McClennan wrote:
If Suarez's case had gone to court he would have been found not guilty because of the beyond reasonable doubt line of enquiry.
WTFever, Judge Judy.
The truth is that you don't know what would have happened had Suarez been taken to court. But there was still a great deal more evidence against Suarez than there was against Terry.
Had Suarez been taken to court, they would have had the advantage of police interviews and a much more confrontational method of questioning in the court. Maybe Evra would've cracked and flawed his case, but it's just as likely to that Suarez could have cracked too.
I agree that the way the issues have been brought to the FA's attention are different, however that doesn't validate one over the other because an offence has taken place in both instances. Terry has less of a defence because he's been resident here for over thirty years. So whilst I take your point about multiple use, Terry's defence appears less strong than Suarez. There is an argument to say that he should receive both less and the same penalty. Whatever decision is reached you'll have one set of fans arguing about it because they will refuse to see both sides of the story and those neutrals without objectivity will end up accusing the FA of favouritism even if they make a good decision.
The truth is that we haven't even seen all the evidence, we haven't seen the witnesses, we haven't seen the hearings. I don't know if you remember, but I backed Suarez all the way until I actually read the summary of the decision. Up until that point I felt it was ridiculous that the decision had gone that way because I was at the mercy of reading journos reports. Based on everything I'd read I backed Suarez, but reading the summary of the decision painted everything in a completely different light.
I don't think anyone truly knows what went on in either case. But on the evidence presented Suarez's offence was far greater than Terry's. The only evidence against Terry was the clip on TV. But he came straight out with his explanation of what went on, he went and talked to Ferdinand and clearly tried to sort things out. His story never changed. The video evidence backed up what he said and Ashley Cole confirmed what happened. Suarez's evidence changed as he was questioned and his version of events was confirmed as wrong. There was the fact that video evidence emerged that he started pinching Evra's skin. Suarez wasn't found guilty of that, but that to me suggests that he was clearly trying to wind Evra up and virtually eliminates his argument that he was "just greeting him like we do in South America".
But on the counter, what was happening at Anfield was happening in the middle of a pressure match, while both participants were talking in a 2nd or 3rd language(?). Linguistic experts may give their opinion, but IMO a linguistic expert is kind of moot when we're talking trash talk on a football pitch.
But while I am prepared to concede doubt against Suarez, the scousers on here will not give Terry even the slightest benefit of doubt. To them, Terry is guilty, Suarez is innocent. Robbie even pronounced Terry guilty of racially abusing Ledley King, even though that appears nothing more than a BS internet rumour.
So f*** the scouse c****, and if you continue to back their BS, f*** you too. And f*** idiots like Garth Crooks who can't stop crying about the verdict because it's not the one they wanted.
