Alex Ferguson on Ferdinand and Roberts

Dempsey · 22-10-2012 1:13pm

Everton: Victor Anichebe, Sylvain Distin, Steven Pienaar
QPR: Anton Ferdinand, Djibril Cisse, Shaun Wright-Phillips, Nedum Onouha and Junior Hoilett
Man City: Micah Richards, Joleon Lescott
Man Utd: Rio Ferdinand
Reading: Jason Roberts
Stoke: Kenwyne Jones
Swansea: All players
Wigan: All players

Thats the amount of players that didnt wear the t-shirt at the weekend yet everyone here is fixated on Ferguson making a fool of himself with Roberts & Ferdinand. Ferdinand has a basic human right to protest this regardless of what Ferguson thinks should happen, expects should happen and just has to accept that he misjudged the situation completely.

jacool · 22-10-2012 1:19pm

Dempsey wrote: »

Thats the amount of players that didnt wear the t-shirt at the weekend yet everyone here is fixated on Ferguson making a fool of himself with Roberts & Ferdinand. Ferdinand has a basic human right to protest this regardless of what Ferguson thinks should happen, expects should happen and just has to accept that he misjudged the situation completely.

Perhaps they are "fixated" because they read the thread title!

Dempsey · 22-10-2012 1:25pm

jacool wrote: »

Perhaps they are "fixated" because they read the thread title!

True but the wider context is several players across several clubs protested this, for their own reasons, and they didnt get chastised by Ferguson, their own managers or any other manager in the EPL

22-10-2012 1:59pm

Dempsey wrote: »

Thats the amount of players that didnt wear the t-shirt at the weekend yet everyone here is fixated on Ferguson making a fool of himself with Roberts & Ferdinand. Ferdinand has a basic human right to protest this regardless of what Ferguson thinks should happen, expects should happen and just has to accept that he misjudged the situation completely.

Fergie was the only manager that criticised his own player though. Not to mention comenting on a player from another team when clearly it's none of his business.

aidan24326 · 22-10-2012 1:59pm

I think in the cold light of day Ferguson WOULD respect a person's right to choose or to protest if they felt strongly about something.

But this is more about Fergie the bully, the Sir Alex who thinks of himself as dictator as much as manager. It's my way or the highway. Other managers have come out in support of their players so it seems to me that Ferguson's ego has been dented here, that one of his underlings had the temerity to challenge his unquestiond, almighty authority.

Ashbourne hoop · 22-10-2012 2:07pm

I think it's very sad that there is even a racism debate in 2012.

The_Kew_Tour · 22-10-2012 2:35pm

Ashbourne hoop wrote: »

I think it's very sad that there is even a racism debate in 2012.

Dont expect much to change in 2022 or 2032 or even 2052 for that matter.

Like any hatred there will always be some element there.

Pro. F · 22-10-2012 2:43pm

Ferguson has made a complete fool of himself with this episode. He has been completely in the wrong. It will be very interesting to see how the relationship between himself and Rio develops from here. Rio is still desperately needed in the team just now.

Pj! · 22-10-2012 2:49pm

Ferguson told a press conference on Monday: 'There is no issue. There was a communication problem. But it has been resolved.'

Minor issue. We don't know the full facts of course but it looks sorted. Couple of games coming up are far more important.

Manager and player look happy today.

Pro. F wrote: »

Ferguson has made a complete fool of himself with this episode. He has been completely in the wrong. It will be very interesting to see how the relationship between himself and Rio develops from here.

I think they'll just move on to be honest. Everyone can calm down.

mitosis · 22-10-2012 3:27pm

Des wrote: »

er, wrong.

The consequence for Ferdinand is a fine of two weeks wages.

Really? What's your bona fide source for that?

jaykay74 · 22-10-2012 3:37pm

Pj! wrote: »

I think they'll just move on to be honest. Everyone can calm down.

Pretty much sums it up for me

eugeneious · 22-10-2012 8:26pm

Wrote a post about why I think Ferguson was wrong and why Rio was right:
http://www.keepyourkloseon.com/2012/10/fergie-not-rio-has-embarrassed-himself.html

PhlegmyMoses · 23-10-2012 1:13am

event wrote: »

tbh, maybe they are developing their own solution that we aren't aware of yet.

If they are, they should maybe have communicated this. They are making a statement to the footballing world by not wearing the t-shirt. They should probably outline their problem. It's a serious issue.

but if they aren't, that doesn't mean they have to go along with the one that's there. They obviously feel that KIO isn't doing enough. What this has done, is highlight that there are people unhappy with the way they are going at the moment. Everyone is pointing to the fact they only get 300k a year. Perhaps this is loads and there are a few lads there sitting on their arses

Nobody is saying that they have to go along with it. Some clarification about why they aren't would be nice. What's the point in making a public stand if nobody fully understands it?

Also, people saying that he should have sent to ferguson first. I doubt he knew what fergie was going to say in his interview Friday, so why would he go to him? I doubt he asks him every week what he's going to say in his interview. A few journos have said it was public knowledge that Rio wasn't going to wear a t-shirt and they were quite shocked when fergie said what he did

Ferguson is Rio Ferdinand's boss. The kind of boss that likes to be kept in the loop but also the kind of boss that publically sticks up for his players and backs them in the face of adversity, as he has done with Ferdinand previously when he spent 9 months out and then stalled on a new contract. It is not up to Ferguson to answer to Ferdinand. ferdinand does answer to Ferguson, though.

Rekop dog · 23-10-2012 1:41am

It always baffles me what gets the boardsies talking. This is such a non issue in the grand scene of things it's farcical. Top class European games regularly go by with little or no comment but the drama lamas always come out in force for these issues blown completely out of proportion by the English media.

Corvo · 23-10-2012 3:45am

Rekop dog wrote: »

It always baffles me what gets the boardsies talking. This is such a non issue in the grand scene of things it's farcical. Top class European games regularly go by with little or no comment but the drama lamas always come out in force for these issues blown completely out of proportion by the English media.

In fairness, its an extremely important issue that is now seemingly rearing its ugly head in the game once again. While the Ferguson/Ferdinand debate is only a sub-plot, the current racism issues and the most recent cases would cause concern for any football fan. Hence the constant talk regarding the Luis Suarez & John Terry cases and other aspects.

I don't see how it can be ignored instead of a european game.

Liam O · 23-10-2012 6:06am

Griffin1988 wrote: »

In fairness, its an extremely important issue that is now seemingly rearing its ugly head in the game once again. While the Ferguson/Ferdinand debate is only a sub-plot, the current racism issues and the most recent cases would cause concern for any football fan. Hence the constant talk regarding the Luis Suarez & John Terry cases and other aspects.

I don't see how it can be ignored instead of a european game.

There have been 2 mildly racist incidents in England over the last year. The Serbia thing is ridiculous but it has been going on for a while. There are potential leg breaking tackles that go unpunished every week, clean diving that goes unpunished among other things. Racism is a small issue in the game compared to these things imo.

Corvo · 23-10-2012 6:11am

Liam O wrote: »

There have been 2 mildly racist incidents in England over the last year. The Serbia thing is ridiculous but it has been going on for a while. There are potential leg breaking tackles that go unpunished every week, clean diving that goes unpunished among other things. Racism is a small issue in the game compared to these things imo.

I would never consider any form of racism a small or mild issue. Just me I guess

Iang87 · 23-10-2012 10:16pm

Griffin1988 wrote: »

I would never consider any form of racism a small or mild issue. Just me I guess

I'm not going to get into it because it does appear we do not agree on that but my point is do you think being called a black cnut is the same as getting beaten because you're black or being forced to use different and lesser facilities because you're black.

Its easy to adopt the any form of racism is the same attitude but just like most bad things people do there are levels that don't make all crimes the same crime.

Drumpot · 23-10-2012 10:35pm

Iang87 wrote: »

I'm not going to get into it because it does appear we do not agree on that but my point is do you think being called a black cnut is the same as getting beaten because you're black or being forced to use different and lesser facilities because you're black.

Its easy to adopt the any form of racism is the same attitude but just like most bad things people do there are levels that don't make all crimes the same crime.

I agree completely . . The world has gone PC mad and extremely smug on its own self importance. .

I dont condone somebody calling another player a black cnut or something on those lines, but i think the context is important. Suarez is not a player I particularly like, but as far as i am concerned the whole thing was blown out of proportion. I actually think the actions of LFC and its management in supporting him in a ridiculous nature and by getting involved in all sorts of lies was worse then the racist remarks alleged by the player.

I wonder what would happen if a black player called a white player a "cracker", would there be the same uproar ? Would somebody in the crowd report it ? That is no less offencive a term then the N word, yet its because one part of society has a chip on its shoulder, the N word is considered more powerful. However, they are both insults about the color of your skin.

Lets go one step further, if a player is called a white piece of "sh*t" or something like that or some other insult like Paddy (we all know Irish players have been subjected to this), where exactly do you stop ?

PhlegmyMoses · 23-10-2012 10:37pm

Iang87 wrote: »

I'm not going to get into it because it does appear we do not agree on that but my point is do you think being called a black cnut is the same as getting beaten because you're black or being forced to use different and lesser facilities because you're black.

Its easy to adopt the any form of racism is the same attitude but just like most bad things people do there are levels that don't make all crimes the same crime.

This is not a great argument tbf. I'm not sure what your point is. Of course some things are worse than others. My house could burn down tomorrow but I couldn't really complain because there are poor people in Africa who don't have food, let alone a house. And at least I'll get insurance money. This is obviously nonsense.

Sure, getting beaten up because you are black is worse than being racially abused verbally. It doesn't mean that we can't rail against verbal racist abuse too. It's abhorrent, unnecessary and offensive to any right-thinking person. Also, if verbal racist abuse is tolerated, it can be a short slide to reach physical abuse territory. Letting stuff like this go unchecked is never a good idea.

PhlegmyMoses · 23-10-2012 10:40pm

Drumpot wrote: »

I wonder what would happen if a black player called a white player a "cracker", would there be the same uproar ? Would somebody in the crowd report it ? That is no less offencive a term then the N word, yet its because one part of society has a chip on its shoulder, the N word is considered more powerful. However, they are both insults about the color of your skin.

Lets go one step further, if a player is called a white piece of "sh*t" or something like that or some other insult like Paddy (we all know Irish players have been subjected to this), where exactly do you stop ?

Of course it isn't the same. It is about how the injured party interprets it. The word ****** or calling someone a black **** comes with the weight of hundreds of years of oppression and hurt behind it. This argument has been trotted out for years and it never gets any more relevant. It misses the point spectacularly.

CSF · 23-10-2012 10:42pm

Drumpot wrote: »

I agree completely . . The world has gone PC mad and extremely smug on its own self importance. .

I dont condone somebody calling another player a black cnut or something on those lines, but i think the context is important. Suarez is not a player I particularly like, but as far as i am concerned the whole thing was blown out of proportion. I actually think the actions of LFC and its management in supporting him in a ridiculous nature and by getting involved in all sorts of lies was worse then the racist remarks alleged by the player.

I wonder what would happen if a black player called a white player a "cracker", would there be the same uproar ? Would somebody in the crowd report it ? That is no less offencive a term then the N word, yet its because one part of society has a chip on its shoulder, the N word is considered more powerful. However, they are both insults about the color of your skin.

Lets go one step further, if a player is called a white piece of "sh*t" or something like that or some other insult like Paddy (we all know Irish players have been subjected to this), where exactly do you stop ?

Can you do us all a favour and never offer an opinion on anything even slightly controversial ever again? You clearly have no concept of context and sensitivity.

CSF · 23-10-2012 10:42pm

Actually, can you just never offer an opinion again?

Pro. F · 23-10-2012 10:53pm

Pj! wrote: »

I think they'll just move on to be honest. Everyone can calm down.

I agree that they probably will. But I strongly suspect that if Fergie didn't need Rio so much he wouldn't get over it so easily.

Drumpot · 23-10-2012 10:55pm

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Of course it isn't the same. It is about how the injured party interprets it. The word ****** or calling someone a black **** comes with the weight of hundreds of years of oppression and hurt behind it. This argument has been trotted out for years and it never gets any more relevant. It misses the point spectacularly.

I disagree, I just think society has gone PC mad . . This whole 100s of years of oppression stuff is old at this stage. What exactly has Rio Ferdinand got to be upset about ?

A person has a choice to be offended or not to be, just like a person has a choice to try to annoy/offend by using the term.

John Terry, Suarez were not trying to imply that black people are inferior, they were simply trying to annoy the opponents. Granted in a not very classy manner, but none the less it was an insult designed to annoy, not to belittle an entire race. (for anybody who has played football t, they will know what Im talking about).

I could hold a grudge against the British for their treatment of our forefathers but I choose not to . . If I am playing on a pitch against them and they slag me about being their bitch (Ulster) or something like that, why should that be treated any differantly just because I didnt get offended ? Why should that be ok ?

Iang87 · 23-10-2012 10:56pm

I wasn't saying that one should be left unchecked I was just saying that I don't agree that all racism is the same.

It's all terrible and shouldn't be tolerated in the slightest but I am saying that all racism acts are not the same and should not be treated the same

Drumpot · 23-10-2012 11:00pm

CSF wrote: »

Can you do us all a favour and never offer an opinion on anything even slightly controversial ever again? You clearly have no concept of context and sensitivity.

I think alot of people have no concept of anything outside of whats popular or fed to them by the media. . .

Poor old multi millionaire footballers, pushing the cause for their slave forefathers, on twitter and by small public gestures.

Suppose Ive been on the receiving end of being accused of being racist (and ultimatley been cleared) simply because i asked a neighbour to show myself and my partner a little respect by not parking in our spot and to stop constantly making noise.

Its all one big giant pile of steaming hyporcisy . .

Iang87 · 23-10-2012 11:04pm

Drumpot wrote: »

I think alot of people have no concept of anything outside of whats popular or fed to them by the media. . .

Poor old multi millionaire footballers, pushing the cause for their slave forefathers, on twitter and by small public gestures.

Dangerous territory there just cos they're rich doesn't mean they should be treated that way

Pro. F · 23-10-2012 11:06pm

Drumpot wrote: »

I could hold a grudge against the British for their treatment of our forefathers but I choose not to . . If I am playing on a pitch against them and they slag me about being their bitch or something like that, why should that be treated any differantly just because I didnt get offended ? Why should that be ok ?

It's not ok under the law or the FA rules. If you choose to not get offended by xenophobic slaggings about your Irishness that is your call. If you are offended then you have the same protection and recourse under the law/rules as one of those black people that you think have a chip on their shoulder about being racially abused. So you can calm down, the PC brigade aren't out to get you.

PhlegmyMoses · 23-10-2012 11:07pm

Drumpot wrote: »

I disagree, I just think society has gone PC mad . . This whole 100s of years of oppression stuff is old at this stage. What exactly has Rio Ferdinand got to be upset about ?

For a start, can you stop with this PC mad nonsense? It's ridiculous and hyperbolic. I'm more of a laptop man anyway. On your point, it is not for you to decide what the statute of limitations is for how raw a wound like that is. The language used back then is still being used today with the intent of injuring a person based on the colour of their skin. If that hasn't gone away, why would people suddenly start to be willing to brush it off.

A person has a choice to be offended or not to be

Correct. So why are you trying to make the choice for everyone else?

John Terry, Suarez were not trying to imply that black people are inferior, they were simply trying to annoy the opponents. Granted in a not very classy manner, but none the less it was an insult designed to annoy, not to belittle an entire race. (for anybody who has played football t, they will know what Im talking about).

I played football until very recently. I would never have dreamed of calling someone a name like that. It was never considered something that was cool to do to gain an edge in a match. You are talking out of your arse.

I could hold a grudge against the British for their treatment of our forefathers but I choose not to . . If I am playing on a pitch against them and they slag me about being their bitch or something like that, why should that be treated any differantly just because I didnt get offended ? Why should that be ok ?

Again, you are applying your own personal reaction to the issue and presuming that everyone in society should follow your moral lead. Who are you to tell anyone how to feel or what to be offended by?

Drumpot · 23-10-2012 11:14pm

Pro. F wrote: »

It's not ok under the law or the FA rules. If you choose to not get offended by xenophobic slaggings about your Irishness that is your call. If you are offended then you have the same protection and recourse under the law/rules as one of those black people that you think have a chip on their shoulder about being racially abused. So you can calm down, the PC brigade aren't out to get you.

I just think that real hardcore racism is mocked by this kind of stuff. I also think its ridiculous that a player calling somebody blackie blackie blackie is more newsworthy then the usual chants of United/Liverpool fans insulting the tragedies that befelled their clubs . .

Its like how I cant understand how the likes of Madeline McCann obduction is more newsworthy then any other death/obduction/rape everyday.

Society chooses what upset or angers it and then jumps on whatever bandwagon is going at the time. This is no differant, there are no UK black slave trade as far as I know in modern UK, so why would anynody take offence to a term that was used to describe something that somebody today cant possibly relate to?

Its a first world problem and we all get sensitive about things that really arent important.

PhlegmyMoses · 23-10-2012 11:22pm

You are making crass generalisations all over the place Drumpot. I'm not sure what your motivation is, trying to make out that everyone's opinions, bar your own, are influenced by media agendas. It seems to me that you are trying to justify your flawed logic by saying that everyone else is "PC mad" or slaves to the media.

FWIW, I have barely read an article about the Ferdinand incident since it happened. My opinions are my own, based on what I believe to be just and fair. Deliberately not calling someone out over using racist language because you don't feel it is too bad is not something I can reconcile myself with.

Will I Amnt · 23-10-2012 11:25pm

Drumpot wrote: »

I just think that real hardcore racism is mocked by this kind of stuff. I also think its ridiculous that a player calling somebody blackie blackie blackie is more newsworthy then the usual chants of United/Liverpool fans insulting the tragedies that befelled their clubs . .

Its like how I cant understand how the likes of Madeline McCann obduction is more newsworthy then any other death/obduction/rape everyday.

Society chooses what upset or angers it and then jumps on whatever bandwagon is going at the time. This is no differant, there are no UK black slave trade as far as I know in modern UK, so why would anynody take offence to a term that was used to describe something that somebody today cant possibly relate to?

Its a first world problem and we all get sensitive about things that really arent important.

Why are there laws against racially abusing someone if it's just a bandwagon??

CSF · 23-10-2012 11:27pm

cambo2008 wrote: »

Why are there laws against racially abusing someone if it's just a bandwagon??

Probably something to do with the Illuminati, eh Drumpot?

Pro. F · 23-10-2012 11:39pm

Drumpot wrote: »

I just think that real hardcore racism is mocked by this kind of stuff. I also think its ridiculous that a player calling somebody blackie blackie blackie is more newsworthy then the usual chants of United/Liverpool fans insulting the tragedies that befelled their clubs . .

Its like how I cant understand how the likes of Madeline McCann obduction is more newsworthy then any other death/obduction/rape everyday.

Society chooses what upset or angers it and then jumps on whatever bandwagon is going at the time. This is no differant, there are no UK black slave trade as far as I know in modern UK, so why would anynody take offence to a term that was used to describe something that somebody today cant possibly relate to?

Its a first world problem and we all get sensitive about things that really arent important.

Ok so lets be clear, you were wrong when you talked about xenophobic abuse of Irish people being accepted by society. But now you want to move on to something else.

The reason racial abuse gets more column inches than chants between United/Liverpool fans is because racism is a big problem in modern society. The chants between Liverpool and Man Utd supporters have very little effect outside of the footballing world. Racism carries over into wider society.

There is also the additional reason that there are lots of uninformed people like yourself who deny that racial abuse is something that we should be dealing with at all. That debate generates even more column inches.

The N word is used against black people as a form of abuse today. That's why people take offence at it. It doesn't particularly matter what its history is, if it's used as a form of racial abuse now then it is something that people can reasonably be offended by now. Not that the N word is even applicable to this case.

Drumpot · 23-10-2012 11:46pm

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

You are making crass generalisations all over the place Drumpot. I'm not sure what your motivation is, trying to make out that everyone's opinions, bar your own, are influenced by media agendas. It seems to me that you are trying to justify your flawed logic by saying that everyone else is "PC mad" or slaves to the media.

FWIW, I have barely read an article about the Ferdinand incident since it happened. My opinions are my own, based on what I believe to be just and fair. Deliberately not calling someone out over using racist language because you don't feel it is too bad is not something I can reconcile myself with.

I never condoned racist comments, I am stating that they are disproportionately singled out for attention over more pressing matters like hooliganism and hardcore racism in the stands.

Penalising a footballer for making a racist comment and letting the likes of Italian and Spanish clubs away with hardcore racism on the terraces is pathetic. Bringing media attention to players using black as an insult simply allows the authorities to avoid the bigger issues with regards to racism.

And yes, I do think the world is PC mad. I wouldn't be in the minority otherwise so I'm awknowledging the fact that my views are not widely shared.

Not sure what the conspiracy post was about, I already qualified my views on the hypocrisy of western media selective outrage. It's not a conspiracy, it's an objective observation. (That's plenty of fodder for some of you to wittingly turn my thread into a parody of itself

)

Pro. F · 23-10-2012 11:53pm

Drumpot wrote: »

Penalising a footballer for making a racist comment and letting the likes of Italian and Spanish clubs away with hardcore racism on the terraces is pathetic.

How are the English FA supposed to punish racist fans in Spain and Italy?

Drumpot · 23-10-2012 11:58pm

Pro. F wrote: »

Ok so lets be clear, you were wrong when you talked about xenophobic abuse of Irish people being accepted by society. But now you want to move on to something else.

The reason racial abuse gets more column inches than chants between United/Liverpool fans is because racism is a big problem in modern society. The chants between Liverpool and Man Utd supporters have very little effect outside of the footballing world. Racism carries over into wider society.

There is also the additional reason that there are lots of uninformed people like yourself who deny that racial abuse is something that we should be dealing with at all. That debate generates even more column inches.

The N word is used against black people as a form of abuse today. That's why people take offence at it. It doesn't particularly matter what its history is, if it's used as a form of racial abuse now then it is something that people can reasonably be offended by now. Not that the N word is even applicable to this case.

Uniformed , brilliant.

So because I have an alternative view on how society picks and chooses what things to get upset about, I'm uninformed and wrong?

Incidentally the reason I used differant examples was to highlight the double standards that society conforms and forces others to follow.

I haven't condoned racism, I have said there are far more important elements of racism in football that deserve more attention (like thousands of fans monkey chanting), then two players insulting each other. If you think that in the last year only two players were called black "something" by a white player in the epl you are mistaken. The differance was as stated the reaction of a player and in one case a fan!

And to the poster who said they were never insulted based on their heritage (Irish), looks (scar) etc then they had a sheltered football life and never played outside Ireland. I didn't engage in insulting opponents but didn't get bothered by being in the end of it.

PhlegmyMoses · 24-10-2012 12:03am

Drumpot wrote: »

I never condoned racist comments, I am stating that they are disproportionately singled out for attention over more pressing matters like hooliganism and hardcore racism in the stands.

We can only really deal with English football here considering that the thread is about Ferdinand. The English FA has been excellent in stamping out hooliganism and hardcore racism in the stands. It is no longer an issue worth talking about because it has virtually been eradicated.

When the captain of your flagship national team - a team with a large proportion of black players - gets brought up on criminal proceedings due to allegedly making a racist comment, it is going to make news. Does this really need to be explained to you?

Penalising a footballer for making a racist comment and letting the likes of Italian and Spanish clubs away with hardcore racism on the terraces is pathetic. Bringing media attention to players using black as an insult simply allows the authorities to avoid the bigger issues with regards to racism.

Again, you are speaking about what happens in other countries. This is a non-issue on a forum full of people who are mostly interested in English, Scottish and Irish football. It is only natural that we will speak about the issues relating to the leagues we take most interest in. I'm sure the boys on elboardso.es aren't really talking about John Terry and Rio Ferdinand. This is a news value called proximity. If you want to continue on with your theory about what is and is not news, some of the best work done in Journalism academia centres around news values. Loads of peer reviewed books and articles on this out there. Galtung and Rouge are the big dogs in this area.

And yes, I do think the world is PC mad. I wouldn't be in the minority otherwise so I'm awknowledging the fact that my views are not widely shared.

Not sure what the conspiracy post was about, I already qualified my views on the hypocrisy of western media selective outrage. It's not a conspiracy, it's an objective observation. (That's plenty of fodder for some of you to wittingly turn my thread into a parody of itself )

Not sure what you're on about here so I'll leave it at that.

Your overall point about News Values is not a new one. You are just butchering the **** out of it and trying to crowbar it into a debate on racism without having a great grasp on the concept.

Pro. F · 24-10-2012 12:07am

Drumpot wrote: »

Uniformed , brilliant.

So because I have an alternative view on how society picks and chooses what things to get upset about, I'm uninformed and wrong?

No, I said you are uninformed because you are uninformed. You didn't know that being abused in reference to your Irishness is also something that society (laws, FA rules, people in general) finds unacceptable.

Drumpot wrote: »

Incidentally the reason I used differant examples was to highlight the double standards that society conforms and forces others to follow.

I haven't condoned racism, I have said there are far more important elements of racism in football that deserve more attention (like thousands of fans monkey chanting), then two players insulting each other. If you think that in the last year only two players were called black "something" by a white player in the epl you are mistaken. The differance was as stated the reaction of a player and in one case a fan!

Fans monkey chanting in other countries gets plenty of attention.

Drumpot wrote: »

And to the poster who said they were never insulted based on their heritage (Irish), looks (scar) etc then they had a sheltered football life and never played outside Ireland. I didn't engage in insulting opponents but didn't get bothered by being in the end of it.

Nobody cares that you didn't get insulted. It's your choice whether you are insulted or not. The law and FA rules offer the same protection to everybody.

Drumpot · 24-10-2012 12:14am

Pro. F wrote: »

How are the English FA supposed to punish racist fans in Spain and Italy?

I was using the chronic problems of racism in other countries that's far more problematic and aggressive.

Incidentally, do you think there is no racism on the terraces in England? Do you think stopping players saying you black x is more important then stamping out hooliganism and venom hatred between fans.

You need only goto a gaa game and a united game to see the aggressive hatred in the game. Perhaps promoting a healthy rivalry woukdnt go astray. Ah but sure a footballer tried to rile another by calling him a black x so we have to confirm to PC modern society that once again disproportionately chooses what penalty should be incurred.

I was at a united v Liverpool game a couple of years ago and united won. As a united fan I was intimidated by the sick chanting of united fans about Hillsboro and it completely ruined the occasion and that was on the tram back to the city centre after united had won 3-0! My Liverpool friend beside me was intelligent enough not to wear a jersey but quite frankly I think this is a bigger problem in football then racism, certainly from all the games I've gone to in England since my first game in old Trafford in 1992.

PhlegmyMoses · 24-10-2012 12:19am

There was a huge deal made of the Hillsborough chanting this year, Drumpot. So much so that SAF was making statements left, right and centre.

Drumpot · 24-10-2012 12:34am

Pro. F wrote: »

No, I said you are uninformed because you are uninformed. You didn't know that being abused in reference to your Irishness is also something that society (laws, FA rules, people in general) finds unacceptable.

Fans monkey chanting in other countries gets plenty of attention.

Nobody cares that you didn't get insulted. It's your choice whether you are insulted or not. The law and FA rules offer the same protection to everybody.

Take that up with the person who said the n word is not as bad as being called a white cracker because its all about how the person being insulted responds to the insult.

Incidentally, it's funny how so many rich footballers are so concerned about the kick it out movement, yet the organisation has a budget less then some of them make in a couple of weeks. There's alot to be said for putting your money where your supposed appalled mouth is.

Pro. F · 24-10-2012 12:54am

Drumpot wrote: »

I was using the chronic problems of racism in other countries that's far more problematic and aggressive.

I know you were using them, hence why I referred to your use of them.

Your point about racism being worse in other countries outside of the English FA's jurisdiction was irrelevant. Of course a racist incident that happened in the EPL is going to generate more interest in EPL circles than a racist incident that happened in another country. And of course the English FA are going to punish players and fans that are in their jurisdiction and leave the ones outside their jurisdiction alone.

Drumpot wrote: »

Incidentally, do you think there is no racism on the terraces in England? Do you think stopping players saying you black x is more important then stamping out hooliganism and venom hatred between fans.

I think there is little racist chanting in the stands in England these days yes. Is there racism in the people in the stands? Yes of course, there is a huge amount of racism in English society in general. I lived there for a few years and it shocked me how much racism there was going on all around. Ireland is no great shakes either.

As Phlegmy said, the Hillsborough chanting generated a lot of news this year. And those types of chants get a large dose of coverage every year. I would say that incidents like Terry and Suarez get more media coverage but then they are far more complex and wider reaching and also far less frequent.

Drumpot wrote: »

You need only goto a gaa game and a united game to see the aggressive hatred in the game. Perhaps promoting a healthy rivalry woukdnt go astray. Ah but sure a footballer tried to rile another by calling him a black x so we have to confirm to PC modern society that once again disproportionately chooses what penalty should be incurred.

I was at a united v Liverpool game a couple of years ago and united won. As a united fan I was intimidated by the sick chanting of united fans about Hillsboro and it completely ruined the occasion and that was on the tram back to the city centre after united had won 3-0! My Liverpool friend beside me was intelligent enough not to wear a jersey but quite frankly I think this is a bigger problem in football then racism, certainly from all the games I've gone to in England since my first game in old Trafford in 1992.

I seriously don't get what your problem is with political correctness. It would be a horrible world if we didn't have political correctness and people were allowed to racially abuse each other without sanction. It was like that for long enough in the past and it was shít. There were people like you, saying that we shouldn't worry about racist abuse, back then as well. Fortunately they were ignored and football grounds are far more welcoming places to all colours nowadays.

And there is nothing disproportionate about a few games ban for racially abusing somebody.

Football crowds chanting horrible shít about tragedies is not nice. We all agree on that and that is reflected in the press coverage. If you were saying that you think fans or teams should be punished more for those offensive chants about tragedies then I would listen to you. But complaining about players being punished for racially abusing other players doesn't follow from that at all. A player getting a few games ban for racially abusing somebody and the press taking an interest in a heated debate around the case, doesn't detract from your wish to stop chants about tragedies.

Pro. F · 24-10-2012 1:01am

Drumpot wrote: »

Take that up with the person who said the n word is not as bad as being called a white cracker because its all about how the person being insulted responds to the insult.

You clearly aren't even following this conversation.

Drumpot wrote: »

Incidentally, it's funny how so many rich footballers are so concerned about the kick it out movement, yet the organisation has a budget less then some of them make in a couple of weeks. There's alot to be said for putting your money where your supposed appalled mouth is.

What's funny is how many times you will try to shift the focus of your argument just so you can have an excuse to complain about "political correctness gone mad" and people having "a chip on their shoulder" about racist abuse.

ThunbergsAreGo · 24-10-2012 8:58am

not sure if its been brought up but a interesting bit on Football Weekly with Jimbo asking why should pro pedophila chants be accepted and racism not (clearly both shouldnt).

Ronay's but everyone does pedophile chants just doesnt wash, a crackdown on all sorts of abuse should be enforced. Racism is disgusting, so is homophobia etc.

At the risk of sounding like Maud Flanders, there are children at the game and people need to set an example

cournioni · 24-10-2012 9:31am

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20048531

I find this quite ironic. Surely if there is to be a fight against racism then people must work together rather than segregating based on colour.

ThunbergsAreGo · 24-10-2012 9:59am

cournioni wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20048531

I find this quite ironic. Surely if there is to be a fight against racism then people must work together rather than segregating based on colour.

What happens if an asian/caucasian/any other race etc player wants to join?

Drumpot · 24-10-2012 10:08am

Pro. F wrote: »

I know you were using them, hence why I referred to your use of them.

1. Your point about racism being worse in other countries outside of the English FA's jurisdiction was irrelevant. Of course a racist incident that happened in the EPL is going to generate more interest in EPL circles than a racist incident that happened in another country. And of course the English FA are going to punish players and fans that are in their jurisdiction and leave the ones outside their jurisdiction alone.

I think there is little racist chanting in the stands in England these days yes. Is there racism in the people in the stands? Yes of course, there is a huge amount of racism in English society in general. I lived there for a few years and it shocked me how much racism there was going on all around. Ireland is no great shakes either.

2. As Phlegmy said, the Hillsborough chanting generated a lot of news this year. And those types of chants get a large dose of coverage every year. I would say that incidents like Terry and Suarez get more media coverage but then they are far more complex and wider reaching and also far less frequent.

3. I seriously don't get what your problem is with political correctness. It would be a horrible world if we didn't have political correctness and people were allowed to racially abuse each other without sanction. It was like that for long enough in the past and it was shít. There were people like you, saying that we shouldn't worry about racist abuse, back then as well. Fortunately they were ignored and football grounds are far more welcoming places to all colours nowadays.

And there is nothing disproportionate about a few games ban for racially abusing somebody.

Football crowds chanting horrible shít about tragedies is not nice. We all agree on that and that is reflected in the press coverage. If you were saying that you think fans or teams should be punished more for those offensive chants about tragedies then I would listen to you. 4. But complaining about players being punished for racially abusing other players doesn't follow from that at all. A player getting a few games ban for racially abusing somebody and the press taking an interest in a heated debate around the case, doesn't detract from your wish to stop chants about tragedies.

1. Actually it wasnt irrelevant as in Suarez case where he referred to the fact that using the phrase "negreto" is not considered racist in parts of South America. The fact that it was considered racist in the UK shows that there is a much more heightened sensitivity to what is percieved to be racist language that does little to further the progress of knocking it out of society, more a focus on the insignificant (ooh that player called him blackie), then the specific (there is a real hatred from that person towards black people)..

2. No they dont get huge coverage every year, certainly not on the same level as one player calling another negreto a couple of times. I have been at United games were both sets of supporters were taunting each other and saw scuffles with police at a couple (serious fights) and was expecting to at least hear it mentioned on MOTD or news and nothing. Its such an accepted part of the culture (vicious chanting - scuffles) that its not even newsworthy , but one player calling another negreto is worthy of months of paper column inches. The player incident is more important in the fight against racism then the crowd ?! It might be part of the solution but its not dealing directly with the widespread violent undertones at grounds.

3. Because it allows people to be smug , focusing on the small problem (players insulting each other) at the expense of properly addressing the real problem (vicious hatred among supporters within the game). Its like FIFAs "fair play" bull**** PR spin. The FA banning Suarez was an excercise in using a high profile footballer as an example, so they dont really have to deal with the problem. How many football teams have had to play matches behind closed doors ? How many teams have had points docked over the years (the things that will really hit clubs)?

4. Do you really think a latino south American was racially abusing Evra ? Really, do you think he was slagging off all blacks (even possibly some of his own family) of the world and trying to use the venom attached to the N word to promote racism ? Of course he wasnt, he was using it to wind Evra up, but society (since it doesnt really want to deal with the problem) chose to show collective disgust because it meant it could feel good about itself that its properly dealing with the racist problem.

Lastly, I think in the context of this discussion, the whole idea of racism has been disolved. I consider racism to be hatred of another person because of where they are from or the color of their skin. I dont think use of words constitutes or warrants the same response as specified actions or aggression towards a particular race. If a person is racist they will use the use of the word to further their cause, if a person is not racist they will either ignore it or condemn it. I dont believe stamping out things like "you black x" or you "n**ger" are vital for the betterment of the game as much as changing the way there is so much anomosity and hatred from certain supporters.

I personally dont agree that its ok to call somebodys mother a whore, slag family members or use any sort of insulting language to rile another player, but its fair game once its not considered racist. Its just hypocricy because its saying that its ok to slag my sick dad, but not the color of his skin simply because its PC to "not go there" . . I never said calling somebody a black X was fine. This is my main point, that football has zeroed in on one issue at the expense of the wider problem of violence, hatred and other issues within football.

Incidentally, the FA have done more to add to tensions by giving a non UK player a bigger ban for racism then an English one. And now there is talk of a breakaway players association. Obviously they are dealing with the problem brilliantly . .

Pro. F · 24-10-2012 1:04pm

Drumpot wrote: »

1. Actually it wasnt irrelevant as in Suarez case where he referred to the fact that using the phrase "negreto" is not considered racist in parts of South America. The fact that it was considered racist in the UK shows that there is a much more heightened sensitivity to what is percieved to be racist language that does little to further the progress of knocking it out of society, more a focus on the insignificant (ooh that player called him blackie), then the specific (there is a real hatred from that person towards black people)..

This is a point completely contrary to your original which was a complaint about the fact that Spanish and Italian clubs get away with blatant racism in the stands.
You are flip flopping around and contradicting yourself so much it's obvious you don't even know what point you are trying to make.

Suarez did not use the word 'negrito.'

The fact that one player racially abused another is specific. You need to go look up the definition of the word.

Also, you are allowed to hate people of other races. Societies that try to control the inner thoughts of people don't work. Hence why in the civilised world it is a crime to act racist, but not to be racist.

Drumpot wrote: »

2. No they dont get huge coverage every year, certainly not on the same level as one player calling another negreto a couple of times. I have been at United games were both sets of supporters were taunting each other and saw scuffles with police at a couple (serious fights) and was expecting to at least hear it mentioned on MOTD or news and nothing. Its such an accepted part of the culture (vicious chanting - scuffles) that its not even newsworthy , but one player calling another negreto is worthy of months of paper column inches. The player incident is more important in the fight against racism then the crowd ?! It might be part of the solution but its not dealing directly with the widespread violent undertones at grounds.

Since what you are talking about in the crowd is not an act of racism then yes of course an incident that actually involves some racist behavior is more important in the fight against racism.

Chanting about tragedies and so on does get big media coverage every year now. As I said before, it doesn't get as much coverage as racist incidents between high profile players, but there are simple and obvious reasons for that.

If you want to complain about crowd violence not getting enough media attention I would listen to you, it is definitely an issue and worth discussing. But it is a separate issue from famous players racially abusing each other. The fact that players racially abusing other players get punished by the authorities and coverage from the media does not preclude fans being violent from getting the same.

Drumpot wrote: »

3. Because it allows people to be smug , focusing on the small problem (players insulting each other) at the expense of properly addressing the real problem (vicious hatred among supporters within the game). Its like FIFAs "fair play" bull**** PR spin. The FA banning Suarez was an excercise in using a high profile footballer as an example, so they dont really have to deal with the problem. How many football teams have had to play matches behind closed doors ? How many teams have had points docked over the years (the things that will really hit clubs)?

Again you are conflating two separate issues. You think that if there was racist chanting from the stands in England the fans wouldn't be punished or the media wouldn't cover it?

Tbc...

Alex Ferguson on Ferdinand and Roberts

Comments