Racism - Mod Note on 1st Post - Read before posting.

opr

Rednigerian The Red Nigerian™
According to the FA, the best player in the world along with the entire Argentina squad and FA are racists.

Edit - Before the match, the Argentina posed with a flag in order to give encouragement to former Argentine defender, struggling to survive.



Opr

#15

Are people being deliberately stupid by pretending that context doesn't matter?

Or is such a nuance actually too difficult to comprehend?

Will I Amnt

opr wrote: »

Rednigerian The Red Nigerian™
According to the FA, the best player in the world along with the entire Argentina squad and FA are racists.

Edit - Before the match, the Argentina posed with a flag in order to give encouragement to former Argentine defender, struggling to survive.



Opr

For an Argentinian in Argentina????

Grayditch

Paul McGrath is an absolute cabbage for singling out Glen Johnson in his Liverpool rant.

opr

cambo2008 wrote: »

For an Argentinian in Argentina????

Did you read El Horseboxo post that context isn't that important when it comes to the word ? I will take the unbiased word of someone fluent in said language who was brought up in similar cultural background to have a better understanding of things than the many experts that have popped up on this thread.

Opr

DOC09UNAM

opr wrote: »

Rednigerian The Red Nigerian™
According to the FA, the best player in the world along with the entire Argentina squad and FA are racists.

Edit - Before the match, the Argentina posed with a flag in order to give encouragement to former Argentine defender, struggling to survive.



Opr

You're much smarter than that post.

Kess73

#15 wrote: »

Are people being deliberately stupid by pretending that context doesn't matter?

Or is such a nuance actually too difficult to comprehend?

Going by some of the replies over the weeks I think that many, on both sides of the arguement, either want to ignore things like context and nuance, or are just too insular in their thinking.

Will I Amnt

opr wrote: »

Did you read El Horseboxo post that context isn't that important when it comes to the word ? I will take the unbiased word of someone fluent in said language who was brought up in similar cultural background to have a better understanding of things than the many experts that have popped up on this thread.

Opr

You will take his unbiased word because it suits you,if he came on and said it was more than likely offensive would you so readily accept it???

opr

cambo2008 wrote: »

You will take his unbiased word because it suits you,if he came on and said it was more than likely offensive would you so readily accept it???

I am saying it is unbiased because he doesn't support a soccer team or give a dam about Suarez.

Opr

Nalz

Mr Alan wrote: »

Are you really trying to paint Ferguson as some sort of well behaved gent?

No. His interview came on straight after Daglish on skysports.

Fúcking hell do you ever get tired of nit picking posts? I'll remove the Fergie quote if that makes you feel better.

Jesus.

invinciblePRSTV

Grayditch wrote: »

Paul McGrath is an absolute cabbage for singling out Glen Johnson in his Liverpool rant.

No he's not, wash your mouth out young man.

#15

Kess73 wrote: »

Going by some of the replies over the weeks I think that many, on both sides of the arguement, either want to ignore things like context and nuance, or are just too insular in their thinking.

I agree, and I would apply context to every aspect of this case.

I can understand why LFC fans don't want to see Suarez labelled a racist, because it was possibly a simple error on his part. Possibly in response to goading from Evra too.

That's not enough to see the man labelled a racist for his entire career/life, but he seems to have overstepped the mark in his comments and should still be punished for it.

This debate would be better served if we didn't have two ignorant subsets of supporters claiming that
(i) he is an out-and-out racist
(ii) that he didn't do anything wrong at all, and is a victim in all this

The way I see it is that Suarez and Evra are both wind-up merchants, and Suarez probably went too far in his WUMing efforts.
He's not a racist, but if he used a racial slur in the heat of the moment then it is pretty ignorant and he should be punished for it.
One moment of madness shouldn't be held against him forever.

Will I Amnt

opr wrote: »

cambo2008 wrote: »

You will take his unbiased word because it suits you,if he came on and said it was more than likely offensive would you so readily accept it???

I am saying it is unbiased because he doesn't support a soccer team or give a dam about Suarez.

Opr

I've heard an Argentinian sports reporter on newstalks off the ball show who originally came on defending Suarez saying it was a friendly term,concede that it could also be used as an insult in certain circumstances.

After some questioning about the incident he ended up saying it probably was offensive given the nature of the exchange.

This lad had no agenda so should we take his word for it aswell???

K-9

#15 wrote: »

Are people being deliberately stupid by pretending that context doesn't matter?

Or is such a nuance actually too difficult to comprehend?

Would be less fun and less reason to hate Liverpool.

It could well be that Suarez has admitted saying the word but feels Evra has exaggerated his evidence with the 10 times thing, we don't even know if Evra said that in his evidence, plus he could be pissed of that the FA took little account of the context particularly if Evra was being "abusive" to him.

As for the shirts thing, really no matter what Liverpool did, even saying nothing would have been perceived as bad by some, twisted to suit their agenda.

Twitter is a joke. Collymore has come in for racial abuse from fans and not just Liverpool fans before, he got loads around the time of the Terry game as well. Plus its getting to the stage that a few get offended on it and people have to issue apologies.

Samich

opr wrote: »

Edit - Before the match, the Argentina posed with a flag in order to give encouragement to former Argentine defender, struggling to survive.



Opr

Yes? What's the point you're making?

Say that in europe and it's a racial slur. Also that was aimed at a player in support of him.

What Suarez did was like an English person coming over here and calling by chance, a traveller, a tinker. I'm sure it has a different meaning in England but if an english person said it to a traveller than they wouldn't be saying "It means something else in England". They wouldn't be saying it in future fo sho.

ilovelamp2000

Kess73 wrote: »

Going by some of the replies over the weeks I think that many, on both sides of the arguement, either want to ignore things like context and nuance, or are just too insular in their thinking.

People relying on the context and nuance thing are generally going off on the wrong tangent for me.

For the FA to find Luis innocent of the charges the precedent they would have set was that any player playing organised football in England could call an opposition player a negro, provided he could say one of the following:

a) he was saying it in Spanish
b) it wasn't offensive where he comes from
c) he said it in a friendly manner.

If anyone honestly believed the FA were going to come to that conclusion, and effectively create a charter for genuinely racist players to get away with racist abuse then I think you're living in an alternate reality to me.

If Suarez did admit to it, as has been widely reported since, the FA had no choice other than to find him guilty. The punishment on the other hand, should not have been so long if they genuinely accept there was no racist intent behind the comment and that Luis is not a racist himself. I would not be the slightest bit surprised if the ban length is reduced.

SlickRic

ilovelamp2000 wrote: »

If Suarez did admit to it, as has been widely reported since, the FA had no choice other than to find him guilty. The punishment on the other hand, should not have been so long if they genuinely accept there was no racist intent behind the comment and that Luis is not a racist himself. I would not be the slightest bit surprised if the ban length is reduced.

/thread.

J. Marston

mike65 wrote: »

England Hero John Terry Stands Tall

Hmmmm.

That would turn your stomach.

Jesus Wept

To be honest, they should just get on with it and make it so only english can be spoke on the pitch.

Kess73

ilovelamp2000 wrote: »

People relying on the context and nuance thing are generally going off on the wrong tangent for me.

For the FA to find Luis innocent of the charges the precedent they would have set was that any player playing organised football in England could call an opposition player a negro, provided he could say one of the following:

a) he was saying it in Spanish
b) it wasn't offensive where he comes from
c) he said it in a friendly manner.

If anyone honestly believed the FA were going to come to that conclusion, and effectively create a charter for genuinely racist players to get away with racist abuse then I think you're living in an alternate reality to me.

If Suarez did admit to it, as has been widely reported since, the FA had no choice other than to find him guilty. The punishment on the other hand, should not have been so long if they genuinely accept there was no racist intent behind the comment and that Luis is not a racist himself. I would not be the slightest bit surprised if the ban length is reduced.

Good post and I found myself nodding my head to most of it. The bit in bold caught my eye. The FA cannot come out and say that they think that Suarez did not use the word in a racial manner because if they believed the word was not used in such a manner then all they can punish him for is for being sarky to Evra.

The FA cannot back down on the racial side of things now, and if they do they will be seen as a total joke. The delay in publishing the evidence they found Suarez guilty with is a bit of a farce as well as it appears that an appeal cannot be officially made until that information is sent to the clubs, and that it may not be sent until next Febuary. So if that is true, then they gave a verdict but are making all parties involved wait until Febuary before it can be decided if an appeal will take place. In which case the issue could drag on into March or April, maybe even longer.

I think that if the FA were confident enough to come out with a guilty verdict in terms of them being sure the word was used in a racist manner, then they should have something ready (that had been checked by their legal people) to issue to the two clubs so that an appeal could be started asap or so the decision could have been accepted asap.

But the one thing that the FA cannot do, is say anything other than they think Suarez is guilty of racist behaviour because if they do then it all falls apart for them. They had the option before the verdict was reached (and after Suarez admitted the word he used) to accept that the context in which the word was used was not that of an offensive racial manner, and just done Suarez for just being abusive.

But with John Terry's court date also happening in Febuary, it looks like there will be no end to the debate over whether or not Saurez and Terry made deliberate racist comments for quite some time.

K-9

ilovelamp2000 wrote: »

People relying on the context and nuance thing are generally going off on the wrong tangent for me.

For the FA to find Luis innocent of the charges the precedent they would have set was that any player playing organised football in England could call an opposition player a negro, provided he could say one of the following:

a) he was saying it in Spanish
b) it wasn't offensive where he comes from
c) he said it in a friendly manner.

If anyone honestly believed the FA were going to come to that conclusion, and effectively create a charter for genuinely racist players to get away with racist abuse then I think you're living in an alternate reality to me.

If Suarez did admit to it, as has been widely reported since, the FA had no choice other than to find him guilty. The punishment on the other hand, should not have been so long if they genuinely accept there was no racist intent behind the comment and that Luis is not a racist himself. I would not be the slightest bit surprised if the ban length is reduced.

It'll be interesting to see if they convicted him of only a racial slur, did they also convict him of other personal abuse? I doubt they'd have been that thick as that would really open a can of worms!

Mr.Crinklewood

opr wrote: »

Edit - Before the match, the Argentina posed with a flag in order to give encouragement to former Argentine defender, struggling to survive.



Opr

Posts like this are beyond a joke.

Nb:- if you were taking the piss I apologise.

mike65

following on from

If Suarez did admit to it, as has been widely reported since, the FA had no choice other than to find him guilty

If the FA had announced that Suarez punishment was to be an awareness course most people (esp Utd supporters I imagine) would have laughed at that and yet it would have served far more purpose than this ban.

Warper

mike65 wrote: »

following on from



If the FA had announced that Suarez punishment was to be an awareness course most people (esp Utd supporters I imagine) would have laughed at that and yet it would have served far more purpose than this ban.

Great idea, when someone says something racist, they can just plead ignorance and go on a course for a few days. That would be a great precedence to set.

While they are at it we should change the drink-driving laws as well. If someone is over the limit and they plead ignorance, well we can send them on a course to explain to them that drinking whilst driving is wrong. After all how would they know if you havnt got a brain to think for yourself.

K-9

Warper wrote: »

Great idea, when someone says something racist, they can just plead ignorance and go on a course for a few days. That would be a great precedence to set.

While they are at it we should change the drink-driving laws as well. If someone is over the limit and they plead ignorance, well we can send them on a course to explain to them that drinking whilst driving is wrong. After all how would they know if you havnt got a brain to think for yourself.

If you extend your thought process there for a second, judges do give different sentences, penalties and fines for drink driving, because you know the context is important.

th3 s1aught3r

Warper wrote: »

Great idea, when someone says something racist, they can just plead ignorance and go on a course for a few days. That would be a great precedence to set.

.

Define 'something racist'
The context and meaning of the comment is everything.

El Horseboxo

Helix wrote: »

El Horseboxo wrote: »

I'm Latino and don't support soccer teams other than betting or playing fantasy football. So I've no agenda. But if the conversation took place in Spanish it's easy to slip into that way of talking without thinking about being in a different culture. I've done it plenty of times when talking to people from Spain where I've used words not offensive to me in Latin America but would be to a Spanish person. Also context isn't really an issue for negrito. It's hard to explain if that's not your mind set or brought up in that culture and language. I was called negrito growing up in my family because I'm darker than the rest. My great grandfather was African so I must have had a larger amount of his genes or something. Anyways without adding more words to negrito I don't really find the offense in that word alone. Spanish, especially Latin American Spanish is very descriptive. Flaco, gordito, guero, oscuro, moreno are all words that are just added on like a nickname sort of. They mean skinny, fat, pale, dark and tanned. Could be offensive here but are in no way in Spanish. I'd consider gringo to be more offensive. I have used those words when talking bout close mates with someone in Spanish and in the flow of things it just comes natural. I even called my ex black girlfriend negrita. Not the reason she's an ex by the way.

I don't know much or care that much about the Luis Suárez debacle but just thought I'd add some perspective from someone that was raised in a similar culture and language to him. It's difficult to explain how context doesn't matter too much when using that word. But without hearing the whole conversation it's even more difficult to hazard a guess what Suárez really meant. I'm not taking any sides at all here and am only commenting on the supposed word used.

if you called a black man from another country negrito in a pub or something what do you think would happen? do you reckon he'd be offended?

If I was talking to him in English or Spanish? That's an important aspect because if it was in English, to me that's the only context I can see that would make it appear going out of your way to address his skin color or race. But if it was in Spanish it would be something that could come out without me even thinking bout it. Sort of in the same way an Irish person might say craic to somebody that they probably know very well doesn't understand that word if they stopped to think before saying it. Granted that's not a offensive word. The point I'm trying to make is if it's a word you are used to saying it can naturally come out in the flow of a conversation and you won't have pre thought about using it. It just happens. If I mentioned negrito to a black guy in a pub and he expressed offense. I would instantly apologize and explain why I used it. I don't know what conversation took place between Suárez and Evra so I won't guess or comment on the nature of it.

everdead.ie

West Midlands Police have started to take action against one of the tweeters Stan Collymore highlighted Ridiculous some of the **** some people have come out with I hope Evra isn't on twitter

The offenders tweet has been deleted but you can see it on @ianprior timeline

ROCKMAN

El Horseboxo wrote: »

If I was talking to him in English or Spanish? That's an important aspect because if it was in English, to me that's the only context I can see that would make it appear going out of your way to address his skin color or race. But if it was in Spanish it would be something that could come out without me even thinking bout it. Sort of in the same way an Irish person might say craic to somebody that they probably know very well doesn't understand that word if they stopped to think before saying it. Granted that's not a offensive word. The point I'm trying to make is if it's a word you are used to saying it can naturally come out in the flow of a conversation and you won't have pre thought about using it. It just happens. If I mentioned negrito to a black guy in a pub and he expressed offense. I would instantly apologize and explain why I used it. I don't know what conversation took place between Suárez and Evra so I won't guess or comment on the nature of it.

Not getting involved in the overall debate ,will wait for the full report ,

But if the word was not used in a conversation but in an heated argument would the use and meaning of the word change ,would it still flow or would you be more aware of its use ,

eigrod

El Horseboxo wrote: »

I'm Latino and don't support soccer teams other than betting or playing fantasy football. So I've no agenda. But if the conversation took place in Spanish it's easy to slip into that way of talking without thinking about being in a different culture. I've done it plenty of times when talking to people from Spain where I've used words not offensive to me in Latin America but would be to a Spanish person. Also context isn't really an issue for negrito. It's hard to explain if that's not your mind set or brought up in that culture and language. I was called negrito growing up in my family because I'm darker than the rest. My great grandfather was African so I must have had a larger amount of his genes or something. Anyways without adding more words to negrito I don't really find the offense in that word alone. Spanish, especially Latin American Spanish is very descriptive. Flaco, gordito, guero, oscuro, moreno are all words that are just added on like a nickname sort of. They mean skinny, fat, pale, dark and tanned. Could be offensive here but are in no way in Spanish. I'd consider gringo to be more offensive. I have used those words when talking bout close mates with someone in Spanish and in the flow of things it just comes natural. I even called my ex black girlfriend negrita. Not the reason she's an ex by the way.

I don't know much or care that much about the Luis Suárez debacle but just thought I'd add some perspective from someone that was raised in a similar culture and language to him. It's difficult to explain how context doesn't matter too much when using that word. But without hearing the whole conversation it's even more difficult to hazard a guess what Suárez really meant. I'm not taking any sides at all here and am only commenting on the supposed word used.

Excellent post. Thank you for that.

Here in Ireland we call people of red hair and/or complexion "Redser" or such like and no offence is ever taken to it. A famous ex-Tipperary hurler is better known as "Redser" than his real name (Ger O' Grady).