h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

It is being reported around the world that a Liverpool football player has been found guilty of racially abusing a black opponent player during the course of a top division football match. The guilty finding has come from the English Football Association and has led to the player, Mr Suarez, receiving an 8 match ban and a fine.

It is also being reported that “Liverpool” is defending the actions of Mr Suarez … “It is our strong held belief, having gone over the facts of the case, that Luis Suarez did not commit any racist act,” Liverpool said.” There has been some suggestion that “Liverpool” may or should defend Mr Suarez to the hilt.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/dcunited/liverpools-suarez-guilty-of-racially-abusing-man-united-defender-evra-banned-for-8-games/2011/12/20/gIQAvNKd7O_story.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/16282405.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/16277126.stm

The “Liverpool” of these reports is “Liverpool Football Club” but the FC is generally not mentioned and we are left with Liverpool the city.

My question to askH2G2 is two-fold.
Minor Question: Given Liverpool’s central connection to the historical African Slave Trade should Liverpool FC be extra mindful of their statements, formal or otherwise, to the media.

Major Question: Without the African Slave trade what differences if anything would there be in the Liverpool of today, e.g. would it have a less grand city centre, would it have a smaller population, would it have a world leading football club ...

Liverpool's a jumped up fishing village, with all that mindset entails. There's something in the water that imparts this sense of persecution and victimhood.

That's all the Suarez thing is to them. Yet more proof that the world is out to get the humble Scouser.

Ooh, harsh Mr603...

Liverpool's association with slavery is far from unique. Big chunks of Bristol were also built on the bag of the slave trade, and the profits from the selling of people would have percolated out widely through the economy.

And how would the development of the US looked without the slave trade?


As for Mr Suarez - guilty as charged, IMO.

Sorry Sprout. I came over all Mancunian then...

Have Liverpool apologised for Holly Johnson yet?

Whether Mr Suarez insulted the guy verbally or not, it was between the two players concerned, and I can't see his actions as damaging the reputation of the football club or being in any way representative of the citizens of Liverpool (Suarez is Uruguayan). The club has every right to defend its reputation, but they might be thankful that it wasn't a police investigation, which is what John Terry is undergoing for his incident with Anton Ferdinand.

Maybe they should have just shook hands?

Here's an interesting article I read on this this morning.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/16262537.stm

I think this is a very tricky one frankly. It's very easy to come down on the side of righteousness without the full facts and I know I don't have them.

given that (according to the LFC statement at least) nobody else on the pitch including Evra's team mates and the ref allegedly heard the comments it's hard to see how it would remotely stand up in a court of law.
Indeed from that it's hard to see how it stood up to any sort of scrutiny. But then, as I said, I don't have the full facts.

I'd guess that is because that was a load of disengenous tosh from Liverpool.

Saurez **admits** saying it and his defence is that it wasn't racist. So whether or not anyone heard it is irrelevant because because Saurez accepted he said it.

FB

As I understand it, it rests around the interpretation of a certain word, similar to N-----r. Suarez says he said it without racist intent, Evra feels differently.

And supposedly Evra said something deeply offensive in Spanish back (or possibly first, I don't know) - *shrug*

Seems like a mountain has been made of two sportsmen sledging each other out of the earshot of anyone else.

Frankly an 8 match ban sounds worse that the worst that could happen to John Terry, which is that he might be fined an amount which would be roughly equivalent to fining me about £20.

As for the link to the slave trade, please take a look at a calendar. You're trying confabulate a link between an incident that happened between a couple of bloody foreigners (a Uruguayan and a Frenchman) to this country's involvement in the slave trade, a trade we stopped taking part in over 200 years ago and which we were responsible for bringing to an end in the 1860s. How you think these two things are even remotely connected is beyond me.

There was even a (to me farcical) official apology from Liverpool Council, and that happened over a decade ago. It really, really, is time to let it go. By all means discuss racism in football - it seems to be a hot topic at the moment. But connecting it to the slave trade -do grow up.

Thanks for that link, Orcus. I've got a lot of respect for Tim Vickery - he knows South American football inside out - and that side of the argument needed the benefit of that knowledge base to be illustrated correctly.
I'm still not totally convinced by either side, and remain receptive. Certainly, Suarez needs it to be made clear to him that using those terms to people is unacceptable in this country. Also, it's worth pointing out that eight matches is a LONG ban by modern Premiership standards. I'm not sure that I've seen a ban of more than 5 matches for the usual violent behaviour or dangerously reckless tackles.

<>

But a fan committing the same offence can expect to be banned from football grounds for years.

That's what winds me up. If I'd have called Anton Ferdinand the same name JT did, I'd be banned for life. Yet that tosspot is still England captain?

But if Mr Terry had called him a black footballer would it be a problem ?

In Mr Terry's universe what he said is part of his everyday language.

Reminds me a bit what a team mate of Craig Bellamy said, after he'd got done for swearing:

"Craig didn't say it to offend, he talks like that the whole time"



sprout