Alex Ferguson on Ferdinand and Roberts

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 01:01AM

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 08:58AM

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 09:31AM

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 09:59AM

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 01:04PM

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...

Pro. F · 24-10-2012 01:08PM

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 confusing 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?

Drumpot wrote: »

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.

You say that Suarez was using it to wind up Evra yet you doubt that he was racially abusing him. You clearly don't even understand what you are saying yourself.

Punishing people who racially abuse others is of course dealing with the problem. Anybody used to be able to sling racial abuse in football grounds, now anybody caught is punished.

Drumpot wrote: »

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 . .

Use of racially abusive words does not carry the same punishment as racially abusive actions. So the rest of society agrees with you on that point you are just completely uninformed about the facts of the matter.

Slagging somebody's mother and generally insulting language is also punishable under FA regulations as well.

Football in England has zeroed in on racism, hooliganism and fan safety because those were the biggest issues facing the game (society and football is mostly ignoring homophobia for now unfortunately). Quite a good job has been done on all three. And while hooliganism is probably the issue that still causes the most problems it doesn't follow that we should give up on the other issues.

With regards to your last paragraph, so now you want the FA to do more about racist abuse, not less? You are so confused it's funny.

24-10-2012 01:15PM

Is it not racist to give black coaches more opportunities just because there is a perceived lack of them? Clubs have shown that if the coaches have the right qualifications they have no problems hiring them. Sure if anything Paul Ince was under qualified when there was a big deal about hiring him. I'd be very against anything like this new directive that seems to be counter racist. The best should rise to the top, regardless of their colour and I haven't seen any evidence of black coaches being discriminated against with regards to hiring.

Pro. F · 24-10-2012 02:21PM

Liam O wrote: »

Is it not racist to give black coaches more opportunities just because there is a perceived lack of them?

No it is not. Positive discrimination makes no judgement on whether one race is superior to another, racism does.

Liam O wrote: »

...I haven't seen any evidence of black coaches being discriminated against with regards to hiring.

There is clear evidence that black coaches are underrepresented in management roles compared to all other aspects of football. Whether that underrepresention is caused by discrimination or self selection or something else is another matter. A period of positive discrimination could fix the balance. It has worked quite well in the USA.

Drumpot · 24-10-2012 03:02PM

Pro. F wrote: »

Again you are confusing 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?

You say that Suarez was using it to wind up Evra yet you doubt that he was racially abusing him. You clearly don't even understand what you are saying yourself.

Punishing people who racially abuse others is of course dealing with the problem. Anybody used to be able to sling racial abuse in football grounds, now anybody caught is punished.

Use of racially abusive words does not carry the same punishment as racially abusive actions. So the rest of society agrees with you on that point you are just completely uninformed about the facts of the matter.

Slagging somebody's mother and generally insulting language is also punishable under FA regulations as well.

Football in England has zeroed in on racism, hooliganism and fan safety because those were the biggest issues facing the game (society and football is mostly ignoring homophobia for now unfortunately). Quite a good job has been done on all three. And while hooliganism is probably the issue that still causes the most problems it doesn't follow that we should give up on the other issues.

With regards to your last paragraph, so now you want the FA to do more about racist abuse, not less? You are so confused it's funny.

Where did I say Suarez was not racially abusing Evra ? Please quote me on that . . I said the incident that happened is not the same as somebody with actual hatred for Black people saying the same thing and that you cannot say the two incidents are the same.

I am not going round in circles because you simply dont get it. If you think the FA are dealing with racism seriously and properly then good look to you. . FIFA are dealing with "fair play" properly too I suppose . .

The FA will and always has done things arse ways. It chooses high profile cases (like picking out clubs like United etc) and high profile players to try and create an air of change. Nothing wrong with that, but they never back it up with progressive strategies. .

All this focus on the racist comments actually seem to be dividing opinion, not uniting people. I have consistantly said that there are more pressing matters that football needs to respond to then racism. I dont believe racist comments on the park are the most important things that need to be fixed in the game and I stand over what I said about being in english football grounds. Just because you over police specific games, doesnt mean it will change the behaviour or hatred of fans and the amount of games I have been at over the years where i feel intimidated even as a home supporter is ridiculous.

I never once said racism shouldnt be stamped out (you are free to quote me where I did) , nor did I say it wasnt important, what I said was that this is overkill and there are more important aspects of football that need attention then what one player says to another. I dont believe clubs or managers (in the main) act in anyway racist towards black players and most players act the same with black players as they do with white ones.

I am certainly not confused as to where I stand on the issue, I just dont get sucked into the hyperbole mainstream western media that is full of its own self importance and loves nothing better then to blow up trivial incidents that somehow proves its got a moral consciounce when every other time it doesnt give two sh*ts about the thing its trying to expose.

If calling a player a "Black cnut" is the worse that racism is in England at the moment, then it is not a huge issue in the game. Thats not to say it shouldnt be eradicated, but like I said, I would much prefer they focused on trying to force/educate fans and penalise clubs for the vicious acts in the stands.

I also made it clear that banning players for saying racist comments is not going far enough in the game if they truely want to eradicate racism from the game. I was saying that the agression that goes on in grounds every week should be the priority. While they have made progress, it isnt being targeted as much as it should be and I think the whole "what did that player say" discussion is doing little to focus on that issue.

You keep quoting FA regulations, but you need only watch a tv match to see how players react to opponents or officials in specific incidents. While the rules might be there, they certainly are not observed in the mainstream. It goes back to the point that it seems that racist insults are taken seriously, pretty much everything else goes (but technically its not supposed to). Like Zidanes motive for headbutting Materazzi, generally there was widespread feeling that Materazzi took the bait ( as opposed to Materazzi doing anything wrong) because thats a part of the game.

Singling out black people for protection is hypocricy because it suggests that they are deserving of more protection then those who might be on the same end of a differant kind of abuse. It also ignores the bigger problem in football that is in the stands and continues to be in the stands even if the english media dont report much on it . . There is a rotten culture in football and racism is just a part of it.

Anyways, each to their own . . Sorry I dont share mainstream conventional wisdom that this is getting to the heart of the problem, as far as Im concerned its skating around it and is now threatening to open up a divide between black and white footballers because of the FAs inconsistant stance . .

Pro. F · 24-10-2012 03:57PM

Drumpot wrote: »

Where did I say Suarez was not racially abusing Evra ? Please quote me on that . .

I said that you doubted that Suarez was racially abusing Evra. Here is the quote where you were doubting that Suarez was racially abusing Evra:

Drumpot wrote: »

Do you really think a latino south American was racially abusing Evra ?

This is just another example of your inability to carry on a discussion. I'm not going to respond to the rest of your post because it is just a continuation of your confused, self contradictory, uninformed rambling nonsense. I'm done humouring you for now.

niallo27 · 24-10-2012 04:26PM

Pro. F wrote: »

I said that you doubted that Suarez was racially abusing Evra. Here is the quote where you were doubting that Suarez was racially abusing Evra:

This is just another example of your inability to carry on a discussion. I'm not going to respond to the rest of your post because it is just a continuation of your confused, self contradictory, uninformed rambling nonsense. I'm done humouring you for now.

I love the way you manage to insult the poster as well as giving your reply, your really quite good at it i must say. Well done you.

CSF · 24-10-2012 04:38PM

niallo27 wrote: »

I love the way you manage to insult the poster as well as giving your reply, your really quite good at it i must say. Well done you.

He is bang on the mark though.

niallo27 · 24-10-2012 05:06PM

CSF wrote: »

He is bang on the mark though.

He may well be, but why he feels to act like a dick and talk down to posters who have a different view to him.

Pro. F · 24-10-2012 05:26PM

niallo27 wrote: »

I love the way you manage to insult the poster as well as giving your reply, your really quite good at it i must say. Well done you.

niallo27 wrote: »

He may well be, but why he feels to act like a dick and talk down to posters who have a different view to him.

I don't talk down to posters just because they have a different view to me. I disagree with plenty of posters and still keep it civil with them. I just don't have unlimited patience for dealing with stupid arguments.

What I said about Drumpot and his argument is evidently true and it is perfectly reasonable to say as much. If somebody wants to talk nonsense and post incoherent arguments then it is fair to call them on that.

niallo27 · 24-10-2012 05:36PM

Pro. F wrote: »

I don't talk down to posters just because they have a different view to me. I disagree with plenty of posters and still keep it civil with them. I just don't have unlimited patience for dealing with stupid arguments.

What I said about Drumpot and his argument is evidently true and it is perfectly reasonable to say as much. If somebody wants to talk nonsense and post incoherent arguments then it is fair to call them on that.

You do though, you have done it to me and several posters on here, you make great points and your obviously an intelligent guy, just leave out the snide ****e.

Alex Ferguson on Ferdinand and Roberts

Comments