Chelski fans in ****.

He's a student, they've embellished the city boy thing because he went to a private school in order to sensationalise it.

Also if you read the articles he's not actually been found to do anything, they just want to question him as a witness.

It's his career down the pisser, but for completely the wrong reasons.

 

Why though? We all know that's the generally accepted standard - anything goes as long as you don't mention race - but why?

Why is it not as bad to give worse abuse to this poster, assuming his account is accurate, just because it wasn't race related? What if they made some 'northerner' comment? Does that count?

I really struggle to understand this rule that anything race related is a lot worse than other forms of abuse.

I haven't seen the Paris video, but what really puzzles me is that it's people from London in a similarly multi cultural City. You almost expect it inside Italian, Spanish and Eastern European stadia where being black seems to be a real issue for a lot of the locals, but people from London of all places? Bizarre.

 

Septic Blatter is finally angry about racism! Oh but wait, it's because its English supporters!
He is a racist **** himself!
It wouldn't surprise me if he tries to get English teams banned again!

http://www1.skysports.com/football/...be-jailed-says-victim-of-abuse-on-paris-metro

 

It's like listening to myself, I had to fill out a 'diversity survey' at work last week asking what religion race etc

I filled out all 15 questions as 'prefer not to say' for exactly the reason you say above, it shouldn't matter as long as I am the best person for my job.

 

There's a religious pamphlet called The Link dropped through our door every month (religiously), which advertises the local Christian Kids Club which for some reason is abbreviated to KKK. Always makes me chuckle. It would make more sense to abbreviate it to CCC but I can only assume that they don't want to be associated with such shady organisations as the Committee on Climate Change.

 

Where did they racially abuse that man?

he himself said he couldn't understand what they were saying

and a small song surely doesn't mean a racist attack occured does it?

 

They abused him by pushing him about, then by singing what they did, pretty much stated that it was racially motivated.

 

but where is the racism

surely it's not just the fact it's a black man..

and a pissed up section of fans singing a song doesn't show or prove racism

 

Or Cambridgeshire County Council or any cricket club whose name starts with a C. All dodgy outfits.

 

Are you really that ****ing stupid?

 

That dog has had it's day.

 

Most of those shown are just typical pack - ers. Those who run with the pack and grow balls in a pack.

The main culprit is the fat bloke who looks like Odd Job. Instead of being a racist maybe he would be better served eating a few salads. Once found he should be handed over the the French and when they have finished with him passed onto Jihadi John. No place for people like that in this country.

 

And sad. Though I know from having had to travel up to London on match days that a lot of Chelsea supporters don't actually live there.

 

the fat bloke was in the carriage behind the incident with the black man

and show me proof Brucebones

 

Nope. He is in the front and you can see him push the black man out.