For someone to be charged they need to prove he did it. The video doesn't prove Busquets said it so Uefa can't charge him. Uefa are still saying if you are found guilty of racial behaviour and charged you will be punished.
They would have done if it wasn't Barcelona I reckon. It seems UEFA have done everything they can to find UEFA FC innocent.
Seriously though, I think the statement UEFA are sending out is if you can be racial abusive to someone discreately (sp) then your get away with it.
What was it that Pep said post-game? Didn't he say that Busquets had made a mistake?
Curtis - not about Barca diving. People made valid points that he deserves to get banned anyway because he's a diving **** =)
Sid Lowe on the Football Weekly Pod said that Barca's belated excuse was that Busquets actually said was: "mucho mono" - which means "You cheeky sod" --> He goes on to say that it's a pretty weak argument and probably not what he said at all.
Did UEFA make the decision on the basis of not wanting to appear as if they were acting because another club made a complaint/told them to?
Curtis - not about Barca diving. People made valid points that he deserves to get banned anyway because he's a diving **** =)
Sid Lowe on the Football Weekly Pod said that Barca's belated excuse was that Busquets actually said was: "mucho mono" - which means "You cheeky sod" --> He goes on to say that it's a pretty weak argument and probably not what he said at all.
Did UEFA make the decision on the basis of not wanting to appear as if they were acting because another club made a complaint/told them to?
Just watched the video, I think he said it (why else would he cover up his mouth?), which really lowers my opinion of him, but you really can't be 100% sure. I don't think it's a good idea to ban someone from the UEFA CL final when you're not 100% sure. Even though lie detectors are 95% accurate, they are not admissible in a court of law as evidence because they aren't 100%. And let's not forget that this would be unprecedented, and this type of thing happens all of the time in football. In Spanish-speaking countries you clearly hear players mouth words (more clear than Busquets) like "la puta que te pario," "la concha de tu madre," "puto," "maricon," etc. etc. etc. These are misogynist and homophobic comments but never ever get punished. If the ref wants to punish players on the field for these acts, more power to him, but if we're going to retroactively use video evidence you have to be consistent. Though I don't speak Italian so I can't comment, I hear they are even worse than the Spaniards about this kind of thing.
LOL though at all of the UEFA FC comments, especially from ManU fans. I think that a lot of people overplay how much ManU gets calls (where was all of the outrage when Chelsea got those calls against Tottenham? if it were ManU people would have gone ballistic), but when their fans comment on it it's always because people are "anti-ManU" (which may be true, when you're such a big club you get a lot of haters). Yet when it happens to another club they're jumping on the bandwagon about conspiracy theories about UEFA helping them out, I think it's a bit disappointing. And if we want to talk about the Chelsea semi-final, how about Anelka diving to get Abidal a red? How about Henry's goal being wrongly called offsides? I agree that one of the handballs and one of the tackles were controversial and could have resulted in penalties, but definitely not enough to still be talking about it years later. I agree this year that Ronaldo's goal getting called back in the second leg was a crime, and there was a lot of diving in the first leg (by both sides) but to suggest that UEFA wants Barca to win is ridiculous. May I ask about the motive? Platini and Blatter being anti-English? You guys are starting to sound like a bunch of Americans accusing other nations of "anti-Americanism." And anyway, what does that have to do with the Barca Real Madrid semi-final matches, where the real controversy occurred? Braga dove all over the place in the second leg of the Europa League semi-final yet no one mentioned anything about it.
That's ridiculous. NOTHING can be deemed 100% accurate. Hence why a small percentage of prisoner's will be innocent. So much evidence stacks up against him, it's extremely difficult to make the judgement. It's like finding someone with the victim's blood on his hands, a knife with the blood and saying they shouldn't be punished because the victim could have cut herself, dripped blood onto the suspect's hands who then picked a knife up. There's ALWAYS multiple possibilities to any crime, but when you have mounting evidence for one, the judge tends to go with it, otherwise our prisons would be empty if we play UEFA's way.
Rooney for instance, we all know he said **** into the camera - there's also a minute possibility (Emphasise minute) that he could have said something similar, which combined with crowd distortion and dialect distortion, simply sounded like ****. Now, no one ever suggested that Rooney should get away with anything because this minute possibility exists, in fact I remember you saying he deserved punishment. So, why doesn't Busquets? All the evidence pointed towards Rooney doing it, so it does with Busquets - but now you take into account minute possibilities. Please. Pep basically admitted to it, why would Marcelo lie, when if video showed he didn't do that Marcelo would look like a lying ***, it's the only thing that makes sense in context, and I'm certain sound engineers could extract at least some of the sound.
There's a reason it's called a judicial system, that someone makes a JUDGEMENT based on evidence for both sides. It's not the "lets find out who's 100% right here to punish them", because it doesn't work.
I would like to see a La Liga player (Spanish one) racially abuse **** out of Alves, Abidal and see the reaction of some Barca supporters here. Will they say it is norm in La Liga or cry for banning the culprit..
Sigh.
Firstly there aren't many Barcelona supporters on the forum. Just because they defend a team doesn't mean they support them.
Secondly - no one is condoning any type of racism, don't be a **** about the issue, quite clear no one is defending any type of racism.
The video isn't clear what he says. When you professional lip readers saying it is inconclusive so I highly doubt a few of you can be sure. You can make claims that it looks like he says something that sounds like mono but can't prove he did say it. It certainly isn't conclusive meaning he shouldn't be banned.
However, I think I'm against the punishment because it's inconsistent, and you don't want to see someone banned from the CL final for a comment made in the heat of the moment. It's one thing to get punished for an act in game, like a foul, but a comment?
But that's the thing, it happens all of the time, especially homophobic remarks. I can't even count how many times I've seen players say "puto," but no one ever gets banned for it. And you lip-read hijo de puta, la puta que te pario, la concha de tu madre, etc. etc. 50 times a game. All I'm saying is that it's inconsistent. If you punish Busquets for this, you have to start punishing people for those remarks too. Which would never happen.
If nothing can be deemed 100% accurate than why aren't lie detectors admissable in a court of law? The fact of the matter is that often times criminals go unpunished even if it seems like they did something if the court isn't 100% sure. More importantly, this isn't the judicial system we're talking about here...we're not talking about the difference between letting a murderer go innocent on the street, we're talking about a soccer game and whether or not a player should be allowed to play. The judicial system is going to be more likely to put someone away based on evidence for the safety of the populace, we aren't talking about that at all here. And on top of that it doesn't even matter, ManU is going to win anyway.
Two totally different examples. Rooney went right into the camera and you could actually hear him say it. He said what he said with the intention of communicating it to the world. Busquet's comment was made to one player. In Busquet's case we're talking about lip-reading, and you can't even see the second part of what he said because Marcelo's head is covering his face up (which is important, because that means we actually have no idea of what was said, a lot of words in Spanish start with 'mono'). And no, there is no way sound engineers could piece it together, there is way too much noise in a football stadium to figure out what one player said to another. Surely there is a lot of evidence that Busquets did it, but that's not how this works. You can't retroactively punish a player for a racist remark just based on evidence, they have to be absolutely 100% sure about something like that, which they aren't, which is why they didn't punish him. And that's the reason they never ever punish players for something like this...you can't be 100% sure, and they'd rather not ban a player for something he said if they aren't 100% sure. The only players I've seen get banned for remarks made on the field (other than directly to the ref) are Rooney and Drogba, and both of them went right into the camera and said it. And as we keep on mentioning, homophobic and misognyist comments are made on the field every game yet go unpunished...they aren't being inconsistent at all here.
He could have been using the word "mono" as an adjective and have been calling him cute ?
If I'm perfectly honest, it looks more like "mucho morro" than "mono, mono" from my standpoint.