It isn’t. The FA set their own precedent with the Suarez incident. I don’t expect Cavani to get an 8 match ban, but he will get some form of punishment here, ridiculous or no.
I’ve just come back from’t caf. They are saying that the FA changed the minimum punishment to three matches after the Silva incident. So if Cavani’s appeal fails, it’ll be a three match ban.
Caf melting down over this, predictably. Nice for them to have a taste of their own medicine.
While it’s funny that Utd are getting this, it is nonsense. There was nothing racist about the tweet, and while they might want to remind Cavani about his responsibilities while he is in the UK, the should be wary of making value judgements about the use of language in other cultures.
I don’t care about Suarez now. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
I think the term used, even if in a different language, may/could cause offence to someone - hence they need to charge?
I agree though - it was not racist, and certainty no intent either. Not like Terry calling Anton what he did, yet Rio misssing the world cup and Terry being captain.
Taking the incident on its own merits, it’s a nothing burger. The right ‘punishment’ is a simple conversation, maybe an opportunity for education/reminder about being careful with the language we use cross-culturally, and then that’s it. Maybe for good will Cavani could make a donation to a suitable charity. All’s well that ends well.
That’s what should happen.
Previous precedent muddies the water, as does the desire of the authorities to be strong on racism, even if the incident they are tackling isn’t racist!
I have no sympathy for Man Utd, so the tribal fan in me won’t mind if Skeletor gets a ban, but the whole thing is blown out of proportion.
3 match ban for a nearly 34-year-old. Just a rest break for him. Ridiculous but all a part of the massive (and probably needed) reset. A few eggs may get broken cooking the multi-cultural, diverse omelet.
Law of averages dictates Sheffield Union must win eventually. Today is fine with me.**
I saw an article somewhere that spoke about how Afro-Uruguayans - a 4% minority, mind you - are uncomfortable with the widespread use of the term by the predominantly white population in Uruguay. While I understand that his intent wasn’t racist, the fact is the language can be deemed as problematic by some. It’s the same argument they used for Suarez. Were we not widely mocked for bringing up the fact that the word Suarez used was a term of endearment in his native tongue?
Maybe the answer is that instead of the FA constituting the Tribunal with a bunch of middle-aged white men they instead appoint a panel of 3 Uruguayans to determine whether what Cavani said would be considered offensive in the language and context in which he said it in. With Suarez the FA got two experts, white British academics from the University of Manchester .
By all means punish Cavani if what he said would be considered offensive in the language he said it in (considering context, relationship with the other party, medium where it was used etc) - but let’s not impose our own interpretation on the words he used in a context that they were not used in, as if we occupy some higher moral plateau that dictates every other culture and language must be interpreted directly into our language and defer to our “superior” standards.