To be fair to Suarez, his racism was a one-off and ambiguous at best, unlike Terry's for example, who for some reason never gets mentioned as a racist anymore. And to call him a cannibal is exaggeration in the extreme. Since his ban he's been impeccably behaved and his performances have been unbelievable. If Rodgers thinks he's captain material (again, Terry's captaincy is never questioned) who are we to argue? And Adkins wasn't treated that badly, get over it already!
"Racist cannibal" = businessman making decisions that he things is best for a business? Interesting concept. Vin
I have suspicions about the intent of the OP, but I will answer the question. Nigel will always be remembered so he is a club legend in that sense. Sacking him may have been harsh but turned out to be justified. However, I don't equate business decisions (where the person was recompensed) with a lack of morality. I do care about how the players and other staff behave. I want to be proud of all of them. I would hope that Nicola would value the reputation of the club if an employee was guilty of a dire crime like racism or rape.
I say that is a bit below the belt old chap especially in response to good old PompeyLapras who seems a thoroughly decent sort. I thought this "let us be beastly to Pompey" nonsense had stopped now that they don't matter anymore.
I disagree...the fact we are shocked about match fixing tells you that. Cycling, boxing, horse racing at least must be worse than football. Mike Tyson is a prime example of someone who should have been dropped like a stone and never seen again. Drug taking is/was endemic in cycling. Doping is happening now in horse racing.
Sorry....I have finally broken...the word the OP was looking for was morals. There are no problems with morale at our club.
I disagree. There are quite a lot of them around. It is a very common Spanish surname. What the OP actually meant was morals but as he used to bunk off from English and Logic lessons at school he never quite got the hang of spelling or reasoning.
Sorry PL you left the door so wide open....... WLW........Why on earth would you call a man a legend because he did good things in a short time? NA was a good manager for Saints and he did do great things for us in a short time. However to be a legend you do these kind of things over and over again whether it be cups or championships over a long time. Ferguson, Shankly, Ted bates and even Mcmenomy (Sorry probably spelt his name wrong as I always have) You would consider legends because they achieved special things. Which included promotions from lower leagues but with an awful lot more besides. Moral issues do not and can not form part of every day footballing issues, Racism aside that is. Moral issues are part and parcel of every day life. If every professional footballer was subject of a moral crusade not too many would make the international scene ever, or even be close to a proper career. Racism is a different kettle of fish.......sadly there are so many different angles considered to be racist it is very difficult to clearly understand some things given that label. I guess what I am saying is what is racist to one would not necessarily be for another! Suarez's kind of racialism needs to be stamped out and by and large is being dealt with. He served his punishment and the world got the message and the message is continually being taught ask Jack Wilshire. So to continue to call someone a racist after receiving and serving a punishment is a moral issue in itself in my view its done, dusted, a single incident, dealt with and it should now be history, again in my view.
Yeah, football is hardly unique here. Off the top of my head boxing has had Mike Tyson (convicted rapist) and Don King (found guilty of murder), the NFL has Michael Vick (dog fighting), various entertainers have been convicted of a variety of crimes and gone on to continue their careers. I'm not saying morals are irrelevant but I don't look to football or footballers for moral guidance. Similarly, I don't look to moral philosophers for entertainment.
Getting a bit confused now between "morale' and "moral" which mean two completely different things. In answer to the question - yes. Or is that - no? I've forgotten.
Suarez explained it by saying that the term was in common use in his country and is merely descriptive...a bit disingenuous as I'm sure that he must have used it in an insulting manner as he was angry. However, we must remember that the word used does mean black in Spanish. Partially understandable, whereas Terry had no excuse apart from the fact that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree and his family are a bit rough. He should have risen above it by now.
Whether a wind up or not the thread does throw up interesting questions. I don't know Mr Cortese neither do I intend to criticise him. The bigger issues raised are concerned with professional sport in general. I play tennis every week. It's a friendly game of doubles that is very competitive whilst we are playing and has dinner in the pub afterwards riding on it. It also depends on the honesty and integrity of all four of us to make the game meaningful. I fully trust my partner and our opponents to make line calls honestly. This trust has enhanced friendships, one of the reasons for playing sport. Once professionalism/gamesmanship overtakes the integrity of the individual player or team, where the questions are what can I get away with, how can I bend the rules, if I cheat will I get caught, the endeavour involved becomes in my view a game rather than a sport. Professional football in these terms is definitely a game rather than a sport. I, and I speak for no one else, find this reasoning uncomfortable. Why do I entertain what I consider to be ethically bankrupt standards in football when I couldn't live with myself if I were to entertain such standards in my private life? It throws up a number of potential reasons that need to be considered: 1. That I need to feel part of a tribal entity that has a shared goal and crucially, following Saints provides this feeling in spades. 2. The game itself provides a metaphor for much that I experience, although cricket probably manages this more eloquently. 3.Having played football to a reasonable standard I can relate to what's trying to be achieved at a sporting level. 4. It provides a platform for good communication between myself (62), my father (99) and my son (33). 5. It is one of the conduits through which many long standing friendships have been maintained. 6. Moments of sublime skill that have artistic value in their own right. To name but a few... but yet.. There is no doubt I feel a disgust when confronted with the blatant cheating that is part and parcel of the modern game. Racism and homophobia live on in football, just below the surface, as they do in society. The greed of many involved in the game is at best unedifying and probably corrupting. The treatment of the ordinary fans as second class citizens, herded from here to there, changing times of performance to suit TV at short notice without due regard to fans' travelling arrangements. Add to these, refereeing of a standard that regularly beggars belief it is a wonder that I still go. Yet Annie and I spend upwards of £1300 on season tickets, look forward to every game. It's our 'soap'. If my uncomfortableness with the ethics of football highlight personal contradictions I hope they do not amount to hypocrisy.. If you have bothered to read all this, then I wish you warmest seasonal greetings and a peaceful new year. It's always a forum worth reading.
Tiggermaster take a bow . F1 is my First Love in sport , and what I have highlighted is exactly why I stopped going to races . But it applies everywhere . Hope you and yours have a great festive season as well .
