nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Alex Ferguson on Ferdinand and Roberts

flyswatter

So Sir Alex Ferguson has been having a go at Jason Roberts during the week for not supporting the Kick It Out campaign by wearing their shirt.

Rio Ferdinand has now decided not to wear it in protest against (presumably similarly to Roberts) the lack of care being taken against racism in the game recently. Ferguson is very embarassed about this and not pleased with his player.

What do people feel about this? I respect the two players decisions not to wear the shirt and think that Roberts especially is to be applauded for making his point known.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

gerryo777

adox wrote: »

So players are thick, get paid loads of money and so are hypocritical and are petty if they report racial abuse on the pitch from other players?
Sorry did I say report, I stand corrected, run crying to the FA or police.

Are you for ****ing real?

Maybe you should look at the Terry case.
Maybe you should look at the verdict of a court of law and not the verdict of a FA that bows to media pressure.
Do you believe that John Terry racially abused Anton Ferdinand?
Ferdinand ran crying to the police after he spoke to his agent and it snowballed from there.
People get hysterical when racism is mentioned, hence some of the replies here to my posts.

kippy

There are very obviously issues at how the footballing governing bodies view and punish racism. All you have to look at are the fines that certain countries get for the actions of their fans versus the fans handed out for commercial faults you'll plainly see that.

That being said, Ferdinand et al, stance this weekend has been pointless.

Will I Amnt

gerryo777 wrote: »

Maybe you should look at the Terry case.
Maybe you should look at the verdict of a court of law and not the verdict of a FA that bows to media pressure.
Do you believe that John Terry racially abused Anton Ferdinand?
Ferdinand ran crying to the police after he spoke to his agent and it snowballed from there.
People get hysterical when racism is mentioned, hence some of the replies here to my posts.

Maybe you should look at how a civil court differs from a court of law. Burdens of proof are not the same.

Why do you keep referring to someone reporting racist abuse as "running crying"?
F**king ridiculous attitude tbh.

[Deleted User]

jive wrote: »

Well with cheating in football you have to consider the $$$$, with racism you must consider sticks and stones etc. You could argue that the lawww and feeeeelings and eeeemotions are more important than money but then I could argue that you're very idealistic.

The one time I'll agree with Platini on something - racism is a societal problem. Sure you can dish out the bans left, right and centre but it won't change anything. People must remember that a lot of footballers are absolute simpletons, trying to get them to change in any way is like pissing against the wind. As that tit Platini said, it's a societal problem.

Sorry I just dont accept that. These guys are looked up to by young kids worldwide. They are paid colossal money and have a duty to do their utmost to influence society by sending the right message out to future generations of fans and players. You dont have to have a high IQ level to behave like a decent human being and unfortunately instead of the game highlighting the more important facts of life to its stars, it godifies and corrupts them. A young boy from the slums of Africa or a rough tower block estate in SE London for example is brought up living on hand me downs and scraps and then all of a sudden due to his talent he winds up on a mega contract and this process, this life changing experience has happened so fast it makes his head spin.
Rationalisation, the meaning of life, the fragility of life, the fortune of being a footballer, etc becomes lost as there is no process in between dealing with the suddenness of going from rags to riches.

Like a shot of adrenaline the money comes in and there is no more thinking from the north pole (your head). All 'thinking' is done from the equator and south pole (mouth and penis ) from now on.

Football should be a vehicle that is one way tackling societal problems but instead its influencing alot of societal negativity due to the corruption and greed of players and officials. The media though will further emphasise and highlight the negative more then a positive due to their own greed of wanting a story to flog to the world.

Yes, Art and sport follows life to a certain degree but life mostly follows Art and Sport.

We could all act the maggot and blame greater society but the fact is as good decent people we must stem the tide and show future generations the right way of behaving. When your in a privileged position its high time you took stock and passed on your infinite wisdom to those less fortunate. Unfortunately that's an ideal world

gerryo777

cambo2008 wrote: »

Maybe you should look at how a civil court differs from a court of law. Burdens of proof are not the same.

Why do you keep referring to someone reporting racist abuse as "running crying"?
F**king ridiculous attitude tbh.

F**king ridiculous attitude, in your opinion you mean.

BTW, do you think the FA are above the courts of the land then?

SantryRed

gerryo777 wrote: »

F**king ridiculous attitude, in your opinion you mean.

BTW, do you think the FA are above the courts of the land then?

:rolleyes:

DIFFERENT BURDENS OF PROOF.

aidan24326

mosstin wrote: »

Bull****. Why should a black player support a token organisation that the FA seemingly support in order to give the impression that they're doing something about racism? Why should ALL players have to wear the t-shirt just because SAF says so? He dug his own hole on this one.

The issue of racism in English football is being overblown because of the John Terry/Anton incident. I don't think it's as much of a problem as it's being made out to be. Try playing in Russia or Ukraine, that's where you'll see real racism at work. The JT/AF incident has been blown out of all proportion.

Fergie seemed well p1ssed off with Rio though. Could it be the beginning of the end for him at United? Knowing how ruthless Sir Alex has been in the past with Stam, RVN etc

event

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

It is hard to know what Ferguson's motives are here. We can say without doubt that he would be a supporter of any anti-racism movement so I'm not sure why he had such an issue with Roberts.

Maybe, like me, he sees these players offering no alternative solution, putting none of their copious amounts of free-time and exorbitant weekly wages to use in setting up an alternative to KIO so feels they should get behind what they have.

I'm also not sure what Roberts and Ferdinand expect of KIO. What is their mandate? What have they done wrong etc? None of this is really clear and I suspect that we'll get nothing more out of this. I don't think I'll ever stop thinking that the manner in which they've chosen to protest was unnecessary and not really helpful.

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

I don't think its fair that a lot of people are saying to Rio "why arent you doing anything to help, where's your input". he may have not had much of an opinion until his brother became involved in the Terry case, but he has a right to feel that they arent doing enough. Maybe now he will get involved with anti racism campaigning, he is doing this to publically highlight 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

[Deleted User]

There's probably not many here have experienced racist abuse tbf.

LuckyLloyd

TheDoc wrote: »

Thats my point, and why Fergie had no reservations in publicly stating Ferdinand will be dealt with, where alot of managers would dodge the question, with some no comment crap.

At United you fall in line, and if you don't, you face the consequences, as many of the current playing staff can inform Ferdinand about, and many previous players I'm sure can attest to, and regret.

Again, apparently not.

_blank_

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Again, apparently not.

er, wrong.

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

gerryo777

SantryRed wrote: »

:rolleyes:

DIFFERENT BURDENS OF PROOF.

Your right about that ok.
One deals in facts and the other bows to media pressure.

Will I Amnt

gerryo777 wrote: »

Your right about that ok.
One deals in facts and the other bows to media pressure.

How does it bow to media pressure??
There was enough evidence to suggest Terry more than likely racially abused Ferdinand, the video clearly shows this and that's all they need to make a decision.

A court of law required that it needed to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. The video was not sufficient there.

Civil courts are not exclusive to the FA ffs.
If you or I have a case in a civil court the burden of proof is the same, nothing to do with bowing to the media.

LuckyLloyd

Des wrote: »

er, wrong.

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

Back of the newspapers misleading today so, wouldn't be the first time.

A_Sober_Paddy

All this hype about Ferguson saying that he'll deal with Ferdinand...

If one of his white\Asian players refused to wear the t-shirt and Ferguson came out and said the same thing, they'd be all over him saying fair play, it works the same for everybody.

Treating a players differently because of the colour of his skin is racist, so not punishing Ferdinand would be racist, as you can bet your mortgage if it was Wayne Rooney, who didn't wear the t-shirt, there'd be war

ArmaniJeanss

A_Sober_Paddy wrote: »

All this hype about Ferguson saying that he'll deal with Ferdinand...

If one of his white\Asian players refused to wear the t-shirt and Ferguson came out and said the same thing, they'd be all over him saying fair play, it works the same for everybody.

Treating a players differently because of the colour of his skin is racist, so not punishing Ferdinand would be racist, as you can bet your mortgage if it was Wayne Rooney, who didn't wear the t-shirt, there'd be war

Theres no doubt its a much more interesting story because it's Ferdinand.

71-year-old white patriach tells all his employees exactly what way to act in a politially charged situation, but one of the young black male employees decides to act differently.
People now wonder whether the young black male will be fined, told not to come to work a few times, or even told he's being moved onto different employment.
Local newspapers unsure which way to leap as generally the word of the 71 year old white patriarch has been taken as gospel, but some appear to be having doubts now.

I haven't had this much entertainment since I left 1960s Alabama to be honest.

SantryRed

gerryo777 wrote: »

Your right about that ok.
One deals in facts and the other bows to media pressure.

No, you're wrong.

I'll say it again:

DIFFERENT BURDENS OF PROOF.

Fishooks12

gerryo777 wrote: »

Your right about that ok.
One deals in facts and the other bows to media pressure.

You should really read over some of the crap you're posting

gerryo777

Some replies here are to be expected I suppose.
It wouldn't do to try and make a proper point with the hysteria that surrounds racism.
Some posters understand the point I was trying to make but some are so blinded by the hype that they can't take in rational argument.
I'll leave them to it so.:rolleyes:

niallo27

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Theres no doubt its a much more interesting story because it's Ferdinand.

71-year-old white patriach tells all his employees exactly what way to act in a politially charged situation, but one of the young black male employees decides to act differently.
People now wonder whether the young black male will be fined, told not to come to work a few times, or even told he's being moved onto different employment.
Local newspapers unsure which way to leap as generally the word of the 71 year old white patriarch has been taken as gospel, but some appear to be having doubts now.

I haven't had this much entertainment since I left 1960s Alabama to be honest.

The way I'm reading the situation which could be wrong is that Ferguson must have asked on Thursday or Friday is everyone wearing the t-shirts and does anyone have a problem with them. Ferdinand must have said he was going to wear it as I can't see why ferguson would make such a big public deal about it otherwise. This is about undermining his boss IMO.

SantryRed

gerryo777 wrote: »

Some replies here are to be expected I suppose.
It wouldn't do to try and make a proper point with the hysteria that surrounds racism.
Some posters understand the point I was trying to make but some are so blinded by the hype that they can't take in rational argument.
I'll leave them to it so.:rolleyes:

:pac:

Sgt Pepper 64

niallo27 wrote: »

The way I'm reading the situation which could be wrong is that Ferguson must have asked on Thursday or Friday is everyone wearing the t-shirts and does anyone have a problem with them. Ferdinand must have said he was going to wear it as I can't see why ferguson would make such a big public deal about it otherwise. This is about undermining his boss IMO.

terry would wear his (If he wasnt banned!) :eek:

Patsy fyre

Rio should know at this stage not to mess with fergie. Fergie will deal with him but hopefully not until after the chelsea game.
Odds on cashley and Rio shaking hands?

Iang87

To be honest I don't think many current players have experienced racist abuse on the pitch when compared to what was tolerated prior to the campaign. I must mention though I believe that calling someone a black cúnt in a moment of fury is a much lesser crime than throwing a banana or making monkey chants at someone.

I think Rio and roberts should realise all the good that has been done by this campaign and not whinge on a personal level.

CSF

Patsy fyre wrote: »

Rio should know at this stage not to mess with fergie. Fergie will deal with him but hopefully not until after the chelsea game.
Odds on cashley and Rio shaking hands?

Oh not another week of this....

[Deleted User]

The pre match handshake is a load of nonsense.

It's a BS gesture for the cameras only.

aidan24326

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Theres no doubt its a much more interesting story because it's Ferdinand.

71-year-old white patriach tells all his employees exactly what way to act in a politially charged situation, but one of the young black male employees decides to act differently.
People now wonder whether the young black male will be fined, told not to come to work a few times, or even told he's being moved onto different employment.
Local newspapers unsure which way to leap as generally the word of the 71 year old white patriarch has been taken as gospel, but some appear to be having doubts now.

I haven't had this much entertainment since I left 1960s Alabama to be honest.

Why do people keep referring to the Ferdinands as being black? They're not! Go to Uganda or The Congo and you'll see black people. The Ferdinands do not qualify.

That's part of the problem, that everyone is so quick to put labels on people, like you have to be either 'white' or 'black' when in reality it's a continuous spectrum. But I guess that's a debate for a different forum.

CSF

aidan24326 wrote: »

Why do people keep referring to the Ferdinands as being black? They're not! Go to Uganda or The Congo and you'll see black people. The Ferdinands do not qualify.

That's part of the problem, that everyone is so quick to put labels on people, like you have to be either 'white' or 'black' when in reality it's a continuous spectrum. But I guess that's a debate for a different forum.

Inaccurate descriptions are probably the least of football's worries atm.

super_furry

I think Ferguson is fuming because Ferdinand made a fool of him. He had no business at all coming out with all that stuff against Jason Robert - he sat in a press conference mocking the man and then one of his own players does the exact same thing. If he does press the issue with Ferdinand it could get very, very messy.

Kess73

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Joleon Lescott and Kenwayne Jones also didn't wear the shirts. Are they dumb / angling for careers too?

They were DEAD ****ING RIGHT not to wear those silly shirts. The Kick It Out campaign is a busted flush. It clearly has not been effective in its stated aims. Wearing a shirt with that name on it is a pointless empty gesture, as are forced handshakes before games, etc.

People like simple statements because it allows them to nod their heads in approval and say 'oh, isn't that great'. Utter bollocks. Alex Ferguson mentioned on the MOTD interview that he felt 'embarrased' by Ferdinand's decision not to tow the line. His anger will be because he laid down a directive that wasn't obeyed. That is frankly irrelevant.

If you're genuinely against Racism, then you would see that what those players did today was absolutely correct. The KIO campaign is a joke. Either do something bold and meaningful, or do nothing at all imo.

You can throw in Shaun Wright Philips, Anton Ferdinand, Hoilett, and Anichebe as four more who refused to be told what to think and do. Plenty of other players over the weekend did the same and I just cannot understand anyone who tries to criticise them for it.

Think you have hit the nail on the head with this post.