Comments for Anfield Road

Comment on Powar denies racism after ‘coconut’ jibe sent on Twitter by Footimad

Footimad — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 17:38:13 +0000

I have brought this to the attention of the Ministry for Justice, as the sports secretary Mr Hunt has washed his hands of this matter, and said it is not his department when the head of FARE uses racist abuse against a football fan.

You too can bring this to the attention of the MoJ by emailing a link to this webpage and voicing your concern that the head of FARE is a racist

general.queries@justice.gsi.gov.uk

Comment on Powar denies racism after ‘coconut’ jibe sent on Twitter by David

David — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:04:26 +0000

Powar is a disgrace.
He should be forced to publicly apologise for his comments and probably be made step aside.
He is an unsuitable spokesperson for any anti-racism group.
I wrote an email to info@farenet.org earlier in the week and plan to post a copy this evening.
Perhaps if enough do likewise, FARE might do something about it.

Comment on Fake Plastic Respect by riaz

riaz — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 08:48:15 +0000

Hi,
What happend to the handshake did after the FA match…
I saw it in the TV.
But nobody is not responding

Comment on Fake Plastic Respect by Hop

Hop — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 05:52:11 +0000

Racism is unacceptable. If this business was just about racism everyone would have moved on long ago. Something was said, and only Suarez and Evra know the truth of that. But Mr F saw an opportunity to attempt to destabilize a player and the club he plays for – October being early in the season and LFC being bitter rivals and perhaps a threat. And boy did it pay off. The attempt has worked, maybe far better than even Mr F would have dared hope. Because Suarez has, perhaps naively, protested his innocence, and because Dalglish has, perhaps naively, stuck by him, the vilification has got so vocal that there are now serious question marks over both their LFC futures. And because football is a business LFC have now realized, perhaps belatedly, that they better side with popular opinion on this before any more damage is done. The truth is irrelevant, whatever the facts may be. LFC must move on, and be seen to be moving on, and stay out of the negative headlines. This case has proven one thing, perception really is reality.

Comment on Fake Plastic Respect by Gerry

Gerry — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 05:05:36 +0000

Hatred!!
How do you know that Ferguson hates Dalglish?
It is your opinion not a fact.
Comments like that add to the problem, it is a disgrace.

Comment on Fake Plastic Respect by Charlie B.

Charlie B. — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 22:07:34 +0000

Where do I start on the lies. He told the referee , with the support of SAF, that Suarez called him ‘n***er’ when he knew full well that Suarez had used the Spanish word for black. He had already translated it on the pitch. He told the panel tha he was uncomfortable using the ‘n***er’ word. Liar. There is video of him using thie very word to describe Desailly, a Chelsea footballer at the time. He claimed in conversation with Suarez that the Liverpool player had kicked him. That is simply not true. That is the one incident which is absolutely clear on the match video; Suarez did not kick Evra.
Evra told French TV that Suarez had used the’n word 10 times, whereas he told the referee that he had used it 5 times. That was a HALF truth. Anything else?

Comment on Fake Plastic Respect by Charlie B.

Charlie B. — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 21:51:43 +0000

You are seriously having a laugh now. Indisputably proven for the standard of proof used. Absolute gobbledygook. Your command of the English language is obviously greater than mine if you think that indisputably proven is equivalent to ‘balance of probability’ and below, therefore, ‘ beyond reasonable doubt’. In my English, indisputably proven is proven beyond dispute which puts it way above reasonable doubt. Are you making thi up?

Comment on Fake Plastic Respect by Dave Smark

Dave Smark — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 21:38:37 +0000

I am not a man U fan, but a Sunderland supporter with no axe to grind. I have always had a soft spot for Liverpool but have been saddened by the way in which your club has handled the whole Suarez – Evra business. The matter was investigated in huge detail by the panel. Suarez came out of it with no credit. Liverpool should have accepted the verdict. The club – and not only Suarez – should have apologised to Evra, and the rest of football would have admired them for it. It would have been forgotten by now and the club would have remained the favorite “other” club for millions of neutrals

Comment on Fake Plastic Respect by Daniel

Daniel — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 20:28:27 +0000

Excuse me for my poor english languaje.
I think Suarez is very angry by this, in Uruguay which happen in the field, in the field stay. That is the most important “law” in football code. Evra broken that, then FA give Luis 8 match, that incredible!! Evra make xenofobic comment and he still play…¿¿??
Suarez have to follow the protocol, and he will, but Evra has his hand down, then he make action with the cameras, puff, what a clow.
I hope Suarez could clean his name, and show really what he is.

Comment on Fake Plastic Respect by uruguayo

uruguayo — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 18:40:46 +0000

Right on. “Plastic” respect is right.
You can blame Suarez for a lot of things, but one thing you can not say is that he is a “plastic”.
He told this piece of crap what he thinks of him by not shaking his hand.
And by doing that he refused to enter into that “plastic” world that he and all the people he cares about abhor.
He’s a simple guy, and he wears his heart on his sleeve. He is not a sphisticated guy but there is nothing fake about him.
Take him or leave him.
We Uruguayans take him, as he is, and we’ll back him to the hilt.

Comment on Fake Plastic Respect by Jim Boardman

Jim Boardman — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 18:36:28 +0000

Claire, you’ve been trolling elsewhere too, and you’ve been doing it using a selection of pseudonyms.

Why anyone would do this and expect to be taken seriously is beyond me, Mr Anderson.

Comment on Fake Plastic Respect by Claire

Claire — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 18:22:37 +0000

Thanks for replying Jim. Sorry to hear you say I twist what I write. I try to be boringly clear if anything to be honest.

About the standard of proof though, it’s not “string of possibilities and maybes”, it’s the flexible civil standard of the balance of probability.
My point was this is not unusual for such an organisation to use. It IS a stronger standard than could be used though, because it is flexible, that is, the more serious the allegation, taking into account the nature of the misconduct alleged and the context of the case, the greater the burden of evidence required to prove the matter.

To Charlie B, the charge was indisputably proven for the standard of proof used. I don’t know to what you refer when you speak of 2 lies. But the reason Suarez was charged using rules E3(1) and (2) and Evra not was because of the racial aspect.

That’s not trolling or abusive or anything. I’ve not been unfair or personal or offensive. If anything I’m pedantic, but that’s surely better than being misinformed.