have to agree with the negative comments about the "respect" campaign. Without strong action on the pitch, and by the FA it means nothing, and is just a cost with no benefit. Perhaps when a premiership game is abandonned because 5 players from one team have been sent off for foul and abusive language and/or dissent by word or action it might be taken seriously, but when the FA suspend the customary handshake at a premiership game because too many players will refuse to shake Terry's hand, then there is no real force of conviction behind the FA's campaign. there are laws within the game to deal with this, and if refs had the courage to use them, and the FA the courage to back the refs against SKY, and ranting managers the game would start to be a better place!
The campaign IS about trying to change people's behaviour, but at the other end of the game, the grass roots. The problem is that at the top end of the game it is treated as a PR excercise as you say, and the FA have no teeth.
I have no knowledge of Jay-Z but I'll take a guess. If members of the same race, or any group who can be prejudiced against, use a word that an outsider would use in a derogatory manner, then the meaning changes significantly. Its not the word itself but the values that support it that are important.
Of course, I was merely responding to your assertion that "That to me is a word that only someone with racist views would use", which you now seem to contradict.
I think the FA have the teeth, its the 'balls' they lack. As soon as the refs start sending off loads of people, the pundits start moaning that they are ruining the game. This has happened before when refs starting actually applying the laws. For example, they introduced the 10 yard law i.e. moving a free kick 10 yards further forward for dissent. I can only remember it being applied on a couple of occasions and then usually in a nom-contraversial part of the pitch. I don't even know if that is still in existence. It beats me that in rugby league the players sprint to get 10 yards away from a restart; in rugby union referees are still called 'Sir' etc. Why can't this sort of behaviour happen in footie? Going back to the Terry case, whatever is the outcome, the FA have to start dealing with issues and not turning a blind eye. Whether it is racism, managers having a go at officials during and after a game, diving, feigning injury, whatever. Fatletiss is right of course, kids copy the top people and it will just go-on forever if nothing is done.
I think you are being a tad pedantic here. Yes, you are technically correct but I am not contradicting myself. I was referring to a white person using it in reference to a black person which I hope most people recognised and understood.
It was brought in as a trial and later dropped, the main problem was that the 10 yards forward had to be accompanied with a booking for dissent, which was rarely an issue. Plus there were problems that free kicks were being moved to less advantageous positions. I don't get the whole "refs sending loads of players off" argument, last year I got through a whole Southampton Saturday League season with 1 red card (violent conduct) and only 2 or 3 for dissent. And if someone called me Sir I'd probably tell them to shut it
You could say that, just wanted to be clear about what you meant. So you stand by your assertion that Atkinson is a racist because he used the n-word, but you also say that Terry isn't a racist despite using the words "****ing black ****"? Can you explain the difference?
I'll try but don't forget that I don't actually know what either of them really meant when they made the statements it is just how I perceive it. To me, using the 'N' word as Atkinson did was something one would say without really thinking at all. This implies that for him to even have that word in his vocabulary there is some underlying racist view. Of course it was a word that used to be spoken far more often so you could argue that it was just a generational thing. I don't accept that, its not a word I use and its not a word my father would have used. Terry was just trying to wind someone up, or was responding to being wound up himself. He was trying to get a reaction and he succeeded although I doubt in the way he intended! I can't explain it any better. If you don't agree, fair enough.
Ok thanks for the explanation, and I see your point, it's not exactly a word I instinctively reach for either. But as you say Atkinson is an older guy and has spent his life in an environment where he would have heard, and perhaps used, that word frequently. It's shocking to us, but in Atkinson's time and/or social circles (notwithstanding the fact he worked with many black players) it is probably not out of the ordinary. It could be said it is equally a matter of social standing and the circles you mix with as it is of age. We know that in football in particular a lot of this kind of language was used. Of course, this is regrettable and he should be ashamed of his ignorance, but I think he said it in this sense, it was ignorance rather than malice. Whereas looking at that video of Terry, it is hard to see anything other than malice. I know he was engaging in 'banter' or 'handbags' or whatever you want to call it, and a certain degree of verbal abuse is forgivable on a football pitch (another argument perhaps!) but he can't claim to be ignorant in the same way that Atkinson can. He is a young man who works in a modern, cosmopolitan environment and must be aware of the issue of race, particularly considering the incident between Suarez and Evra had happened just a week earlier. I'm not saying I think he is a racist (although I wouldn't necessarily go as far as to say I think he isn't, either) but either he uses this sort of language routinely, or he singled out Ferdinand for particular abuse, and to me, either of those scenarios is equally reprehensible.
Well, that explains why I haven't seen it recently. I don't want to see loads of players sent off either. What I do want is to see the laws of the game properly applied, and for everyone to respect the decision, and to stop the cheating. If it takes sendings off to achieve that then sobeit. I am also a qualified ref by the way and I never sent anyone off. My experience of local football was the occasional "for ***** sake ref" and some rather dodgy tackling at times. Maybe I got lucky, but I never had any outright abuse and I never saw anyone diving or feigning injury. Of course that was a few years ago. I recently ran the line in a game and got no abuse whatsoever form the players but the supporters didn't hold back!
Agreed. I think he's an overpaid plonker who probably thought he was above the law if you know what I mean. Its as if footballers think they can get away with anything without consequences. Anyway, too much of me on this thread. I really ought to be working.
The trouble for me is what is a racist? There is obvious things one can do to be considered racist...but what of the not so obvious. My understanding of the law today is that you cannot refer to a Person of a different colour by that colour. You can refer to them by their nationality, IE African or maybe Jamaican or maybe Asian or even Indian. However get the race wrong and you are back in the racist corner!!! Maybe not the best example but one that for sure is easily to fall into. I think to be fair a lot of so called racist remarks can be deemed as racist by someone that is sensitive to that kind of remark. In my young day we whitey's were known as Honkies and Jamaicans as nig-nogs or goliwogs! I don't ever remember any one saying either was racist. In this day and age either could be taken to court I guess and would be considered racist or at least a racist remark! I was talking to some of my Jamaican buddies about this only a few weeks ago. These are guys who are the same age as me and I have known for maybe 60 years. They were saying that it depended a lot on how something was said and in what context. They said they could always tell by the way someone was talking to them if the person had a "racist chip on their shoulder" (their words not mine) with out that person actually making a racist remark or action. They also acknowledged strangely that a few of their "younger brothers" Also had some kind of chip on their shoulders and would openly taunt white people too. They also reckoned they thought people of today where rather soft and sensitive and that the recognition of something said in haste rather than being and out and out racist remark was being over looked. To be fair to us as a nation I don't think we are not tolerant of different races and I think it is a very very small minority that have some sort of difficulty. I therefore think under different circumstances this Ferdinand/Terry thing may have just died a death but for the previous Liverpool players antics. I am not sure what Ferdinand is likely to gain out of this at all. Or is it just another one of those "we must make an example of this incident" despite it being witnessed by just a couple of people. Maybe there again it is just me. I don't understand what it is like to be on the end of a racist remark and I suspect most of us who write on here don't. Finally I hope no body has taken offence at my offering it has been made as a discussion point only and not directed at any religion, race or creed.
Latest is Mr Ferdinand told the court that initially he did not think any racist terms had been used. But after the match, his girlfriend at the time played him a YouTube clip and he changed his mind. The QPR defender told the court that if he had realised at the time he would have told officials. "I would have been obviously very hurt and I probably wouldn't have reacted at the time because, being a professional, you can't do that. "I probably would have let the officials know what happened and dealt with it after the game," he said. "When someone brings your colour into it, it takes it to another level and it's very hurtful." Not sure this helps either player really.
Beddy, I don't think you would be accused of racism for mistaking someone's nationality, although you might offend them. For example a Scot might look superficially like an Englishman, but would probably not take kindly to being referred to as English. I'm sure that most people are decent enough to forgive a genuine mistake and would not want to draw attention to themselves by accusing you of racism, although depending on the circumstances people can take offence and the reason might not be immediately clear. But there's really no room for confusion if you use language like Terry (allegedly) did, and I'm sure even your very reasonable-sounding Jamaican friends would be offended by that!
Racism only exists because someone labels someone else as being somehow different, get rid of the tags, get rid of the abuse.
People are programmed to be wary of people who are different from them, just look at football fans! Awareness of that is the first step to overcoming it.
