So much article because of this case. Everybody seems to cashing in the situation. But still it's interesting to know both sides of the story.

everywhere also article, one side show one so called meaningful article, the other also got meaningful article. banyak la article ni

all these orang kata korang punya opinion songsang, mana betul mana salah lu pun tak tau

Hmm interesting indeed.

The writer starts by saying this.



So basically he's discrediting himself from the start and the rest of the article is written from his perspective as a white suburban man living in a cosmopolitan city where the said word can only carry one meaning.

And then he goes on to say this.



Suddenly he's an expert on the word and it's connotations.

Could LFC have handled the situation better or differently? Well hindsight is 20-20.

Does it change the fact that the FA have imposed a sentence befitting of someone who is actually racist and meant exactly what he said? Nope.

Did they base that decision on solid facts? Ill wait to see the official report before commenting though short of subjectting Suarez to a polygraph test, I don't see how anyone can actually prove intent. Yet a sentence was given before the facts were released. One could say that regardless of what he meant, the word is not acceptable in England and therefore regardless of his defense, Suarez should be punished but if they don't think he's racist, why subject him to a punishment befitting someone who is? Also can anyone really deny that the FA wants to make an example of Suarez hence why you don't see him receiving the John Terry treatment from the media?

Some coincidence that people who before this case were criticizing the FA have suddenly sided with them.

This post has been edited by Duke Red: Dec 28 2011, 05:24 PM

Interesting to him because the article lean toward Evra side. That's all that i can think of. Because nothing new in that article, it just recycled the same thing that other journalist has pointed out since a week ago.

LOL, so true

Anyone who wants further articles can dig around this site http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Sport/Football/Premier+League

Everybody who has an article has something to say.

Basically all these people are either sympathetic or otherwise to either players.

Go nuts reading all of them but at the end, everyone is entitled to an opinion albeit skewed for obvious reasons

Can the FA control the media? I don't think so. Why don't we wait the FA's verdict on Terry before accusing the FA is bias.

I rather wait for the full report as to how the verdict was given. John Terry's case should not even be argued as video evidence is as clear as day.

And like Duke said, effing read, what's wrong with the youth today and their selective reading

He mentioned a simple fact that most of you choose to be blind to is "if they do not think Suarez is a racist, why punish him like one?"
If it was in the heat of the argument, punishing someone with an unprecedented punishment of 8 matches for the spur of the moment reaction, possibly asking him to back off using his own dialect in a heated tone? Is it excessive, many believes so. that is the main point here isn't it?

But then again people with poor selective reading is again the signs that even with education, the quality of forummers going to heck, sad but true

This post has been edited by REDShaun: Dec 28 2011, 11:00 AM

Didn't link the FA to the media, just because I mentioned the amount of attention this case was getting. Let me separate the two then.

The media are scrutinizing Suarez's every word and motives, with one even printing the words, "racist". At the very same time, they are lauding Terry for being heroic in the face of controversy, despite that there is video evidence. Nothing wrong here?

The FA aren't new to controversies and inconsistencies or do you think otherwise? Most recently they appealed and won a case, reducing Wayne Rooney's 3 match ban to 2, despite him intentionally kicking his opponent. Where was their moral compass then? In case the topic strays, I'm not making this an anti-Rooney post. I'm just using his example because it's recent. I could give two shits about England and their Euro or World Cup fortunes. How can anyone not find it irregular that Suarez was deemed guilty before any report was released? In Malaysia, we preach about transparency so what's wrong with someone like me wanting to see the facts the FA's decision was based on?

^'the media', nah.. u are hasty generalization.. there's also Liverpool -based media supporting Suarez.

Glen Johnson said he can support whoever he want, and media also can 'support' whoever they want.. why bother what media said?

Well the Daily Mirror used the headline, "racist". Which case do you see getting the most attention? The Suarez - Evra one or the more direct, Terry-Ferdinand one? Whilst the papers did highlight Suarez getting abused by racist chants, they hardly called him heroic for playing in the same manner they labeled Terry's efforts as "heroic". Equal treatment then?

The media influences public opinion and sentiment does it not?

Here's a other inconsistency. Spurs stewards were assigned headcams as they expected the captain of the 3 lions to receive abuse. Stewards were told to adopt a, "zero tolerance" policy. Did anyone See Suarez given the same amount of protection against Wigan? What about when Man Utd fans introduced the, "Suarez racist *******", chant against Fulham? Why no "zero tolerance" then when it was captured in video and posted on YouTube for all to see. I'm not a fan of Neil Warnock but at least he's picked up on it. (http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/289427/289427).

I get it. We're rivals and will jump at every opportunity to kick one another when the other is down. However by continually hurling racists chants at Suarez, it surely serves only to further stoke racial tension and sentiments? I agree with the FA's zero tolerance policy when to comes to racism and also abuse. I just wished it put in practice consistently.

Being a racist (and I don't think everyone believes he is) is a big offense but accusing someone of being a racist isn't a light offense either.

This post has been edited by Duke Red: Dec 28 2011, 12:39 PM

So, you're blaming the media then. Nothing we can do when the media write that kind of stuff about your club. It happened too all the clubs, not only yours.

Rooney's case, it is to the FA's benefit because it's international. On club level, it's different though. I cannot answer you on why isn't the report being released prior to the verdict, but I am sure they will submit one to LFC sooner or later.

Depends on what you think I'm blaming them for? I'm not blaming them. I'm saying they aren't consistent with their tone and manner when covering two cases running parallel to one another.

Yup the report should be released early next year. The point of me asking why the report wasn't out before the verdict was released wasnt in expectation of receiving an answer because I've no idea either. It is to highlight why I'm dubious over their sentence.

British tabloids. What do you expect?
If this incident happened in Uruguay, I am sure same thing will happen. Uruguayan media will support Suarez and bash Evra.
For this case, Suarez already has the support of the whole Uruguay generally.

This post has been edited by likeicare: Dec 28 2011, 01:17 PM

not entirely same, just having similarities

For what it's worth, Suarez's new suspension is a joke. But I'll take it anyway just to hear conspiracy theories on how undeserved the eight game ban is.

I can't understand this.. Why show middle finger banned one match but swearing banned 3 matches?
Aren't both also indecent act? How the FA weigh which one is more indecent than the other?
FA should standardize it like straight red n double yellow suspension..

one do purposely in front of camera while the other one want curi2 buat gesture but still caught bah

keyword : camera

This post has been edited by SGSuser: Dec 29 2011, 12:53 AM

Awww...most of the things happened in the game are in the heat of the argument. Even if I am racist, I don't go and refer someone using their color on the football field without any reason. That's suicidal, except maybe the lady in the bus. But then again, you don't think Suarez is as low as her, do you?

Ahh...the "Better than Thou" spirit. It runs deep in the blood.

On other note, 1 match ban for the hand gesture. I guess LFC will gladly accept this punishment . Too good to be true. Guess Duke is spot on the consistency thingy.

Can not say purposely le.. He been abuse by the home fans le.. Its came out spontaneously after all the abuse received.. FA should do sth like banned the fans but abusing fans are normal in every football match so if banned all abusing fans, those games won't have spectators already..

My gripe in this instance is the abuse from the Fulham and Wigan fans. If they deemed it fit to have stewards wear headcams to spot those in the crowd hurling abuse at John Terry, then surely the same courtesy can be afforded to Suarez? The FA does keep harping about "zero tolerance" when it comes to racism and abuse after all. Shouldnt matter who the player receiving the abuse is. Not uncommon to hear clubs being fined for unruly behavior on the part of their fans, no?

As for the ban, I don't agree with suggestions it was too light. Just two seasons ago Joey Barton escaped with just a warning. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/...ndo-Torres.html Ashley Cole escaped as well and the "V" sign is arguably more offensive in England. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/2328795/A...n-fall-out.html. The inconsistencies are there for anyone willing to see them.

One thing I foresee happening is more and more incidences getting reported to the point it will almost turn football into a passionless, non emotive sport.

This post has been edited by Duke Red: Dec 29 2011, 08:39 AM