open source research so i'm hoping anyone with history in the area can provide any insight!  Starting here before i contact Southwark Archives or similar orgs to get any information and pictures (any advice here also would be welcome). Thank you
    • Portable ramps are available for businesses to use in this sort of situation, aren't they? I don't know whether one would be suitable for use here, or whether they have the space to store one. Lots of people have  permanent or temporary disabilities which mean they have to use crutches or a wheelchair.
    • I can’t remember where I read that figure but this article in the Grauniad from 2023 discusses Ocado results from 2022. The average shopping cart fell to £118 from £129 the previous year. But Ocado lost £500m that year on approximately 20 million orders (circa 400k orders per week). So, averaging out to £25 lost per order. Ocado pauses building new warehouses as annual losses balloon to £500m | Ocado | The Guardian  Obviously, the £500m loss includes various factors. But Ocado has existed for 25 years and only made a small profit in a couple of those years. The rest have been huge losses. Yet it continues to raise funds and speculation sends the share price up and down. In that respect,  it’s like the UK version of Tesla. Meanwhile, the main growth in the supermarket sector has been for Aldi and Lidl, who do not deliver.
    • download-file.mp4  Is this the sort of thing you are after?   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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