Why would Evra claim that Suarez repeatedly used it with negative connotations if he didn't. Evra is a bit of a mad lad but thats a bit of a stretch. Its not like he might have misheard a single sentence. It was a dialogue between the two.
I'm sure that you're aware that Evra changed how many times Suarez was supposed to have abused him and even the word that Suarez said multiple times. He first told the ref that Suarez called him black, after the game he claimed Suarez called him the N world (the bad one) 5 times and then it later changed to Negro (which is the Spanish word for black) 8(?) times.
I've no doubt that Suarez would do pretty much anything to gain an advantage on the pitch however Evra's evidence was far from reliable, as it was during the whole Chelsea groundsmen thing when the FA said as much.
So Suarez was using his skin colour in a non offensive way, as part of a sentence which was specifically trying to offend him?
I genuinely can't believe Liverpool fans are still beating this drum. I thought you all magically gained some kind of ethical compass about his actions once he left.
The guy I knew who used to rage against it went through the whole spectrum as further evidence was released:
Suarez never said it, Evra lied.
Suarez said it as a term of endearment.
Suarez said it while insulting him, but it wasn't part of the insult.
And then when he left - He was always a nasty piece of work, I never believed he didn't say it.
Interestingly, from step 2 onwards Evra was still somehow the villain of the piece for ... telling the truth about it.
Excuse me? What you said was simply wrong. If you go back to the thread on here at the time and you will find that I said that I believed Suarez was guilty.
He didn't admit to saying what he was charged with, as you claimed and as I corrected though. What Suarez admitted to saying was neither a term of endearment nor meant to cause offence. From what I remember, he admitted to asking Evra "why black/negro", in response to Evra getting mad at him, which as I said, the FA's linguistic expert claimed wouldn't be considered offensive in South American Spanish dialect.
Just to be clear so you don't get confused, I can say that what you claimed was wrong (because it was) and still not believe Suarez was innocent. I even can say that Evra's evidence was inconsistent and unreliable (which it was) and think Suarez was still guilty.