no balls Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 And I just thought it was because kids idolised footballers and wanted to play like them, as happened in my childhood. I wasn't aware it was social engineering. Blimey. Quote
dingdangdo Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Right, here is the basic line of attack according to many racial awareness sessions I get at work. The same also applies in other forms of bullying. Someone verbally attacks you > you feel upset, angry or threatened by that verbal attack > you speak to the person making the verbal attack > he stops making the verbal attack and apologises to you Someone verbally attacks you > you feel upset, angry or threatened by that verbal attack > you speak to the person making the verbal attack > he continues the attack > you then speak to a person higher up the employment ladder (his line manager or a supervisor maybe)> that line manager or supervisor investigates whether the verbal attack took place and deals with the situation as he sees fit. The first scenario isn't normally a problem unless it all starts again a short time later. The second is exactly what happened, in basic terms, to Suarez. Can you really compare your workplace with a competitive highly charged football match? The main objective on the pitch is to compete and win - by fair means or fowl. Normal rules of engagement cant easily be applied. And avoid racial awareness classes at all costs. Bunk off and read Mill, Voltaire or Marx. The idea that you run and tell the boss is bad. The idea that a racial awareness class will make you more racially aware is a non starter. Top down social engineering in yet another form. Quote
Ani Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Well, for a start, if it was coloured, he'd need to apologise. Black people don't like the term coloured. Half-caste is not acceptable. It is known as mixed-race. This where things get blurred for me, referring to someone as coloured is a turn of phrase that I am not sure when it became offensive, if you are going to make your fortune as a TV broadcaster I suppose you have a duty to keep upto date on the latest 'rules'. I can see why this winds people up as political correctness. As a one off Hansen has apologised and that it is the end of the matter. Suarez has used words that are offensive, not denied it, just said it means something else where he comes from. When you live in a country you have to abide by the rules of the country. Unless people are arguing that these immigrants should also be allowed to bring their own laws and rules into Britain.......................... Quote
Ani Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Can you really compare your workplace with a competitive highly charged football match? The main objective on the pitch is to compete and win - by fair means or fowl. Normal rules of engagement cant easily be applied. And avoid racial awareness classes at all costs. Bunk off and read Mill, Voltaire or Marx. The idea that you run and tell the boss is bad. The idea that a racial awareness class will make you more racially aware is a non starter. Top down social engineering in yet another form. Do you accept that such behaviour is unacceptable in the workplace though ? Quote
no balls Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 The main objective on the pitch is to compete and win - by fair means or fowl. Really? So, why are the refs there? Or in an egalitarian world will there be no need for any? Quote
barryk32 Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 I've not bothered reading this as Suarez didn't really interest me. My curiosity as to why it had turned into a ten pager got the better of me though. What an absolute plum you are Dingle. You surely are on the wind up, you can't honestly believe what you are writing. Are you Seb Blatter? Quote
chief wiggum Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) This where things get blurred for me, referring to someone as coloured is a turn of phrase that I am not sure when it became offensive, if you are going to make your fortune as a TV broadcaster I suppose you have a duty to keep upto date on the latest 'rules'. I can see why this winds people up as political correctness. As a one off Hansen has apologised and that it is the end of the matter. Suarez has used words that are offensive, not denied it, just said it means something else where he comes from. When you live in a country you have to abide by the rules of the country. Unless people are arguing that these immigrants should also be allowed to bring their own laws and rules into Britain.......................... A pretty poor excuse, he's come here from playing in Holland for three years, a country as multi-ethnic as ours. And he plays for Liverpool, the city with possibly the most long-standing black population of any in Britain. He's not just landed from Montevideo airport and been put on the pitch. He knew exactly what he was saying. Edited January 2, 2012 by chief wiggum Quote
Traf Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Surely when Kuyt walks over, he should have just said:"Shut the fuck up Luis, you're the wrong side of beige yourself!" That would have sorted it. Quote
Guest Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Surely when Kuyt walks over, he should have just said:"Shut the fuck up Luis, you're the wrong side of beige yourself!" That would have sorted it. Looking for "ecru", I think? Quote
SpiritofBurnden Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Why would the pitch suddenly become a bloodbath? Did we have bloodbaths prior to the plethora of anti racist codes of conduct when racism was a real social problem? There were hardly any black players back then and the ones that played were routinely subjected to racist abuse and expected to put up with it. The situation gradually got better because of anti-discrimination laws and because the F.A. started to take it seriously, not because players spent most of their time chinning each other. Quote
SpiritofBurnden Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Good point - and I know racism in Spain is more prevalent than here - but you can't say that the specific problems in Spain are caused by a lack of authoritarian intervention. The problem in Spain is more deeply rooted in Spanish culture and society. It's more 'deeply rooted' because the authorities there have done fuck all to eradicate it. You said earlier that 'The fact that racism in football is virtually non existent nowadays has everything to do with the integration of black people into everyday society and the success of black players', but this integration is a direct result of anti-discrimination laws, not because racists suddenly decided not to be racist anymore. Samuel Eto'o is a successful black player. Take a look at how that success protected him from racist abuse: Perhaps he should have just waded into the crowd and started chinning them... Quote
Traf Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Looking for "ecru", I think? Possibly, but I seem to have temporarily mislaid my foreign footballers pantone chart. Quote
bolty58 Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Still believe this is massively overblown and am disappointed that no one has seen fit to comment on the disparity in punishment between Suarez and Keane. The money side of it I can see (although I am not sure todays footballers are earning 10 times what Keane was). It's the 3 game ban v. 8 game ban I am struggling with when one considers the 3 game ban was for a career ending tackle delivered with absolute intent and the 8 game ban is for calling someone a nasty name. Quote
Guest Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Still believe this is massively overblown and am disappointed that no one has seen fit to comment on the disparity in punishment between Suarez and Keane. The money side of it I can see (although I am not sure todays footballers are earning 10 times what Keane was). It's the 3 game ban v. 8 game ban I am struggling with when one considers the 3 game ban was for a career ending tackle delivered with absolute intent and the 8 game ban is for calling someone a nasty name. I can agree with this. Racial incitement or "calling someone a nasty name"? Keane should have been banned for longer (if the laws allowed that at the time) Suarez's 8 matches seems about right Quote
frank_spencer Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 Still believe this is massively overblown and am disappointed that no one has seen fit to comment on the disparity in punishment between Suarez and Keane. The money side of it I can see (although I am not sure todays footballers are earning 10 times what Keane was). It's the 3 game ban v. 8 game ban I am struggling with when one considers the 3 game ban was for a career ending tackle delivered with absolute intent and the 8 game ban is for calling someone a nasty name. Keanes tackle didn't end Haaland's career though. It was the other leg that caused him to retire not the one Keane savaged. JSL Quote
anewman Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 I dread to think what would happen next time I call shrek err sorry rooney a fat granny shagging scouse twat fuckin ridiculous Quote
frank_spencer Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 I dread to think what would happen next time I call shrek err sorry rooney a fat granny shagging scouse twat fuckin ridiculous have fat granny shagging scouse twats been subject to years of persecution based soley on the colour of their skin? Quote
dingdangdo Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 It's more 'deeply rooted' because the authorities there have done fuck all to eradicate it. Not strictly true http://www.uefa.com/uefa/socialresponsibility/antiracism/news/newsid=383840.html#spains+battle+against+racism Quote
anewman Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 have fat granny shagging scouse twats been subject to years of persecution based soley on the colour of their skin? well I'd rather come from africa than liverpool Quote
frank_spencer Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 well I'd rather come from africa than liverpool Can't argue with that. Quote
jayjayoghani Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) Keanes tackle didn't end Haaland's career though. It was the other leg that caused him to retire not the one Keane savaged. JSL not quite sure how an injury to one knee can affect the other but..... Haaland's retirement was confirmed in 2003 and even though it was his left knee that would not respond to surgery and treatment he has always believed Keane's tackle on his right was the root cause. Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz1iJ9ARGC5 Oh yeah. Keane initially got a 3 match ban for the foul. Once he subsequently admitted pre-meditation, he got an additional 5 games. Edited January 2, 2012 by jayjayoghani Quote
dingdangdo Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 It's more 'deeply rooted' because the authorities there have done fuck all to eradicate it. You said earlier that 'The fact that racism in football is virtually non existent nowadays has everything to do with the integration of black people into everyday society and the success of black players', but this integration is a direct result of anti-discrimination laws, not because racists suddenly decided not to be racist anymore. Samuel Eto'o is a successful black player. Take a look at how that success protected him from racist abuse: Perhaps he should have just waded into the crowd and started chinning them... I'll accept that the law has a role to play in tackling racism - but let's not confuse laws for words and deeds. There's a massive difference. Laws that focus on words are a waste of time. It's the deeds that matter. So if you want to discuss racist imigration laws then fine - but laws on the effects of racism - language - don't tackle racism at all - that's my point. We don't need laws to tell us what to think or what to say - you can't legislate thought - you can legislate against discrimination. The example of Eto is a good one - he did indeed suffer racist abuse - but he should have dealt with it like the great black footballing pioneers of the past - by shutting them up with his performance on the pitch. To say the anti racist industry tackled racism in football stadia is to decry the fantastic success of the likes of John Barnes, Luther Blisset and good old Jay Jay in dealing with the problem. Footballers are encouraged to be victims by the anti racist industry - that's a problem in and of itself. Quote
SpiritofBurnden Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 We don't need laws to tell us what to think or what to say - you can't legislate thought - you can legislate against discrimination. The example of Eto is a good one - he did indeed suffer racist abuse - but he should have dealt with it like the great black footballing pioneers of the past - by shutting them up with his performance on the pitch. To say the anti racist industry tackled racism in football stadia is to decry the fantastic success of the likes of John Barnes, Luther Blisset and good old Jay Jay in dealing with the problem. How does that even begin to address the issue? John Barnes had bananas lobbed at him at away grounds and he was barracked when he played for England. The fact that he ignored it, didn't cause it to stop. You legislate against racism by reminding people that there are consequences to their actions. It might not change the way they think, but it will prevent them from infecting the next generation and it's the next generation that will ultimately ensure that the problem doesn't re-emerge. Quote
MalcolmW Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 It's not one man's word against another. Evra's evidence was consistent. Suarez changed his story more than once when he was challenged. (But Evra also thought the referee cheated him at the toss!) Quote
dingdangdo Posted January 2, 2012 Posted January 2, 2012 How does that even begin to address the issue? John Barnes had bananas lobbed at him at away grounds and he was barracked when he played for England. The fact that he ignored it, didn't cause it to stop. You legislate against racism by reminding people that there are consequences to their actions. It might not change the way they think, but it will prevent them from infecting the next generation and it's the next generation that will ultimately ensure that the problem doesn't re-emerge. The fact that John Barnes and many others like him chose to fight racism with their skill did indeed have a positive effect on challenging racism on the terraces. You undermine their heroic contribution to claim otherwise. And the legislation of words and thought (which are qualitatively different than actions) has no limits. Be careful what you wish for my friend. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.