The Banter Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
pingwing said:
Because it contradicts the attitude from the kick racism out of football initiative. The precedent set by Suarez is that being racist = 8 games, but in this situation racism is scaled like Bartons aggressive/moronic behaviour so more incidents in the once case = longer bans.

To me it smacks of belittling the kick racism out of football movement by setting a standard of how you can be more or less racist by action when the whole point of it being an offence is that it is just not acceptable to be racist at all, ever. In no situation should the FA be able to get a graph of comparative racism and then dish out comparative punishments.... (well aware this is a bit silly but it is how I see the FA on this case)
Click to expand...


No, that is exactly the point the precendent set by the FA in the Suarez case was he got a ban of 4 games for using a racist remark and another ban for using it multiple times.

This is the exact problem if JT got an 8 game ban it would contradict the Suarez punishment, getting a 4 game ban is exactly in line with what they gave Suarez.


In what way is racism, or using a racist mark not possible to be quantified. Should a guy who does it once get the same ban as a guy who calls someone ******, getsa 4 game ban, does it again the next game, gets a 4 game ban, does it again the next game..... etc, etc. Do we consider a kid with racist parents who calls a black person a ****** the same level of racist as someone who goes out and beats a black man to death for no reason other than his skin colour? Ignoring daft PC ness, racism is as quantifiable as everything else on the planet, pretending there is no scale to racism is just completely ridiculous and assuming that anyone who comes close to a racist remark should all get an identical ban ignoring what they actually do, is equally daft.

Unless people want JT or Suarez banned from worldwide football, for life, instantly, then surely there is a "term" for any ban set, and if you break this rule again at a later date, or twice on that same date, you would get the ban a second time or twice as long the first time.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure how he got to asking that (it's not unlike dm to go off on one mid-post) but the question he's asking is fairly straight forward. Making a racially offensive remark out of ignorance, being taught that term is the norm or even with the intention of causing offense is not the same as somebody that actively discriminates against somebody because of their race.
 
BaZ87 said:
I'm not sure how he got to asking that (it's not unlike dm to go off on one mid-post) but the question he's asking is fairly straight forward. Making a racially offensive remark out of ignorance, being taught that term is the norm or even with the intention of causing offense is not the same as somebody that actively discriminates against somebody because of their race.
Click to expand...

Well because pingwing suggested that the FA were doing something wrong by suggesting there weren't different levels of racism, which flies in the face of all logic. As you said though, it was pretty clear what I was saying, its plain as day that someone can be a little bit racist or an extreme psychotic murderous racist, there are differing levels of racism, as there are differing levels of violence and basically everything else in the universe.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Well because pingwing suggested that the FA were doing something wrong by suggesting there weren't different levels of racism, which flies in the face of all logic. As you said though, it was pretty clear what I was saying, its plain as day that someone can be a little bit racist or an extreme psychotic murderous racist, there are differing levels of racism, as there are differing levels of violence and basically everything else in the universe.
Click to expand...

Sorry but you can't just be "a little bit racist". The general definition of racist behaviour is it comes in an absolute. Referring to someones race in a derogatory manor is just a (excuse the terrible phrase) a black or white situation. There's no "oh thats only a bit racist" phrases.

I was asserting the FA had done wrong by creating a system that racist behaviour comes in quantities or is in some way gaugeable in how acceptable/wrong it is. Suarez got an 8 match ban ultimately for being racist, why Terry was only given half the ban for also being racist, which is madness. It say's Terry, though was racist, was less wrong than Suarez, despite the fact that racism is just not acceptable in football, which sends completely the wrong message.
 
I can't believe how much sympathy Hodgson has got over the Ferdinand issue on Sky and the BBC. If one of us had openly discussed confidential work matters in public we would have been sacked. The same goes for Cole, he'd have been out the door before he even realised what was happening.
 
Is it really confidential? It was unprofessional of him to tell people Ferdinand wasn't in the squad before the official squad announcement but it's no different than a manager saying x will/won't be in the team a day before a match.
 
BaZ87 said:
Is it really confidential? It was unprofessional of him to tell people Ferdinand wasn't in the squad before the official squad announcement but it's no different than a manager saying x will/won't be in the team a day before a match.
Click to expand...

There are appropriate methods, like press conferences and squad announcements, for putting unknown information into the public domain. It's no different to revealing inside information on your company to a stranger on the tube a day before it's officially released to the press.

I imagine if Capello had done it he would have been slaughtered, instead it's "can't we talk to people any more?" Yes you can, but there are boundaries.
 
As I said, it was unprofessional but Hodgson telling somebody that Ferdinand isn't in the squad a day or so before he officially announces his squad doesn't really change anything. Managers have announced before that x will/won't be in the squad before the official squad announcement - admittedly not on the tube though.

You're right, Capello would have been slaughtered but that doesn't mean it's right. It was stupid of Hodgson but he's not released top secret information - he's just confirmed something that most people already knew shortly before he chose to make it official.
 
Surprise, surprise:

Chelsea defender charged over Twitter comment

Chelsea FC’s Ashley Cole has been charged by The FA in relation to a Twitter comment which was improper and/or brought the game into disrepute.

Cole has until 4pm on Thursday 11 October 2012 to respond to the charge.
Click to expand...

Sauce
 
Manchester United controlling referees again it seems.

Anyone see the funny picture going around regarding status of referree's after they made "mistakes" in a Man U game? Shocking really.

Van Persie get's away with elbow on Yohan Cabaye

Can't believe it to be honest.

Also, anyone else think Gary Neville was a joke commentating? He really shouldn't be allowed to commentate on Man U games
 
rossk26 said:
Manchester United controlling referees again it seems.

Anyone see the funny picture going around regarding status of referree's after they made "mistakes" in a Man U game? Shocking really.

Van Persie get's away with elbow on Yohan Cabaye

Can't believe it to be honest.

Also, anyone else think Gary Neville was a joke commentating? He really shouldn't be allowed to commentate on Man U games
Click to expand...

Isn't Tiote getting away with a stamp as well? Or did Fergie ask for that too?
 
rossk26 said:
Also, anyone else think Gary Neville was a joke commentating? He really shouldn't be allowed to commentate on Man U games
Click to expand...

:o

For starters since he got the gig with Sky it's the first time he's ever actually done commentary on one of our games secondly he showed no bias towards us whatsoever the same of which can not be said for the likes of Niall Quinn when he does City games
 
BaZ87 said:
As I said, it was unprofessional but Hodgson telling somebody that Ferdinand isn't in the squad a day or so before he officially announces his squad doesn't really change anything. Managers have announced before that x will/won't be in the squad before the official squad announcement - admittedly not on the tube though.

You're right, Capello would have been slaughtered but that doesn't mean it's right. It was stupid of Hodgson but he's not released top secret information - he's just confirmed something that most people already knew shortly before he chose to make it official.
Click to expand...

Think you're missing the point Baz, he didn't say Ferdinand wasn't in the squad, that wasn't the problem. This is what he said apparently;

"I have to say it is over for him and England. It has got to be the end of the road," Hodgson was quoted as saying.
Click to expand...

Which is just unacceptable for the England manager to be casually portraying this to random people on the Tube.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom