MercoPress, en Español
Get our news on your inbox! Suscribe x
Montevideo, March 20th 2019 - 23:39 UTC
France is only one step away from reaching the fourth World Cup final of its rich football history. Didier Deschamps’ team beat Uruguay 2-0 and now has qualified for its sixth World Cup semifinal. Read full article
Not even one Latin American country has survived - they have now ALL been eliminated.
It just illustrates that violent play and acting injured no longer is accepted. Brasil, Argentina, Uruguay, Colombia and Mexico learn how to play the beautiful game PROPERLY!
Yeah, it's an all-European tournament now. I wonder how often that's happened before? But diving is hardly confined to Latin American teams (though they may have the world champion here: https://twitter.com/RRWWE/status/1013812704744824833 ).
Have you noticed we've ended up with the next three matches all being between flag twins? Cross vs cross, horizontal tricolore vs horizontal tricolore, vertical tricolore vs vertical tricolore. Or to put it another way: Northern Europe vs Northern Europe, Western Europe vs Western Europe, and Eastern Europe vs Eastern Europe. Just a weird coincidence.
gordo1, WHO ARE YOU TO TELL URUGUAY HOW TO PLAY FOOTBALL PROPERLY ??
But the Russians are still in it?
Wow, I can't believe it. Germany's out, Argentina's out, Brazil is out, and we've reached the semi-finals.
Chronic, yes Russia are still in but their match against Croatia starts in half an hour. We'll be playing whoever wins.
Are you aware that posting in the upper case is evidence of shouting and is, thus, very bad manners! ¡nabo!
It wasn't a Uruguayan player acting here:
Russia are out. They played really well though, no one expected them to get this far and they only lost on penalties.
Looks like Mbappé learned the wrong lesson from Neymar....must have felt like an idiot after seeing himself on video....he has no need to resort to such crap.
Just as well most refs are wise to those who like to fake injuries.
Re Brazil, it's a pity, but not really surprising.....they may have won 99% of their 'friendly' preparation matches over the last two years, and well, which gave them confidence, but when they came up against stronger teams they soon realized it wasn't goin to be as easy.
It's going to be ENGLAND all the way!!!
Neymar's diving has become a meme, but he brought it on himself. It might be better for Brazil if he spent more time on his feet and less on the floor but he's far from the only player to do this, and refs can't have their eyes everywhere at once. Maybe they could find some way to reduce the incentive?
I'd have thought Brazil would avoid overconfidence after what happened last time, but then Germany has done much worse. This is a weird WC with all the upsets, the last 4 teams are not at all what I would have predicted.
Firstly, I did not answer you before, because I had no computer available.
Secondly, I am fully aware that posting in the upper case is evidence of shouting, but in rare occasions is the normal reaction to stop offensive people like you in their tracks.
I decided to send you this linkhttps://soundsandcolours.com/articles/uruguay/uruguay-the-most-successful-country-in-the-world-at-football-3567
in order to ask you once again: Who are you to tell Uruguay how to play properly?
By the way, you did not answer my question before. And you may not know that not to answer a question, is a sign of bad manners. Right?
Thirdly, you called me nabo. Well, that is another sign of bad manners as well as utter cowardice. It is really very easy to insult while well hidden behind a computer.
Next, I hope that you are going to stop this issue now.
Finally, GOOD BYE.
P.S. You do not need to answer me my former questions any longer.
Neymar sure has brought it upon himself...let him lump it...If clubs, and federations (when playing for the nat'l team) warned them against it 'n issued their own punishment (after the tournament), they might succeed in breaking the disloyal, anti-sporting attitude.
Re : cont. of 100s arbitray killings...
245 cops killed in 2017, 40 % in Rio alone. Considering tt cops are killed while trying to uphold the law (and targeted while off duty), and the high criminality rate is the reason why the armed confrontations occur in the first place, using your first figure of 4,224 people killed by cops (6% of the approx. 65,000 violent deaths in Brazil per year, one must presume that part of those 4,224 deaths by cops are justified and part refer to ‘bad’ kills...we don’t know how many, but would think tt ‘bad’ ‘n accidental killings are a very small percentage…especially given the nbr of daily armed confrontations (police v. gangs and gangs v. gangs, the latter requiring the police to intervene).
But my initial point was the press’ bias against the cops, apparent by the very way it reports Claudia F. da Silva’s death….a shootout between the police and “suspected” criminals…why the term suspected ? they make it sound like the police look for people to shoot.
As for revenge against fallen comrades in arms, IMO it’s fully justified…if justice won’t do its part, who will ? When you see the nbr of robberies, 'n innocent people being killed after them, you tend to stand behind the cops….again, this does not justify corrupt cops or those who are gang members (which to a point is explained by low salaries v. risk).
The NYT report is pretty accurate – it acknowledges that “people – in Latin America - are no longer shocked by the number of deaths” and that impunity stimulates crime. I doubt HR is really interested in reducing crime…they survive because if it...but you’re right, I prefer practical results to what sounds good….after years of Brazil that's almost natural.
I wonder why Uruguay are so good at football? It's easily the smallest country to have won the world cup.
Since we have no idea how many of the police killings are justified, you can't just say it's probably a very small percentage that are bad or accidental, especially when the number dropped so much after police were forbidden to give first aid. You could do some research and find out how many people are killed by the police compared to other countries with similarly high crime rates. I googled and found this:
”A study by Ignacio Cano, a Brazilian criminologist, found that the higher a country’s murder rate, the greater the overall share of killings committed by cops (see chart). It seems that police unable to quell violence may lose their inhibitions about taking part in it.
I also found out that murder rate in São Paulo dropped significantly between 2000 and 2010, which surprised me. You make it sound like crime has been rising steadily over time.
As for revenge against fallen comrades in arms, IMO it’s fully justified…if justice won’t do its part, who will ?”
I bet you don't think that is true in general. No doubt some of those killings of off-duty cops were retribution from gang members for the deaths of their own 'comrades in arms'. If you, as an ordinary person, want revenge for the death of someone close to you, it's very understandable, but it just leads to feuds and more bloodshed. This kind of 'justice' was one of the things the police were created to prevent. The state (hopefully) has the power to arrest criminals, give them a fair trial, and punish them, and even if they get the death penalty it is all impersonal; there is no one person to get revenge on. If the police are killing people for personal reasons it means they can no longer do their job, they are acting like just another gang.
Probably becos URU has a competitive championship and they are fierce contenders.
Ok, we don't know, but given that armed confrontation is so common, the resulting death toll amongst the criminals is justified. And when a kill is suspicious, it is so highly publicized that one remembers them, and they aren't all that many....so I believe it's safe to say most are justified.
D'you have any nbrs on ...when the number dropped so much after police were forbidden to give first aid ?
Re the article fm the Economist, it mentions a that in El Salvador, the ratio of cops killing criminals, to criminals killing cops is 10:1.....just as well it isn't the other way round.
SP is the only State that has managed to reduce the number of homicides...Tks to our ex-governor , Alckmin...but other types of crimes have increased....blowing up ATMs, average of 24 robberies of cargo (trucks) per day, and many others. As the police clamp down on one type of crime, the criminals resort to others. In the rest of Brazil, especially in the NE, they carry on increasing.
Sure many cop's deaths are due to retribution by criminals....but it just shows how powerful the criminal gangs are , and their total disrespect for the law and the police force. Believe that cops looking for revenge (against those who kill police) is fully justified, which is not exactly personal...The cause of the feuds (between rival gangs, and these and the police) is due to criminality, not because the police are trying to stop it. It is not abt which came first, the chicken or the egg....crime came first. The criminals, with all their 'soldiers' and firepower, will do whatever it takes to avoid arrest...reason why the shootouts end up with so many dead.
You live in a country where crime is at an acceptable level (ideally near zero) and the Justice /prison system works, so I don't expect you to fully grasp the difficulty of combatting hundreds of thousands of ruthless criminals.
I don't think that follows. The media will report only the most dramatic, and obvious cases, and ignore all the routine ones. But how easy for the police ro kill suspects and make it look justified, and who other than the police is going to investigate them? Most cases are probably not reported at all.
Why will the criminals do whatever it takes to avoid arrest when you said they may well be set free again the same day? Are they afraid of going to jail or not? If the police let them surrender, they wouldn't die and going to jail should be better than dying.
The numbers dropping was in the article I linked earlier:
Last paragraph: ...forbade police from providing first aid at the scene of shootings... In the following months the rate at which the state’s police killed in the line of duty fell by two-fifths.
It's not just SP, murders fell in Rio over the same period, but started rising again in 2012. This is the article I found, does it sound about right?
Sure crime came first, but it takes two to make a feud. It's easier to get police to change than criminals.
There is crime in the UK, my neighbours were burgled when I was a student and other friends have suffered the same. One had his motorbike stolen from outside my house. I also know a couple of people who have been mugged and beaten up, but the muggers didn't shoot or kill them. They know if they did the police would make a big fuss and they would likely be caught, so they stick to what they think they can get away with.
Seems you don’t realize that the enormous amount of crime causes dozens of serious confrontations p/day, between gangs/police, so most of what we see on local news,is crime. Almost natural tt routine shoots don't make headlines, or are even reported, IMO because they’re ‘clean’…but when there’s the slightest suspicion, the press makes a meal out of it, accusing police before they even know what really happened.
With 1000s of street cameras, as well as witnesses coming forward, it's getting harder for the police to hide what went down, or to convince top brass the shoot was good if there's anything strange in their report.
It's only the less dangerous criminals that are sometimes released - due to lack of checking the criminal records, or some judge tt acts more like a HR activist - so it's usually the others - gang leaders/members - who insist on lethal confrontations.
The Economist writes tt police allege most victims are killed while “resisting arrest”...if by that they mean “shooting at the police”, probably yes. And in which case, I don’t disagree. The claim tt ‘suspicious’ deaths fell 40% after forbidding ‘1st aid’, sounds off…to believe it means nearly half police kills are bad.
The WEF-LA says tt in SP, homicides dropped fm 52.5 to 6.1 per 100,000 inhabitants fm ’99 to now . Possible reasons : 1) decline in nbr of young men ? don’t think so. 2) falling unemploymt ? don’t think so - criminals don’t abandon crime for a 9 to 5 day job; 3) tighter arms control ? ONLY for the gen’l population…crime gets all it needs fm Pguay. 4)PCC dominance ? might influence less deaths among gangs/members, not in the gen’l population.
Overall measures taken by the police, no doubt improved things but still far fm ideal. The chance of accidental kills is directly proportional to one’s attitude when accosted by police or not stopping yr vehicle when ordered to. Yr criminals are definitely different to ours…no comparison, here you can be killed at the blink of an eyelid.
Almost natural tt routine shoots don't make headlines
Very natural, but means no one is paying very much attention to them, unlike when cases are rare. Makes it easier to cover up anything suspicious. But what kind of thing do you mean when you say 'slightest suspicion'? If someone is shot in the back, or at close range (but they wouldn't know that until the autopsy), or if witnesses say the suspect was unarmed? Or some other reason?
Cameras should make a difference - assuming the footage is not mysteriously 'lost' - but who do the witnesses come forward to? The same police they just saw kill their buddy?
It's only the less dangerous criminals that are sometimes released
Ah, you made it sound like it was all of them. So they prefer to risk death rather than go to jail? Guess jail can also be a death sentence with all the gangs in there, but I thought the gang leaders often ended up in a cushy cell running their 'business' by phone?
About the drop in homicides, if you don't believe any of the reasons in the article, what do you think caused it? And RE (2) it doesn't have to be criminals getting jobs. Gang members are constantly being arrested or killed, and have to be replaced. If there are less poor, unoccupied young men around because there are more jobs, it's harder for gangs to recruit. For (4), surely most deaths really are among gang members, despite the fact they sometimes kill bystanders or robbery victims?
I tried to find stats for people killed resisting arrest to see if it really dropped that much, but I only found some for ordinary murders. Using a google-translated search term doesn't help.
Yeah, our criminals are different, but how much of that is just because they are afraid to get caught? We have plenty of minor crimes because they know the police are too busy to deal with them, while in Brazil the police are too busy to deal with even the serious crime.
If I ever visit Brazil, how do I avoid getting killed by criminals or the police?
Why should people pay special attention to routine police ops ? All need reports, if something sounds peculiar, it’s investigated. By “slightest suspicion”, mean when someone disputes the police report / official version. If a witness testifies the victim was shot in the back, or the autopsy proves it, shit will happen. The victim’s record (or lack of one) gives a good indication. So far, haven't heard of footage disappearing. Cops don’t know they are on tape (cameras or cell phones) ‘n as they’re not in charge of collecting evidence, not much chance of tampering with it. Witnesses can testify to any police inspector and can supply evidence anonymously. Then IA investigates.
DT, sorry to say so, but it seems you too, without much notion of the crime problem here, defend the criminals…IF you lived here, believe me, you would probably think very differently…without realizing it, you compare what you hear, to the UK’s type /level of crime, and like most foreigners, simply believe the criminals are the victims and that it’s nearly always the fault of the police…I have no agenda here, just telling you as it is.
Why crime dropped (where it did), basically I think because of investment in weapons and intelligence. There is no shortage of crime volunteers. To me, the only reasons that will get a criminal to stop committing crimes, is because he’s jailed (and not even then) or because he’s dead. Crime is a profession, not influenced by the economy and criminals are not afraid of the police. If they are already in jobs, before resorting to crime, perhaps more difficult, but many initiate while minors. Gangs focus of big robberies, blowing up ATM’s, the common criminal is more likely to roam the streets looking for opportunities to rob, and kill, if necry. You wonder why yr criminals are different…afraid of being caught ? here that is not a consideration…'n if they are, they literally escape by the 100s, every yr.To stay alive, avoid risky situations 'n don't tempt luck.
Sorry if I gave the wrong impression. I don't at all believe the criminals are the victims and the police always guilty. I think most of the people they shoot are criminals of one kind or another, however, unlike you I don't think it is justified for the police to take revenge for their friends, and I think they probably resort to violence too quickly and this is not helping. You live in Brazil but not in a favela, and the people there seem to think differently about the police. For you the criminals come from elsewhere, and the police are protecting you from them. For those in the favela the criminals are among them, and they have to put up with it and live with them. The police coming in are just another danger and disruption, not being fussy enough about who they arrest or shoot, and provoking firefights that can kill bystanders.
RE the investigations, who collects evidence if not the cops? And who owns the CCTV cameras? Witnesses can testify to any police inspector - sure, but cops always back up their buddies. Have there been any suspicious cases reported recently?
And crime is not influenced by the economy? Seems unlikely when everything else is. I said I found crime stats for São Paulo; homicides are still falling, but 'furto' and 'roubo' (theft and robbery? I don't know the difference) started to rise again in 2016 when the recession hit.
Now I am wondering what happens to old criminals and gang members. Do they retire? Are they still on the streets selling crack at 60? Or is the death rate so high that it's not an issue? I'd never thought about it before.
And yes, I think our criminals are happy to burgle and mug people because the police will do little, but they know if they kill someone the responce would be very different. If in Brazil it is just as easy to get away with a murder as a mugging, they have much less reason to restrain themselves and stick to minor crimes.
Ok, see we differ only on the level of justification...I can live with that. Right, people in favelas obviously have a different view of the police, because unfortunately for them, that is where most violent criminals hide out....so the favela residents are the most exposed to violence when the police go after them....residents can denounce the criminal1's whereabouts anonymously, which helps the police, but when the police do go into the favela, they are met with heavy firepower..
It's the civil police who collect evidence, not the military police who are the ones patrolling the streets and getting into shootouts. And the civil and the military police don't get along too well...They don't like sharing information, which only benefits crime.
Sure the police defend, or cover for their own, but their story has to be pretty convincing to be accepted without question.
Regardless of whether the economy is good or bad, violent crime carries on unabated...violent criminals don't become violent because they don't have a job... they don't want one...it's a mindset and a cruel streak they develop and 'perfect', growing up amongst other criminals and believing it's better to earn a few thousand bucks a week in crime than to sweat it out at an honest job.
Theft is stealing w/o being seen, and is more likely to rise in a bad economy ; Robbery for example, would be to assault you at gunpoint, then take your belongings.
Old gang members...that's not an issue....those that have a chance to get old, is very likely because they're behind bars. If they are 'white collar criminals (usually politicians), they usually get old , living at the taxpayer's expense.
You are lucky that your criminals are satisfied with relatively little...and the fact that assault rifles, machine guns, rocket launchers and grenades (and hand guns) are not available to them. In Brazil, the problem is that muggings usually ends up in murder.
Police seem so complicated in other countries. We just have one force for each area, and the transport police who do railways and such. Seems like there are problems with the system in Brazil if they won't share information, do they have some kind of rivalry or something?
Not sure I want want to tell the police on criminals if it meant they'd come round and stage a shootout next door. And even more so if the criminals might guess who'd done it, I'm sure they'd be quick to take revenge.
I guess mugging would be robbery then, and burgling a house theft. I read an interesting book called Freakonomics, and it included a guy who did a study on gangs in (I think) Chicago. He found the lowest level members could have earned more by working at McDonalds; they sold drugs because they were hoping to move up and become gang leader, and this was the only path they knew of to getting rich. Of course most ended up dead or in jail instead.
We are lucky, but I don't think our criminals are satisfied with less so much as they are realistic about the consequences and, as you say, they can't get their hands on powerful weapons. Don't know about Brazil, but I think in the US criminals nearly always carry a gun, because they need to protect themselves as well as threaten others. This makes confrontations much more deadly. In the UK not only would it be hard to get a gun, but neither people they rob nor other criminals are likely to have one, so it isn't needed.
Commenting for this story is now closed.If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!
Get our news on your inbox!