Rival 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!
Rio Ferdinand comments about racist chanting heard at the England/San Marino game.

The chants were aimed at him and his brother.

By the England fans.

...and the story gets a tenth of the coverage it would've got if it was the Sammarise fans doing so.
 
Non-story if it isn't a United player. Politics played out in football. More character assisination of the (white) working class by the middle class under the say-so of the wealthy elite. Social control in its most meticulous form.
 
Anyone seen the Edgar Davids article in the Mail today? Most of their "footballer's football columns" are a bit **** but Davids tends to be at least amusing. He basically seems to say that he put his career in danger playing for the national team and didn't always want to but always made himself available because he felt it was his duty, so he did it. Seems to have been honoured whenever he was asked to play, and also insinuates the view that no player has a right to play for the country and be selected. England players take note.....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...-Playing-Holland-jeopardised-club-career.html

ALSO

I thought the articles currently on the DM website about the youth player culture in current clubs in interesting, how nowadays apparently the youth players have no/little respect and don't have the duties and responsibilities they used to have. Sign of the times I fear, what with lucrative pro contracts coming at such an early age now and the hype surrounding certain players.

Just realised I've praised the DM twice in one post there Think I'll go get my head checked now

FINALLY

I think this article (again from the Fail actually) pretty much sums up my views on the England 'racism' chants - ie from what's been reported that I've seen it's no really racism, 'just' abuse. If it was a pair of white players (or maybe not a United player and his brother) getting the flack would anyone care half as much, if at all? Of course they wouldn't. There'd probably he half a dozen articles in the papers endorsing if not the language used, then the sentiment at least.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...d-fans-guilty-racist-abuse-Rio-Ferdinand.html

Ok, having praised the DM 3 times I'm off for a strong drink and a lie down.

(I realise I've gone slightly off topic here, please forgive me)
 
I am at a total loss as to how the chants aimed at Rio and Anton Ferdinand are racist.

Claims like this totally undermine the very real work that needs to be done in society to overcome all forms of prejudice. To read articles in the British press about how "disgusting" this racism is enfuriates me given how xenophobic, homophobic, sexist and generally ******ed almost all papers are when it suits them (which is every day).

The Sun's anti-pornography "campaign" springs to mind. They wheel out parents of murdered kids (whose phone they hacked) to speak out about on-line porn (why?!) whilst saying that they "have no problem with nipples being on show" to make sure that we all understand that page 3 is exempt from the corrupting influence of porn on kids.

Or how about the publishing of sex-offenders' photos and general *****-hysteria around the time that the Sun had a countdown to Charlotte Church's 16th birthday?

Opportunistic, no-brain filth is what every tabloid trades in and it is a much greater problem to society than any chant that football supporters sing.

So **** off Oliver Holt: http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/england-sickening-chants-against-rio-1786627

You work for a ****ty paper whose sole aim is to make money by keeping people as thick as humanly possible.
 
Ferdinand's just trying to deflect the negative press that his decision to chase some more cash brought him, in my opinion.
He chose to do Ferguson's bidding and run after some money, rather than playing against some sub-standard opposition and then balked at the predictable reaction.
Pretty poor form all round, including the actual abuse itself, despite it carrying absolutely no apparent racist connotations.
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
Ferdinand's just trying to deflect the negative press that his decision to chase some more cash brought him, in my opinion.
He chose to do Ferguson's bidding and run after some money, rather than playing against some sub-standard opposition and then balked at the predictable reaction.
Pretty poor form all round, including the actual abuse itself, despite it carrying absolutely no apparent racist connotations.
Click to expand...

Can you imagine the press letting it pass by without comment in the papers the following day? (if it actually happened) Seems a dead end of a story to me.
 
If the abuse was simply directed at Rio for supposedly turning his back on England, then why include his brother Anton?

If you want to find a reason for the abuse- assuming it wasn't just mindless, as some of you must have done in concluding that it wasn't racist- then how can you look further than Anton's claims of racist abuse by Terry and the support given to him by his brother? What other reason could there be for apparently white England fans displaying such hostility against two black players they sing about burning on a bonfire?

Wake up, it wasn't even subtle.
 
What evidence is there that the fans were either white or Chelsea supporters?
Would it be racist if a black Liverpool fan altered the lyrics to include Gary Neville and his brother Phil?

Ferdinand was abused because he acted like a twat. There's absolutely no evidence to suggest otherwise.
 
littleDinosaurLuke said:
If the abuse was simply directed at Rio for supposedly turning his back on England, then why include his brother Anton?

If you want to find a reason for the abuse- assuming it wasn't just mindless, as some of you must have done in concluding that it wasn't racist- then how can you look further than Anton's claims of racist abuse by Terry and the support given to him by his brother? What other reason could there be for apparently white England fans displaying such hostility against two black players they sing about burning on a bonfire?

Wake up, it wasn't even subtle.
Click to expand...

Maybe not, but if Terry had ****ed England about like Ferdinand had, they would be singing similar songs about him and his reprobate family. To be fair England did Rio and United a favour dropping him in the first place. His body has not been up to a full programme AND internationals for a while now.

By the way, what is the breakdown of the ethnicity of travelling fans? I imagine they are overwhelmingly white, so that point is pretty redundant isn't it? They were displaying hostility against a player who thinks commentating on a game a game he should have been playing in (after a long flight which app arently he couldn't make with the team) is ok and knowing that he is protective of his brother sang about him too. Tasteful? No. Racist? No, not in this instance (although I have no time for any apologists for Terry's actions towards Anton or England's support for him subsequently.)

Just because Rio plays for United it doesn't mean he can't be called out for thinking he is bigger than England. United and its players and manager aren't always right Luke. I know it may seem like it but it just ain't true.
 
What do you mean "what evidence" PNP? The fans chanting were inside the stadium and can be identified on CCTV. Anecdotally, they were a group of white males, of that there is no doubt. There may have been others of different ethnic backgrounds present, possibly- the CCTV analysis will clarify that- but I don't think I'm sticking my neck out to say it was a group of white England fans singing about burning two black players. If Rio acted like a twat, what is the justification for the abuse of Anton?

The fans don't have to preface the chanting by explaining their motives for abusing these players for any observer to sensibly conclude that the abuse was based on racial hostility. If the abuse wasn't a reference wasn't to the Terry saga, then what was it about? Are we meant to give them the benefit of the doubt because they don't spell it out in the plainest terms? It wasn't exactly subtle though was it?

I think you're being very naive if you think the chanting should be dismissed as hostility towards Rio alone based on his withdrawal from the squad. It might be the excuse the offending fans want to hide behind as their justification, but who are they kidding? It hardly explains wanting to burn Anton too, does it? Why not Les instead? Or Scholes or Shearer or any number of players who called time on their England careers early? But then none of those had the temerity to complain about being racially abused by a white former England captain, did they?
 
You've given absolutely nothing to back up any of your claims, Lidls.
You've also ignored my question about the Neville brothers.

Ferdinand hasn't retired from England duty and I doubt he'd have faced such hostility had he done so.
He made some shoddy excuses for not turning up for these games in particular and then did something which appeared to contradict the reason that he gave for not attending.
His brother was included because he's his brother and he's famous or noteworthy, just as Beckham used to get abuse about his wife, Terry gets stick about his family, etc.
There's no reason to assume a racist agenda here, where none is evident.
 
littleDinosaurLuke said:
What do you mean "what evidence" PNP? The fans chanting were inside the stadium and can be identified on CCTV. Anecdotally, they were a group of white males, of that there is no doubt. There may have been others of different ethnic backgrounds present, possibly- the CCTV analysis will clarify that- but I don't think I'm sticking my neck out to say it was a group of white England fans singing about burning two black players. If Rio acted like a twat, what is the justification for the abuse of Anton?

The fans don't have to preface the chanting by explaining their motives for abusing these players for any observer to sensibly conclude that the abuse was based on racial hostility. If the abuse wasn't a reference wasn't to the Terry saga, then what was it about? Are we meant to give them the benefit of the doubt because they don't spell it out in the plainest terms? It wasn't exactly subtle though was it?

I think you're being very naive if you think the chanting should be dismissed as hostility towards Rio alone based on his withdrawal from the squad. It might be the excuse the offending fans want to hide behind as their justification, but who are they kidding? It hardly explains wanting to burn Anton too, does it? Why not Les instead? Or Scholes or Shearer or any number of players who called time on their England careers early? But then none of those had the temerity to complain about being racially abused by a white former England captain, did they?
Click to expand...

You're missing the point Luke. Scholes and Shearer both "retired" from England to extend their club careers, which to most England fans is an anathema. They didn't, however, withdraw on the eve of the game (after making themselves available again,) saying that that the flight would ruin their fitness regime and then promptly jump on an aeroplane and go and do some media work in the Gulf.

At best RF's actions were ill-advised from a PR point of view, at worst it was telling England where to stick it. Play a little game with yourself and imagine how you would feel if he DIDN'T play for United. If you make the kind of choices Ferdinand did, then you will reap the whirlwind. The abuse of Anton was designed to wind up his dopey brother and his equally precious supporters. Looks like it worked didn't it? There is no evidence of racist chanting. The crowd did not racially abuse anyone and cut them some slack, they can't help being white.

As far as England's former captain is concerned, if you think there's any support whatsoever for one of footballs most odious individuals anywhere outside Stamford Bridge you are barking up the wrong tree. He's less popular than Man Utd.
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
You've given absolutely nothing to back up any of your claims, Lidls.
You've also ignored my question about the Neville brothers.

Ferdinand hasn't retired from England duty and I doubt he'd have faced such hostility had he done so.
He made some shoddy excuses for not turning up for these games in particular and then did something which appeared to contradict the reason that he gave for not attending.
His brother was included because he's his brother and he's famous or noteworthy, just as Beckham used to get abuse about his wife, Terry gets stick about his family, etc.
There's no reason to assume a racist agenda here, where none is evident.
Click to expand...

<applause> Well said
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
You've given absolutely nothing to back up any of your claims, Lidls.
You've also ignored my question about the Neville brothers.

Ferdinand hasn't retired from England duty and I doubt he'd have faced such hostility had he done so.
He made some shoddy excuses for not turning up for these games in particular and then did something which appeared to contradict the reason that he gave for not attending.
His brother was included because he's his brother and he's famous or noteworthy, just as Beckham used to get abuse about his wife, Terry gets stick about his family, etc.
There's no reason to assume a racist agenda here, where none is evident.
Click to expand...


I think I've found out why LDL is confused PNP..

[video=youtube;tAs8ST3KrY0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAs8ST3KrY0[/video]
 
lennypops said:
I am at a total loss as to how the chants aimed at Rio and Anton Ferdinand are racist.

Claims like this totally undermine the very real work that needs to be done in society to overcome all forms of prejudice. To read articles in the British press about how "disgusting" this racism is enfuriates me given how xenophobic, homophobic, sexist and generally ******ed almost all papers are when it suits them (which is every day).

The Sun's anti-pornography "campaign" springs to mind. They wheel out parents of murdered kids (whose phone they hacked) to speak out about on-line porn (why?!) whilst saying that they "have no problem with nipples being on show" to make sure that we all understand that page 3 is exempt from the corrupting influence of porn on kids.

Or how about the publishing of sex-offenders' photos and general *****-hysteria around the time that the Sun had a countdown to Charlotte Church's 16th birthday?

Opportunistic, no-brain filth is what every tabloid trades in and it is a much greater problem to society than any chant that football supporters sing.

So **** off Oliver Holt: http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/england-sickening-chants-against-rio-1786627

You work for a ****ty paper whose sole aim is to make money by keeping people as thick as humanly possible.
Click to expand...

Excellent comments, very well said.
 
Ashley Young does a blatant dive, wins a free-kick and the commentators gloss over it.
Where's the uproar about a persistent offender? No consistency.

And now Buttner does a bellyflop with absolutely no contact and wins another free-kick. Still no condemnation.
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
Ashley Young does a blatant dive, wins a free-kick and the commentators gloss over it.
Where's the uproar about a persistent offender? No consistency.

And now Buttner does a bellyflop with absolutely no contact and wins another free-kick. Still no condemnation.
Click to expand...

It's Sky, what do you expect?

As much chance of impartiality on Chelsea TV re: Chelsea or LFCTV re: Liverpool. Sky are to Man U what those channels are to Chelsea and Liverpool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back