Quizzes & Puzzles13 mins ago
FA report on Suarez / Evra spat.
379. We accepted Mr Evra's account of these exchanges. The principal reasons for doing so were the following. First, Mr Evra was a credible witness whose evidence was not seriously undermined in any material respect, as explained above. Secondly, we found Mr Suarez, in contrast, to be an unreliable witness on critical parts of his evidence.
http://www.thefa.com/...ory%20Commission.ashx
http://www.thefa.com/...ory%20Commission.ashx
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Gromit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.So let me get this straight, there's a lot of semantics going on over the possible use of the words 'why' and 'because' when the main crux of this whole argument is over the word '***' or the Uruguayan derivative of it.
Still no explanation forthcoming as to why Suarez felt the need to use the word or comment on Evra's colour.
Unbelievable!
Still no explanation forthcoming as to why Suarez felt the need to use the word or comment on Evra's colour.
Unbelievable!
no the crux isn't over the use of the word, it's behind the context and sentiment behind it. Basically, anyone chosing not to believe that a Uruguayan can use that word without it being used in a racist manner is just plain ignorant. Do you honestly believe that the way the British use the word is the only way it can be meant?
What if it turned out that calling someone ginger in Turkmenistan was really, really offensive? Would you be sympathetic of anyone using that word there in a casual dialogue?
I know that sounds daft but it's the principle behind it, we can't decide whether another person's words were racist without taking into consideration their cultural norms, it's absurd to!
What if it turned out that calling someone ginger in Turkmenistan was really, really offensive? Would you be sympathetic of anyone using that word there in a casual dialogue?
I know that sounds daft but it's the principle behind it, we can't decide whether another person's words were racist without taking into consideration their cultural norms, it's absurd to!
Those were the words used, as reported by the BBC(whom I deem more reliable than Suarez) 2 days ago in their lunchtime bulletin.
Pages 27/28 of the FA report.
http://www.thefa.com/...ory%20Commission.ashx
Pages 27/28 of the FA report.
http://www.thefa.com/...ory%20Commission.ashx
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.