Dear sirs,
I wish to formally complain to the FA about the behaviour of Manchester United player Patrice Evra towards Liverpool player Luis Suarez during the Premier League match at Anfield last October for using abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.
This complaint is based on the evidence provided by Mr. Evra himself subsequently.
Rule E3(1) is:
Rule E3, with the sub-heading "General Behaviour", provides as follows:
"(1) A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour."
On page 26/27 the suarez document, the very first occurence of run in between the two players occured:
"Mr Evra and Mr Suarez are agreed that they spoke to each other in Spanish in thegoalmouth. Mr Evra said that he is not exactly fluent in Spanish but that he can easily converse in Spanish. For Mr Suarez, Spanish is his native language as a Uruguayan. Mr Evra told us that he began the conversation by saying "Concha de tu hermana". Mr Evra's evidence was that this is a phrase used in Spanish like when you say "f*****g hell" in English, but the literal translation is "your sister's pussy". Mr Suarez did not hear Mr Evra say this. One of the video clips that we have seen, taken from a close up angle behind the goal, does appear to support Mr Evra's evidence that he started the conversation with this comment."
I would like to receive the following from the FA in relation to this highly publicised incident;
a.) An explanation as to why Mr. Evra has not been charged when admitting the offence in question when giving his version of events during the recent inquiry.
(Maybe you believe that stating "Your sister's pussy" to a fellow professional to be not offensive and was spoken by Mr. Evra in a conciliatory manner.
I doubt you'd buy that as a defence though given the fact that he said this in a heated discussion with Mr. Suarez during a Liverpool v Man United match.
Or maybe this remark has been deemed to be inoffensive in Spanish although I imagine this could not be regarded as a legitimate defence either as you have deemed the word "negro" to be offensive in any language or context.)
You have found Mr. Suarez guilty of the aforementioned offence despite the fact he has stated that he is not guilty and there is no corroborating evidence against him despite the word of your "credible" witness, however you have failed to even charge Mr. Evra with the offence even though he has admitted such a breach of the rules through his testimony.
b.) Details of what action will now be taken against Mr. Evra for his self-confessed breach of the rules and how this matter can be adequately progressed so that this type of unsavoury behaviour can be stamped out of the game for good.
By the way, I'd just like it noted that I am not rushing to judgement here based on probability or hearsay but rather on the testimony of someone the FA have already officially deemed to be a credible witness.
Looking forward to seeing justice being done according to your own rules.
Regards.
Dear Sir,
Thank you for contacting The Football Association.
As you are aware an Independent Regulatory Commission found a charge of misconduct against Luis Suarez proven and has subsequently released the full written reasons of the commission. Liverpool FC and Suarez have accepted the sanction therefore Suarez will be suspended for a period of eight matches. Suarez was also fined £40,000 and was warned as to his future conduct.
In relation to your email we feel it is important to highlight the following:
a. It was accepted by all parties (including Mr Suarez) that the phrase “concha de tu hermana” properly translates into English as “f*cking hell”, “f*ck me” or similar and is therefore deemed an exclamation not a direct insult.
b. The Commission found as a matter of fact that Evra did not use the term “South-American” in respect of Suarez;
c. Evra’s further comments (i.e. “say it to me again, I’m going to punch you”, “okay, now I think I’m going to punch you”) were made in the context of, and in reaction to, him being spoken to in racially insulting terms;
d. Accordingly, there was nothing in Evra’s language which breaches Rule E3 when assessed against the standards The FA applies to all incidents of on-field verbal exchanges between players.
e. Similarly, language alleged to have been used by Dirk Kuyt could – on one reading – be said to amount to a breach of Rule E3; but, as stated above, The FA exercises a common sense approach to incidents of verbal exchanges involving players as they are seen to berate and engage with each other in relatively strong terms on a regular basis.
f. The FA therefore considers that there is a clear and significant difference between Evra’s comments and Suarez’s repeated use of racially insulting language.
We do appreciate all of the feedback we receive from supporters. This feedback is collated and used to build a picture of public opinion and is subsequently fed back internally within the organisation. Please rest assured your comments will form part of this feedback process.
Kind regards
Rebecca Budd | Customer Relations
The FA Group
Wembley Stadium, Wembley, London, HA9 0WS
Postal address: Wembley Stadium, PO Box 1966, London, SW1P 9EQ
T +44 (0) 844 980 8200 | F+44 (0) 844 980 8201
http://www.TheFA.com, http://www.wembleystadium.com
