Match Day Thread Premier League, Cups & Euro Watch

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Result...

  • Home win

  • Draw

  • Away win

Results are only viewable after voting.
sadiosalah said:
This is exactly what I meant in an earlier post. Thank you Diego for illustrating my point so graphically.

You not only don’t agree that the words are offensive. You go on the attack and say the people offended “NEED something to cause friction/feel offended about all the time.” So they feel offended to feel a better person. And you finish your rant with a flourish by calling these words “very trivial things”.

Can’t you even for a few seconds accept that although YOU don’t find the words offensive, OTHERS because of their background or history find them offensive and unacceptable? I said in an early post I find it difficult to accept how in a society why only certain views of life, society, justice, language have to be the only ones reasonable and others are not? Who are we to arbiter when someone should or should not be offended by a word? I can readily accept in good faith that many black people find the words Coloured players offensive and not at all trivial or a way to cause friction. Why can’t you without denigrating these people?
Click to expand...
This ^ really.

People who throw the word ‘woke’ around as some form of pejorative get on my wick tbh. They should maybe google the origins of the expression and it’s definition in current parlance. As being ‘woke’ is something we should all be, no?

Anyway, as for Gregg, the context of what he said and where he said it is the issue here. I’ve no idea whether Gregg is racist or has any racist bias, as I don’t know the man. However, what I do know, is that he went to Westminster to speak about diversity in football and used the word ‘coloured’ to describe BAME players and staff. I mean ffs, if that’s not a sign that the FA is out of touch then I don’t know what is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darwinism and Jimmy Squarefoot
Language changes over time and what was once acceptable, may not be now. The fact lots of people look to be offended as they think it makes them superior in some way as they feel they have caught someone out does not help.

Example:- if you read P G Woodhouse, Agatha Christie, Enid Blyton, or other authors of that time they often use the word "gay" as meaning happy. Characters may refer to having a "gay weekend", use that same expression in a novel nowadays and it would have a completely different meaning to most people.

As regards the original discussion "non-white" is probably the safest bet.
 
Bumps said:
In the way you have responded to Diego who really looked like he was trying to be careful how he articulated his words you have illustrated how difficult this is by dissecting every word and placing the narrative on it that you thinks serves in this scenario

Greg Clarke I believe was one of the FA board who was trying to get Paul Elliot on the FA board

he has made a mistake and apologised and explained straight away and yet people still want more and have tarred him with a brush.

do you believe that Greg Clarke is a racist ? Bearing in mind that is quite a serious accusation?

or do you believe he is a normal human who made a mistake

I have no idea how the decision to resign went down - maybe Mr. Clark was totally horrified that he had spoken in such a manner and felt that it was not appropriate for him to stay in position
If that is the case does he not warrant some sort of chance at redemption or are we saying one wrong comment and you are done ?

I have heard this question a number of times (not directly specifically at me and you more the point of the statement) but what happens when I am offended that you are offended ?
Very difficult topic
Click to expand...

it is difficult alright. But we shouldn’t stop discussing it just because it is.

Language is important. Because it is the window to someone’s attitude.

I honestly didn’t want to clobber Diego. He has the merit of being honest and say things as he feels them. I suspect he is from an older generation? I may be wrong. I really enjoy his football posts not least for being witty (on most occasions!)

Although I have no idea about Clarke’s real views on race and sex, I suspect he is not a hardcore racist. He is just part of an earlier generation as I said earlier which finds it difficult to take issues such as casual racism and LBGT as seriously as the younger ones. But as the leader who had to institute the necessary changes he had to go.

Reminds me of an issue I came across a few years ago. There was this older senior manager in charge of promoting and increasing flu vaccine uptake in their patch. During a meeting of the Immunisation committee with various professionals around the table, they said out of the blue that they never get vaccinated against flu because they personally “never had flu every winter and therefore didn’t feel it was necessary for them ”. Of course if that individual had not said that no one would have been any wiser but they did say it. How could anyone in such a leadership position carry on when they didn’t believe in vaccination 100%? Not exactly the same but you get the gist.
 
sadiosalah said:
it is difficult alright. But we shouldn’t stop discussing it just because it is.

Language is important. Because it is the window to someone’s attitude.

I honestly didn’t want to clobber Diego. He has the merit of being honest and say things as he feels them. I suspect he is from an older generation? I may be wrong. I really enjoy his football posts not least for being witty (on most occasions!)

Although I have no idea about Clarke’s real views on race and sex, I suspect he is not a hardcore racist. He is just part of an earlier generation as I said earlier which finds it difficult to take issues such as casual racism and LBGT as seriously as the younger ones. But as the leader who had to institute the necessary changes he had to go.

Reminds me of an issue I came across a few years ago. There was this older senior manager in charge of promoting and increasing flu vaccine uptake in their patch. During a meeting of the Immunisation committee with various professionals around the table, they said out of the blue that they never get vaccinated against flu because they personally “never had flu every winter and therefore didn’t feel it was necessary for them ”. Of course if that individual had not said that no one would have been any wiser but they did say it. How could anyone in such a leadership position carry on when they didn’t believe in vaccination 100%? Not exactly the same but you get the gist.
Click to expand...

This makes me laugh, the older generation, as if because he's a bit older hes suddenly must be out of touch. While it doesn't occur to you that the latest round of bollocks is just that.

What makes me laugh even more is one say, you will be the older generation looking on in bemusement at the latest trend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bumps
THE FOOL said:
This makes me laugh, the older generation, as if because he's a bit older hes suddenly must be out of touch. While it doesn't occur to you that the latest round of bollocks is just that.

What makes me laugh even more is one say, you will be the older generation looking on in bemusement at the latest trend.
Click to expand...
But he’s shown he’s out of touch by saying not one but many of these contentious phrases which someone in his position shouldn’t say. the alternative is worse <ok>
 
THE FOOL said:
This makes me laugh, the older generation, as if because he's a bit older hes suddenly must be out of touch. While it doesn't occur to you that the latest round of bollocks is just that.

What makes me laugh even more is one say, you will be the older generation looking on in bemusement at the latest trend.
Click to expand...
What is the ‘latest round of bollocks’ and the ‘latest trend’?
 
Solid_Air 2 said:
ooh this is a good game can i play
do you think there is difference between
a ) Person with a Disability .
b ) Disabled Person .
Click to expand...

I’ll have a go.

I will say (a) is more likely to be used and is more factual. (b) is more judgemental about the person.
 
THE FOOL said:
This makes me laugh, the older generation, as if because he's a bit older hes suddenly must be out of touch. While it doesn't occur to you that the latest round of bollocks is just that.

What makes me laugh even more is one say, you will be the older generation looking on in bemusement at the latest trend.
Click to expand...
I agree. I'm one of the "old white men" that are constantly vilified in this manner, so what happens if I'm offended by being pigeonholed as something based on my age and ethnicity? The hypocrisy is alarming.
I'm not racist and never was. People of my generation (and the previous one) were active in promoting social inclusivity and the principles of equality, and to be accused of being out of touch by people who apparently believe they invented the idea is unjust.
Yes, there were some of my contemporaries who were racist and probably still are, but this is true of subsequent generations, including the current one, so they have no right to adopt the moral high-ground here.
All of us need to be judged on what we do and say as individuals, not stereotyped in such a facile manner.
Prejudice works in many different ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Diego, THE FOOL, Solid Air and 2 others
Jimmy Squarefoot said:
The oppressor is celebrating the oppressed by using tools that were used during the oppression ...

It's like me beating the sh*t out of someone with a baseball bat and then celebrating a year later by waving around my baseball bat.
Click to expand...

Actually it's not imo

Its like some distant guy in the past beat the **** out of someone with a baseball bat, someone with no relation to you, how you think or what you believe, then you picking up a baseball bat instead of a pinata stick, unintentionally, and waving it, followed by your career getting the death sentence

This "identity" stuff is both ******ed and toxic.

It has made society more divisive than it has been for decades and drawn real racial lines in the sand.

(Now I guess this will be turned into me denying the historical or current issues relating to race)

No, I just disagree on how we address current issues, and be honest about what's racism and what is not racism

A decade of telling white kids they have privilege and black kids they are a victim, serves no one and only serves to draw divides. Men v Women, white v Non white, gay v straight Trans v non trans.

All of this has caused more mayhem than the actual problems we need to address

I also dont know how it serves to beat it into poor working class white kids that no one gives a **** about you. I really dont
I dont know how it serves to tell young black kids that everything is rigged against them to hold them back
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: saintanton
Liverpool defender Joe Gomez suffered an injury during training with England today. Gareth Southgate is likely to provide an update this evening at a press conference ahead of the Republic of Ireland game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back