English Premier League Thread II

you guys are fast becoming the new arsenal these days with all these injuries.

and why the fuck does fpl list rooney as available.

common you spurs !!


http://www.firstrowsports.tv/watch/100307/1/watch-swansea-city-fc-vs-tottenham-hotspur.html

Fuck Spurs! I hope Swansea puts 3 pass them.

Taarabt is a clueless as he is technical

manutd fan said:

Yes it does. De Gea has made 4 mistakes this season - only 2 of which were what you'd call "blunders" (vs City + West Brom). I can't think of any other goals we've conceded that he should have saved, yet you claimed De Gea in 2 matches has made more mistakes than Hart all season, which is rubbish.


edit:

Vidic's agent has said he could be out for 12 months.

Click to expand...

knockout ned said:

Click to expand...

You do realise that that was said before today's match don't you?

Time has a funny way of playing tricks on simple minds

To be fair to De Gay, he has a shitty pairing of CB in front of him most the times.
He wouldn't have to look stupid if Ferdinand and Vidic were there.

pipa said:

Fuck Spurs! I hope Swansea puts 3 pass them.

Click to expand...

why that? i used to live there, it was the neibourghoods team

i know it's a milan forum and if i have to choose between milan & spurs i always choose milan

and i hate swansea

joyirider said:

why that? i used to live there, it was the neibourghoods team

i know it's a milan forum and if i have to choose between milan & spurs i always choose milan

and i hate swansea

Click to expand...

You can love them, I will hate them.. at least until the day we finally avenge our defeat.

pipa said:

You can love them, I will hate them.. at least until the day we finally avenge our defeat.

Click to expand...

i agree with that and what a great match !!

walcott is such a cocksucker. he should give up the number 14 when henry comes back.

great pass by arshavin and great finish by vp.

joyirider said:

i agree with that and what a great match !!

Click to expand...

What.. great.... match ..... ?

jammin said:

walcott is such a cocksucker. he should give up the number 14 when henry comes back.

great pass by arshavin and great finish by vp.

Click to expand...

Give up the shirt for 3 months?
They should have retired it in the first place.
They can build a golden statue of him, and yet couldn't retire a freaking number?

llllllllooooooooooooooooollllllllllll chelsea 1-3

HAHAHAHA 1-3 For Aston Villa against Chelsea, and Swansea equalized against Spurs !

Good day for the chasing pack, Happy New Year!
Mwuahahahahhahhaha!!!

Will Idris come back online if Chelsea lose?

chelsea

i love new years eve

Apart from Van Pussy, not a single home win today.

Independent Regulatory Commission release written reasons for Luis Suarez case.

http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/Disciplinary/NewsAndFeatures/2011/luis-suarez-written-reasons
http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/Discipli...Written Reasons of Regulatory Commission.ashx

There's 500 pages.

Highlights:

This is what Evra said:

In the goalmouth, Mr Evra and Mr Suarez spoke to
each other in Spanish. Mr Evra asked Mr Suarez why he had kicked him, referring to the
foul five minutes previously. Mr Suarez replied "Porque tu eres negro", meaning "Because
you are black". Mr Evra then said to Mr Suarez “say it to me again, I’m going to punch
you”. Mr Suarez replied "No hablo con los negros", meaning "I don't speak to blacks"

Click to expand...

Mr
Evra continued by saying that he now thought he was going to punch Mr Suarez. Mr
Suarez replied "Dale, negro, negro, negro", which meant "okay, blackie, blackie, blackie".
As Mr Suarez said this, he reached out to touch Mr Evra's arm, gesturing at his skin. Mr
Kuyt then intervened. When the referee blew his whistle and called the players over to
him shortly after the exchanges in the goalmouth, Mr Evra said to the referee "ref, ref, he
just called me a fucking black".

Click to expand...

The third exchange alleged by Mr Evra was that he said "okay, now I think I'm going to
punch you", to which Mr Suarez replied "Dale, negro, negro, negro", meaning "okay,
blackie, blackie, blackie". This involves a use of the word "negro" as a form of address.

Click to expand...

Suarez said:

Mr Suarez denied the Charge. His case, in short, was as follows. He agreed with Mr Evra
that they spoke to each other in Spanish in the goalmouth. When Mr Evra asked why he
had kicked him, Mr Suarez replied that it was a normal foul and shrugged his shoulders.
Mr Evra then said that he was going to kick Mr Suarez, to which Mr Suarez told him to
shut up. As Mr Kuyt was approaching, Mr Suarez touched Mr Evra's left arm in a
pinching style movement. According to Mr Suarez, at no point in the goalmouth did he
use the word "negro". When the referee blew his whistle to stop play, Mr Evra spoke to Mr
Suarez and said (in English) "Don't touch me, South American". Mr Suarez replied "Por
que, negro?". He says that he used the word “negro” in a way with which he was familiar
from his upbringing in Uruguay. In this sense, Mr Suarez claimed, it is used as a noun and
as a friendly form of address to people seen as black or brown-skinned (or even just blackhaired). Thus, it meant "Why, black?" Mr Suarez maintained that when he said "Por que,
negro?" to Mr Evra, it was intended in a conciliatory and friendly way. Mr Suarez said this 6
was the only time that he used the word “negro” in his exchanges with Mr Evra during
the match.

Click to expand...

Sounds like he contradicted himself there, but anyway:

The FA said:

The FA's case, in short, was as follows. In the goalmouth, Mr Evra and Mr Suarez spoke to each other in Spanish. Mr Evra asked Mr Suarez why he had kicked him, referring to the foul five minutes previously. Mr Suarez replied "Porque tu eres negro", meaning "Because you are black". Mr Evra then said to Mr Suarez “say it to me again, I’m going to punchyou”. Mr Suarez replied "No hablo con los negros", meaning "I don't speak to blacks". Mr
Evra continued by saying that he now thought he was going to punch Mr Suarez. Mr Suarez replied "Dale, negro, negro, negro", which meant "okay, blackie, blackie, blackie". As Mr Suarez said this, he reached out to touch Mr Evra's arm, gesturing at his skin. Mr Kuyt then intervened. When the referee blew his whistle and called the players over to him shortly after the exchanges in the goalmouth, Mr Evra said to the referee "ref, ref, he
just called me a fucking black".

Click to expand...

I don't fully understand all of this, I'm just repeating what has been said.

Mr Suarez's account of his admitted use of the word "negro" changed several times. He
seemed unsure of when the admitted use took place and what triggered it. His account
seemed to change in an attempt to fit in with the video evidence.

On 11 November, the FA instructed two experts, Dr Scorer and Professor Wade. The
experts were instructed to prepare a written report on the linguistic and cultural
interpretations of the words "negro" and "negros" in Rioplatense Spanish. The instructions
went into further detail as to the issues which the experts were asked to cover. The FA
provided the experts with relevant materials, including 12 video clips of the match, the
witness statement of Mr Evra and the transcript of the interview with Mr Suarez. The
experts provided a written report to the FA on 15 November.

Click to expand...

The FA wished to cross-examine Mr Suarez, Mr Kuyt, Mr Comolli and Mr Dalglish who
were witnesses for Mr Suarez. This meant that the FA accepted in full the evidence of Mr
Haughan, Mr Mick McDonough, Mr Scott Ledger, both assistant referees, Mr David
Horlick, the match assessor, Mr John Bramhall of the PFA and Mr David De Gea, the
Manchester United goalkeeper.
29. Mr McCormick wished to cross-examine Mr Evra, Mr Marriner and Mr Giggs. This meant that Mr Suarez accepted in full the evidence of Mr Dowd, Valencia, Hernandez, Nani,
Anderson, Sir Alex Ferguson, Mr Mike Riley and Mr Stephane Guy of Canal +, the French
TV station.

Click to expand...

Page 97 onwards is the actual verdict

388. Our findings of fact which are directly relevant to the Charge are as follows:
(1) In response to Mr Evra's question "Concha de tu hermana, porque me diste in
golpe" ("Fucking hell, why did you kick me"), Mr Suarez said "Porque tu eres
negro" ("Because you are black").
(2) In response to Mr Evra's comment "Habla otra vez asi, te voy a dar una porrada"
("say it to me again, I'm going to punch you"), Mr Suarez said "No hablo con los
negros" ("I don't speak to blacks").
(3) In response to Mr Evra's comment "Ahora te voy a dar realmente una porrada"
("okay, now I think I'm going to punch you"), Mr Suarez said "Dale, negro,
negro, negro" ("okay, blackie, blackie, blackie).
98
(4) When the referee blew his whistle to stop the corner being taken, Mr Suarez used
the word "negro" to Mr Evra.
(5) After the referee had spoken to the players for a second time, and Mr Evra had
said that he did not want Mr Suarez to touch him, Mr Suarez said "Por que,
negro?".

Click to expand...

---

So.. essentially, the FA completely sided with Evra in every way?

There is no compromise from the FA's view. It just repeated Evra's...

Shame Arsenal didnt get the 3 points today,would have made for much more interesting title fight.

As things stand right now,there to far away to compete.Probably 3rd place at best come season end.

But anyway,who cares about that when i could just @United &Chelsea

From the Guardian's Owen Gibson:

Owen Gibson@owen_g

Independent panel found Evra to be a "credible witness" and Suarez to be "unreliable in relation to matters of critical importance".

Click to expand...

the FA made this decision not on the basis of one mans word v another, but on the basis that they have had access to the extra video and sound recording, that isn't yet public

Click to expand...

There is a monster essay from the FA that will be too big for me to paste (and would take an entire page), so here it is:

post 5192
http://www.redcafe.net/f6/evra-accu...arez-guilty-racial-abuse-341660/index130.html

Suarez accepted everything Nani, Chicharito, Valencia, Anderson, De Gea, and Ferguson said - from the document:

http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/Discipli...Written Reasons of Regulatory Commission.ashx



there's like 115 pages or something.... I'm on page 40 or so, I'm not sure utd fan is providing the clearest indication of what it means - but based purely on what I've read so far, unbroadcast footage seems to have shown what evra said to be true, according to the independant panel - that's the impression I get though you know how these things work they won't say something as simply as that yet - I can however say that Evra did not say "the ref only booked me because I'm black" - which is what Kuyt said he did

Page 97 onwards is the actual verdict

388. Our findings of fact which are directly relevant to the Charge are as follows:
(1) In response to Mr Evra's question "Concha de tu hermana, porque me diste in
golpe" ("Fucking hell, why did you kick me"), Mr Suarez said "Porque tu eres
negro" ("Because you are black").
(2) In response to Mr Evra's comment "Habla otra vez asi, te voy a dar una porrada"
("say it to me again, I'm going to punch you"), Mr Suarez said "No hablo con los
negros" ("I don't speak to blacks").
(3) In response to Mr Evra's comment "Ahora te voy a dar realmente una porrada"
("okay, now I think I'm going to punch you"), Mr Suarez said "Dale, negro,
negro, negro" ("okay, blackie, blackie, blackie).
98
(4) When the referee blew his whistle to stop the corner being taken, Mr Suarez used
the word "negro" to Mr Evra.
(5) After the referee had spoken to the players for a second time, and Mr Evra had
said that he did not want Mr Suarez to touch him, Mr Suarez said "Por que,
negro?".

We remind ourselves that the test for a breach of Rule E3(1) is an objective test. That
means that it is for us to form our own view as to whether Mr Suarez's words or
behaviour were abusive or insulting. It is not necessary for the FA to prove that Mr Suarez
intended his words or behaviour to be abusive or insulting. We are concerned with
whether the words or behaviour were abusive or insulting when used in a football match
played in England under the FA Rules. Mr McCormick accepted that we should apply
standards that we consider should be applicable to games played under the jurisdiction of
the FA. We are not deciding whether the words or behaviour would have been abusive or
insulting if used in a match in Uruguay. Nevertheless, we have taken account of the fact
that the words were said in Spanish by a Uruguayan player to a French player who speaks
Spanish. We have also had regard to the Spanish language expert evidence about how
particular uses of "negro" and comments using "negro" would or might be understood in
Uruguay. However, ultimately our task is to decide whether in our view the words or
behaviour were abusive or insulting in the circumstances in which they took place in this
match played in England under the FA Rules.
390. Mr Suarez used the word "negro" in his comments to Mr Evra because Mr Evra's skin
colour is black. In our judgment, Mr Suarez's words were insulting when he used the
word "negro" in each of the comments to Mr Evra which we have identified in paragraph
388 above.
391. Taking each of these comments in turn, and referring to the English translation only in this
paragraph (the full Spanish comment being set out in paragraph 388 above):
(1) Mr Suarez used insulting words in telling Mr Evra that he kicked him because he
was black. We do not believe this requires any elaboration. The Spanish language
experts, whose evidence was accepted by Mr Suarez, said that this comment
99
would be interpreted in Uruguay and other regions of Latin America as racially
offensive.
(2) Mr Suarez used insulting words in telling Mr Evra that he did not speak to
blacks. Again, this requires no elaboration. The Spanish language experts said
effectively the same about this comment as they did about the previous
comment.
(3) Mr Suarez used insulting words in saying to Mr Evra "okay, blackie, blackie,
blackie". Here, Mr Suarez was using the word "negro" as part of their argument
in which he was trying to wind up Mr Evra. The Spanish language experts said
that in the context of the previous usages of "negro" and "negros", this usage
would retain its provocative and offensive connotations, even though, in a
different context, the phrase "Dale, negro" could easily be inoffensive in
Uruguay.
(4) Mr Suarez used insulting words when he used the word "negro" when speaking
to Mr Evra just before they were spoken to by the referee for the first time. We do
not know what Mr Suarez said to which he attached the word "negro". However,
given that it was said as part of the continuing confrontation and argument
between the two players, and following the three previous comments when the
word was used in an insulting way, we find that it was also insulting on this
fourth occasion. For a Uruguayan to address a black opponent who understands
Spanish as "negro" in a football match in England, in the context in which the
word was used, is insulting.
(5) Mr Suarez used insulting words when he said to Mr Evra "Why, black?" after the
referee had spoken to them for the second time and Mr Evra had said that he did
not want Mr Suarez to touch him. Again, given that this was said as part of the
continuing confrontation and argument between the two players, it followed the
four previous comments using the word “negro” and, furthermore, given that
Mr Evra had made clear that he did not want Mr Suarez to touch him, in all the
circumstances the use of the word was insulting on this occasion also.
100
392. In total, Mr Suarez used the word "negro" or "negros" seven times in the penalty area. On
each occasion, the words were insulting. On each occasion, Mr Suarez breached Rule
E3(1). Accordingly, the Charge is proved.
393. Having found the Charge proved in that Mr Suarez's use of the word "negro" or "negros"
was insulting, we did not find it necessary to consider whether they were also abusive.
394. We make clear that the Charge was not proved in respect of Mr Suarez pinching Mr Evra's
skin. Whilst we considered that action to be reprehensible, we were not persuaded that it
amounted to abusive or insulting behaviour within the meaning of those words in Rule
E3(1). Accordingly, no issue arose as to whether any breach of Rule E3(1) by pinching
included a reference to Mr Evra's ethnic origin, colour or race. In the event, this decision
made no difference to our finding that the Charge was proved. It might conceivably have
made a difference to penalty had we found a breach of Rule E3(1) by pinching and that
this included a reference to Mr Evra's ethnic origin, colour or race. However, that situation
did not arise.
_________________________________________________________________________


the verdict^^

I've spent 20 minutes copying and pasting then you come along and within 2 minutes say everything I wanted to say but in a clearer fashion.

Fuck you

With those matters in mind, we turn to consider what Mr Marriner was told. Mr Dalglish
told him that Mr Suarez had said "you are black". Mr Comolli told him that Mr Suarez
said "Tues negro". As Mr Dowd told us, Mr Comolli spelt "Tues negro" and Mr Dowd
noted it down. In cross-examination on this point, Mr Comolli agreed that he told Mr
Marriner that Mr Suarez had said "Porque tu es negro". But, he denied that he dictated all
the words. He said that he just said "negro", that Mr Dowd asked Mr Comolli to spell
"negro", and he did not remember dictating the full sentence. We were surprised by Mr
Comolli's evidence that he only dictated the word "negro" in view of the contents of Mr
Marriner's report, and his and Mr Dowd's witness statements. Mr Dowd stated that he
asked Mr Comolli to spell "Tues negro" and Mr Dowd then noted it down. Those words
appear in Mr Marriner's report. Mr Marriner's and Mr Dowd's witness statements were
accepted in full by Mr Suarez. We find that Mr Comolli told Mr Marriner that Mr Suarez
had said "Porque tu es negro" to Mr Evra, and that Mr Comolli spelt "Tues negro" for Mr
Dowd, who wrote it down.

Click to expand...

Does "concha de tu hermana" not translate as "your sister's cunt"?

That's not very nice.

Chelsea.

60m for Torres.

15m for Villas-Boas.

Calum1903 said:

Does "concha de tu hermana" not translate as "your sister's cunt"?

That's not very nice.

Click to expand...

it's pointed out in the document that it also is a way of saying "fucking hell" etc - apparently