Liverpool FC and Racism

[undertheredsky]

Don't know to what extent this has received coverage in the States.

 

This was the original story:

Liverpool's Suarez was given an eight-match ban and a ?40,000 fine after he clashed with Manchester United's Evra.The report says Suarez has "damaged the image of English football around the world".The incident happened during the 1-1 draw at Anfield on 15 October.The report states that, after being tackled by the Uruguayan, Evra asked Suarez why he had kicked him, to which the forward replied in Spanish: "Because you are black."When Evra challenged him to repeat the answer and said he would "punch him", Suarez said: "I don't speak to blacks."Suarez is said to have used the term "negro" seven times in around two minutes.

 

However, despite choosing not to appeal against the decision, both Liverpool FC and the player continued to insist they had done nothing wrong. Suarez stated:

"In my country, 'negro' is a word we use commonly, a word which doesn't show any lack of respect and is even less so a form of racist abuse. Based on this, everything which has been said so far is totally false.I will carry out the suspension with the resignation of someone who hasn't done anything wrong and who feels extremely upset by the events."

 

To which there was widespread media criticism, including the following:

Liverpool FC need to take a hard look at themselves and how they have responded to the complaint and the investigations into the allegations of abuse in the Patrice Evra/Luis Su?rez case.

 

Throughout the entirety of the proceedings, over the past three months, all we have heard are denials and denigration of Evra. Since the publication of the 115-page report of the findings of the FA's independent commission, Liverpool's vitriol has increased. Su?rez's attempt at a belated apology is nothing short of lamentable. I cannot believe that a club of Liverpool's stature, and with how it has previously led on matters of social injustice and inequality, can allow its integrity and credibility to be debased by such crass and ill‑considered responses.

 

At such a historic time in Britain, Doreen and Neville Lawrence have taught and inspired us never to give up the fight for equality, justice and fair treatment following Wednesday's sentencing of Gary Dobson and David Norris for the murder of their son Stephen Lawrence in 1993.

 

With all these things, you come out of it with more credit if you hold your hands up. OK, Liverpool may have thought they had to defend their player as he is innocent. But if the club does not carry out a thorough investigation, how can it understand that Su?rez said things which are not acceptable, but that he didn't comprehend this due to his background?

 

If this is the case, Liverpool have failed him. Because they have not told Su?rez what the club's expectations are; that they have a zero policy towards racism. If he is ignorant of what is required of him, Liverpool should be asking: how come we have got a contract with the player?

 

Unless, of course, Liverpool are saying that they have explained to Su?rez what the club want and he has defied them.

 

In any other sector, if someone makes a claim of racially motivated or abusive behaviour, an employer has to investigate if they are competent because this may be damaging to the business. Clubs in these cases don't seem to be. And when it's a high-profile incident involving a big-name player, they want to say, unequivocally, we defend our player 100%. Why are people not showing leadership and apologising, saying that we won't do it again, and ask that they can move on?

 

Liverpool have been particularly hypocritical. You can't on the one hand wear a Kick It Out T-shirt in a week of campaigning against racism when this is also happening on the pitch: it's the height of hypocrisy. Liverpool players wore a T-shirt saying: "We support Luis Su?rez", seemingly whatever the outcome. This was a dreadful knee-jerk reaction because it stirs things up.

 

And, then, this was followed, after the verdict, with a kind of stance that says: "Hey, we support anti-racism and Kick It Out. But we're not sorry. All we are really saying is that we blame someone else, not us."

 

In the wider context of racism throughout our society there are issues. Undoubtedly there are still areas in this country you would not feel comfortable being in, and that is not just on grounds of potentially being racially abused.

 

I do think that the police service is much better than it was in 1993, when Stephen Lawrence was murdered. You can actually raise matters of race in a police station and get a degree of sensitivity that gives you comfort that you are going to be treated in a fair manner.

 

What we've got to do is keep building on that. We had the MacPherson Report in 1999, which rolled into the Race Relations Act of 2000 and then things did move forward, but there's been a rolling back regarding equality since 2005, due to the reaction to the July bombings in London. And this has continued with the present government and the suspicion that is held of a multicultural society. It's important that we sharpen up our focus regarding these matters.

 

This is a momentous time for us. Four million people play football in this country and this weekend there will be many kids in parks and on pitches: they need to know that if they misbehave, they can't get away with it. That is the big issue.

 

Since the incident we've not heard a word of complaint from Evra about how his character has been besmirched by Liverpool. This is surely something the FA and the PFA and the whole of football should be concerned about: we can't have a situation where there is just one side on the attack.

 

Surely the new owners, with their experiences of equality and inclusion in the US, can see how their brand is being devalued, and if they sanction this sort of lack of professionalism and moral leadership, we may as well pack up and go home and forget about anti‑racism.

 

The FA has shown that it has the bottle to back its Respect campaign by enforcing rules and regulations with regard to unacceptable behaviour and conduct. We have a duty and responsibility to demonstrate to the world how we deal with this issue. It's fine to criticise Fifa and Uefa but let's show we can take care of our own business.

 

The future of football needs such strong and decisive leadership, especially for the next generation of young people who play the game across the country. Let's remove all racists and bigots from football.

 

Lord Ouseley was head of the Commission for Racial Equality from 1993 to 2000

[undertheredsky]

Racism row FINALLY over but only after Red Sox owners are forced to intervene. This from the Daily Mail:

 

One hundred and twenty days. That was how long it took for Kenny Dalglish and Liverpool to finally get something right.

 

That’s 120 days to work out how to do the decent thing.

 

When they came - midway through Sunday afternoon - statements from Dalglish, Luis Suarez and managing director Ian Ayre served their purpose and, for once, delivered a clear message.

 

Finally, four months after Suarez and Patrice Evra clashed in the penalty box at Anfield on October 15, Liverpool declared themselves ready to move on. Finally, there was some contrition, some responsibility. It was all long overdue.

 

Forget all the other low days this club have endured since mid-autumn. Forget the days of the silly T-shirts and the rambling, bemusing statements. For none has been lower than Saturday.

 

A visit of one of England’s flagship clubs to Old Trafford remains one of the stand-out fixtures of the year. Manchester United v Liverpool on a winter’s Saturday. What is there not to like?

 

Here, though, Liverpool - clumsy, arrogant Liverpool - failed by the curled lip of their striker and by a floundering manager buried deep in denial, shoved a great spectacle into the shadows. In its place they revealed their darker side and how ugly it looked. Self-serving, out of touch, paranoid, delusional. Take your pick.

 

How important is a handshake? Suarez clearly thinks it means little. To him, dignity remains optional. Saturday at Old Trafford presented the Uruguayan and Liverpool with an opportunity. Take a deep breath, put out your hand and put the past to bed.

 

Just do the right thing.

 

It was a goal as open as the one Suarez volleyed the ball into late in this undistinguished game. He wasn’t interested, though, and, to make matters worse, his manager didn’t - at that point - really seem to care.

 

On Sunday it emerged that Suarez had been willing to go along with Dalglish’s suggestion last week that he would shake Evra’s hand. He had been instructed to swallow his substantial pride. It seems he changed his mind, ignoring his manager and effectively calling Dalglish’s authority into question. It appears it was this, as much as anything, that prompted Suarez’s apology and Ayre’s subsequent criticism.

 

Still there was no contrition or explanation from Dalglish after the game, though. And no website statement, no Sunday afternoon apology will make us forget that. Instead of addressing the issue with Sky’s impressively persistent interviewer Geoff Shreeves, Liverpool’s manager once again sought refuge in sneering, condescending aggression. It was as embarrassing as it was offensive.

 

On Sunday, Dalglish apologised, though not to Shreeves. In doing so, he appeared to suggest he wasn’t aware of Suarez’s actions when beginning his interview. That seems extraordinary. As painful as it is to acknowledge, the spirit of Dalglish runs right through the middle of this saga. It has done right from the moment he saw Sir Alex Ferguson accompany Evra to the referee’s room after the 1-1 draw on Merseyside last year.

 

Suarez is a young man of 25. A South American gun for hire already playing at his fourth professional club. He has no great understanding of the English game or all that Liverpool and United have done over the past 40-odd years to advance its cause.

 

Dalglish, though, has been in the vanguard of this. His goal brought England only its third European Cup in 1978. He managed Liverpool to a League and FA Cup Double less than 10 years later. He dragged the club through the horrors of Hillsborough. So what has happened since? How has it taken him so long to understand the damage the past four months have done to his club and its reputation? Away from the field, Dalglish remains desperately out of his depth.

 

Foolishly, Liverpool have allowed him to drive their defence - if it can be called that - of Suarez and he has let them down. Dalglish admitted his conduct on Saturday was not befitting of a Liverpool manager. The point is, though, that it hasn’t been so for quite some time and nobody inside Anfield has been brave enough to tell him.

 

On Saturday, Liverpool owner John W Henry seemed more preoccupied with lunch than soccer. ‘At Boston Bagel Cafe in Ft. Lauderdale’ he tweeted. ‘Great sandwiches.’ Henry and chairman Tom Werner, his fellow American, rarely come to Anfield. On Sunday, the Liverpool FC section of the NESN (New England Sports Network) website part-owned by Henry claimed that Suarez had shown ‘strength of character’ to ‘score in the face of adversity’. There was no mention of what had preceded the match.

 

Elsewhere, though, there are signs that the stench of the Suarez-Evra issue is finally beginning to drift across the Atlantic. Sunday’s edition of the New York Times carried an article under the headline, ‘Another Ugly Incident Mars Liverpool’s Good Name’.

The editorial ended by posing the question: ‘Is it time for Henry and Werner to state the direction the club will take on this issue?’

 

Anyone who has watched this saga unfold will know the answer, of course. Who knows how much input Henry and Werner had in the statements. It is certainly interesting that they didn’t come until America - five hours behind - had ‘woken up’.

 

What is indisputable, though, is that Sunday’s movement came far too late.

 

To repeat, Liverpool have had 120 days to educate Suarez, 120 days to drag Dalglish into line. In that time, the club’s reputation has been allowed to nosedive.

[SCM33]

Yeah, I really could care less....

 

Im actually pissed off the owners spent 178M this year for the Liverpool soccer team rather than the Redsox.

 

This is the united states, specifically the New England region......most of us dont give a s*** about soccer. Id rather they just sold the soccer team and spent the money on the Sox.

[mvp 78]

This has gotten a little play on sports radio here, but most Sox soccer fans already followed a team before NESN tried to shove tape delay Liverpool matches down our throats (not that NESN has better programming).

 

The fact that this is even a minor distraction to Sox ownership is a little frustrating.

[User Name]

The commitments are mutually exclusive. The money they spend on the soccer club has nothing to do with the money they spend on the Red Sox. If they're not spending, it's because they don't want to, not because the soccer team's investment doesn't allow them to.

[iortiz]

I'm not sure how much is Liverpool's value these days but this team should be a good business. Liverpool is probably one of the top 10 soccer clubs around the world and their fan base is awesome. They have a very impressive record of achievements. They have won everything.

[mvp 78]

The commitments are mutually exclusive. The money they spend on the soccer club has nothing to do with the money they spend on the Red Sox. If they're not spending' date=' it's because they don't want to, not because the soccer team's investment doesn't allow them to.[/quote']

 

It's not the $$$ that bothers me, it's the time spent.

[iortiz]

According with forbes they are the #9 most valuable soccer team in the world...

 

#9 Liverpool

Country: England

League: Barclays Premier League

Owner/Majority Shareholder: John Henry, Tom Werner

Stadium: Anfield (Seating Capacity:45,300)

Current Value: $552 mil

1-yr Value Change (U.S.): -33%

Revenues: $276 mil

 

New England Sports Ventures paid $476 million to buy the debt-laden team from Tom Hicks and George Gillett in October.

 

In our latest look at the fortunes of professional soccer Manchester United is once again on top, the most valuable franchise in football, and in all of professional sports, at $1.86 billion. Number two? Real Madrid with a value of $1.4 billion. Arsenal, at $1.19 billion is number three.

 

Overall, the average value of the 20 clubs on our list increased to $640 million, up 1.3% over last year. More impressive: Average operating income rose 25% to $40 million.

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney/2011/04/20/the-worlds-most-valuable-soccer-teams/

[User Name]

It's not the $$$ that bothers me' date=' it's the time spent.[/quote']

 

What JH does regarding his soccer team doesn't ffect the Sox at all. LL runs the Red Sox joint, which is the bad thing. I wish he WAS spending time on the soccer team.