General Premier League Thread 2020-21 - Mod Notes in 1st post. [Updated 17/12/20]

CSF

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

This is an absolutely nothing issue in which IMO, noone has done anything wrong. It's just horrible "banter"

I am sure she doesnt care, more people know who she is now. But if you are a pundit you are fair game to be challenged.

Challenged, absolutely. We all know that’s not how the world of social media works though. Inevitably ends in people being a lot more than challenged.

Have Leeds done more than challenge her? No. Are they absolutely aware of how the internet works and what will inevitably ensue? 100%

TheadoreT

CSF wrote: »

Quick read of this thread will show there are people lining up to make anti-woke gender rants despite nobody (that I saw at least) here making any reference to gender.

But the main reason its had a disproportionate amount of people jumping to defend it is because shes a female, it would be disingenuous to suggest otherwise. Which is sexist in itself as theres been countless similar examples that haven't gained nearly as much traction as this.

SlickRic

CSF wrote: »

I really don’t think the average joe soap has seen Merson getting abuse about addiction. I know I haven’t.

If a football club official Twitter account took a pop at him, the chances I’d see it are probably higher though, and I think your notion that people would be ok with it because he’s a man are completely off the mark and agenda driven.

Leeds' Twitter took issue with Agbonlahor just a couple of weeks ago. Barely anyone will have seen it I'd say in comparison to this.

The reaction today is because she's female. And I feel for her on that, because it's not helpful and it's not fair. She's a good pundit, and she's being patronised by the overreaction. All things being equal, she'd be ridiculed for the opinion by those who think it deserves that, like other pundits would be, Leeds would get criticised, and then we all get on with our lives.

But as I said (and this is my only point really), people are using it to push the gender agenda by over-defending her, when it should have nothing to do with it.

CSF

SlickRic wrote: »

Leeds' Twitter took issue with Agbonlahor just a couple of weeks ago. Barely anyone will have seen it I'd say in comparison to this.

The reaction today is because she's female. And I feel for her on that, because it's not helpful and it's not fair. She's a good pundit, and she's being patronised by the overreaction. All things being equal, she'd be ridiculed for the opinion by those who think it deserves that, like other pundits would be, Leeds would get criticised, and then we all get on with our lives.

But as I said (and this is my only point really), people are using it to push the gender agenda by over-defending her, when it should have nothing to do with it.

The Leeds Twitter thing was literally just slagging Agbonlahor about Leeds having beaten us 3 nil after Agbonlahor constantly riling up Leeds fans on Twitter. It isn't the same. Has nothing to do with gender. Gabby was courting the attention that he got.



If this was a woman who spends her time on the Internet trying to wind up football fans to generate clicks (the Talksport model), then she would kind of have to accept what is coming to her (although I still don't think sending abuse to anyone is acceptable), but that isn't the case here.

CSF

CSF wrote: »

It absolutely is hanging someone out to dry when you’ve 664k Twitter followers and know exactly how social media works.

Managers aren’t allowed question a ref for that very reason. Anonymous football fans on the internet are a horrible breed.

Managers aren't allowed question a ref?

Huh?

You've just made that up, they can of course. Now, obviously they cannot challenge their integrity or suggest they are cheating. But they are perfectly entitled to comment. Here is Dean Smith calling a ref card happy in the last few weeks, encouraging millions of Villa fans around the world into a pile on and hanging him out to dry, as you no doubt characterised it at the time...

https://talksport.com/football/803054/aston-villa-dean-smith-stockley-park-slippers-card-happy-mike-dean/

CSF

TheadoreT wrote: »

But the main reason its had a disproportionate amount of people jumping to defend it is because shes a female, it would be disingenuous to suggest otherwise. Which is sexist in itself as theres been countless similar examples that haven't gained nearly as much traction as this.

I don’t think that is the case. The conversation was started in here by someone of the opposite opinion.

I haven’t seen too many people come in to slate Leeds here. I don’t see the disproportionate amount of people that you’re referring to.

However, the more people you have coming in and talking about gender inequality and wokeness and virtue signalling, the more people are going to give their opinion on it, and some of that larger number are going to think that Leeds shouldn’t have tweeted it.

~Rebel~

thebaz wrote: »

Every pundit , male or female - are open to criticism , part of the job - playing the gender card when that criticism comes is PC nonsense - plenty of male pundits have got plenty of stick , including losing ther job - Lots of other more serious issues to get in a twist about today.

Yes... but on the other side, male pundits don’t tend to get thousands of posts saying things like “I hope someone will rape you to death”.

Something like this is a lot more complicated than either “it’s cause she’s a woman” or, “it makes no difference she’s a woman”.

Her stupid comment left her open - but there’s no doubt that plenty of the abuse she’s received is more personal and vitriolic because of her gender.

My takeaway is that the messaging of any mass grouping of people is ****ing horrible.

Also, more as a musing - pundits are open to criticism, but what does that mean? One person saying “here, that’s a stupid thing to say” is criticism. Is it still just criticism if it’s 10,000 people calling you a whore or a moron or an addict etc etc etc”?

There was the Miguel Delaney post recently where Lineker said something negative about an article he wrote, and Miguel got thousands of abusive posts as a result. How much visibility a platform gives an issue is important - Leeds and Lineker caused a vastly disproportionate amount of attention and abuse for these two people, whether they’re right or wrong. Right or wrong goes out the window, there is only mass shaming and abuse at a scale that dwarfs any damage caused by the original point.

CSF

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Managers aren't allowed question a ref?

Huh?

You've just made that up, they can of course. Now, obviously they cannot challenge their integrity or suggest they are cheating. But they are perfectly entitled to comment. Here is Dean Smith calling a ref card happy in the last few weeks, encouraging millions of Villa fans around the world into a pile on and hanging him out to dry, as you no doubt characterised it at the time...

https://talksport.com/football/803054/aston-villa-dean-smith-stockley-park-slippers-card-happy-mike-dean/

Yeah, ok. Clearly I thought you were referring to more serious criticism than him having given a few too many yellow cards in a particular game.

People who have said things like what Nuno said will inevitably be punished.

TheadoreT

CSF wrote: »

The Leeds Twitter thing was literally just slagging Agbonlahor about Leeds having beaten us 3 nil after Agbonlahor constantly riling up Leeds fans on Twitter. It isn't the same. Has nothing to do with gender. Gabby was courting the attention that he got.



If this was a woman who spends her time on the Internet trying to wind up football fans to generate clicks (the Talksport model), then she would kind of have to accept what is coming to her (although I still don't think sending abuse to anyone is acceptable), but that isn't the case here.

Put yourself in the shoes of someone who made an embarrassing error on tv. Forget male or female. Would you prefer for it to go away with as little fuss as possible or for every journalist to keep retweeting it with comments, keeping it relevant, patronising you with feign niceties, making your error the focal point of a national debate?

Nobody commenting is thinking about the person behind this, more so to push an agenda and that's quite clear.

CSF

TheadoreT wrote: »

Put yourself in the shoes of someone who made an embarrassing error on tv. Forget male or female. Would you prefer for it to go away with as little fuss as possible or for every journalist to keep retweeting it with comments, keeping it relevant, patronising you with feign niceties, making your error the focal point of a national debate?

Nobody commenting is thinking about the person behind this, more so to push an agenda and that's quite clear.

I completely agree that the matter has gone way beyond what it should have. That was inevitable unfortunately, which is kind of my point.

Agent Coulson

Leeds have released a statement condemning the abuse Karen Carney is reserving.


Closing the barn door after the horse has bolted.



It's 2020 did whoever runs there Twitter account not have a small Idea that she would be destroyed on social media by fans the second they posted the tweet.

Getting ridiculous now

CSF

Reports that Spurs game will indeed be postponed

~Rebel~

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Leeds have released a statement condemning the abuse Karen Carney is reserving.


Closing the barn door after the horse has bolted.



It's 2020 did whoever runs there Twitter account not have a small Idea that she would be destroyed on social media by fans the second they posted the tweet.

Yup, anyone with a few thousand or more followers has a duty of care in what they post. Their voice isn’t just their voice anymore - it’s the touch paper for an explosion of thousands of other voices to follow.

The old thing of “If you can’t say something positive, don’t say anything at all” might be good advice for influencers... doesn’t mean you can’t critique necessarily, but you have to be thoughtful in how you frame it.

Mushy

CSF wrote: »

Reports that Spurs game will indeed be postponed

Confirmed now

y0ssar1an22

Mushy wrote: »

Confirmed now

seems to be reaching a critical mass. wonder will the UK gov step in and shut down elite sport entirely

Collie D

I think this is more of a general ****heads on social media debate than a football one. I hate Leeds but have no issue with them calling out a pundit on nonsense...and it was nonsense.

Leeds haven't made this about gender. Haven't seen the follow-up comments apart from the quotes here and they're pretty scummy but isn't that just the toxic dump that is Twitter?


Anyway.... Fulham v Spurs....is it on?

EDIT: Answered as I typed.

DM_7

Fitz* wrote: »

It's happening all over the league(s).

Troy Deeney was very vocal about not wanting football to return in the summer. Because Watford were in the relegation zone and wanted to save his own skin. Now that Watford are 2 points off an automatic spot in the Championship, he is questioning the idea of the a circuit breaker.

All over the media, and boards, there was an awful lot of talk of null & void last year saying that football needed to be stopped, leagues just cancelled and start from scratch etc. Big name pundits, Premier League club players and officials were very vocal on it. There is no talk of that this year whatsoever, because it doesn't suit the same clubs narrative. Arguably the league is in a worse position now, even with the mass testing because of outbreaks at clubs that they cannot contain.

Narratives always exist to a certain degree as well as bias.

Regardless of why the idea was brought up in the past, fear for how bad things could be about to get or the less genuine reasons suggested in your post there is no basis for such an idea now.

Last season could be stopped and restarted, it worked well. The league is close to its halfway point with minimal disruption following the health protocols in place. Far more is now known about the virus, vaccine has started.

I think a league only bubble with cups and europe, maybe even internationals pushed to end of the season in their own bubbles is most likely outcome. Teams showed that such routes to run through a season work.

ThunbergsAreGo

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

seems to be reaching a critical mass. wonder will the UK gov step in and shut down elite sport entirely

Given the scale, elite sports likely makes very little difference to numbers, but keeps spirits up etc.

Utopia Parkway

Very hard to see them avoiding another clatter of postponed games over the next few weeks. Surely chances of them taking a 2 or 3 week break must be growing. Where do you make up the games though unless they can put back the Euros a few weeks?

bucketybuck

The real stupid is Leeds thinking that one good result makes her point invalid.

I just hope Carney has the balls to throw it in their faces should they do go on a bad run of form in the 2nd half of the season.

CSF

Collie D wrote: »

I think this is more of a general ****heads on social media debate than a football one. I hate Leeds but have no issue with them calling out a pundit on nonsense...and it was nonsense.

Leeds haven't made this about gender. Haven't seen the follow-up comments apart from the quotes here and they're pretty scummy but isn't that just the toxic dump that is Twitter?


Anyway.... Fulham v Spurs....is it on?

EDIT: Answered as I typed.

I don’t think a single person has accused Leeds of making this about gender. What a bizarre take.

Collie D

CSF wrote: »

I don’t think a single person has accused Leeds of making this about gender. What a bizarre take.

And I didn’t say anyone had but it seems to have become a gender debate which is why I said I think it’s got nothing to do with Leeds or football.

Mushy

bucketybuck wrote: »

The real stupid is Leeds thinking that one good result makes her point invalid.

I just hope Carney has the balls to throw it in their faces should they do go on a bad run of form in the 2nd half of the season.

They're not basing it on one good result though

Agent Coulson

Agent Coulson wrote: »

It's 2020 did whoever runs there Twitter account not have a small Idea that she would be destroyed on social media by fans the second they posted the tweet.

When Jurgen Klopp blames a pundit for injuries to his players, does he factor in how that might be received on social media?

~Rebel~

Collie D wrote: »

I think this is more of a general ****heads on social media debate than a football one. I hate Leeds but have no issue with them calling out a pundit on nonsense...and it was nonsense.

Leeds haven't made this about gender. Haven't seen the follow-up comments apart from the quotes here and they're pretty scummy but isn't that just the toxic dump that is Twitter?


Anyway.... Fulham v Spurs....is it on?

EDIT: Answered as I typed.

I think there's a contradiction here in a sense... you're right, Leeds didn't themselves make it about gender - but as you say, the fallout was entirely predictable. I'd actually go further and say it was inevitable. So in that respect, given that the result of their 'call out' has happened exactly as we'd all have said it would, they are fairly responsible.

We're gone long past the days when any institution can claim naivety on the consequences of their actions on social media, so they need to decide when they're gonna do some little 'call out' if this is truly worth it or not. In this case I'd say it was negligence. If they really wanted to just let her know what she said was wrong, could easily have someone at the club just give her a call and say so. They popped it up on social media knowing this would happen.

Fitz*

Deleted User wrote: »

When Jurgen Klopp blames a pundit for injuries to his players, does he factor in how that might be received on social media?

He never blamed a pundit for injuries.

Utopia Parkway

I think it's fair to say that official club accounts shouldn't be getting involved in things like this. There are plenty of unofficial accounts out there that will have a go.

Secondly it's either equality or it's not. Male pundits get absolutely slaughtered every day of the week and nobody bats an eyelid. If they are going to push female pundits out there they are going to get the same treatment if they talk nonsense.

~Rebel~

Deleted User wrote: »

When Jurgen Klopp blames a pundit for injuries to his players, does he factor in how that might be received on social media?

1) He hasn't done this.

2) He particularly hasn't done this on social media.

It's just a reality that when something pops up on someones social media there's an immediacy in the action that can be taken.

Obviously peoples comments on TV or whatever will also generate responses - but interaction through direct social media is exponentially higher.

Fitz*

Fitz* wrote: »

He never blamed a pundit for injuries.

He congratulated Des Kelly for the injuries to his players. Let's not rewrite history...

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/nov/28/jurgen-klopp-bt-sport-des-kelly-injuries-liverpool-schedule-brighton

It's arguably worse than the Leeds one because, of course, he instigated the row, he wasn't responding to a point...and it's childish nonsense.