|
|
Post by lordeffinghamhunt on Feb 23, 2013 18:54:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Feb 23, 2013 19:00:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by chinesedave on Feb 23, 2013 19:08:29 GMT
Paul Elliot has made some wedge out of the KIO quango, should choose his words more carefully.
Was it Kamara who ended his career?
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 23, 2013 19:19:41 GMT
"But it is understood Elliott insists the term was not offensive because of the nature of the conversation and as it was between two black men."
To be fair to him, that's exactly what I thought when I read it. It doesn't appear to be racist at all to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Feb 23, 2013 19:21:08 GMT
"But it is understood Elliott insists the term was not offensive because of the nature of the conversation and as it was between two black men."
To be fair to him, that's exactly what I thought when I read it. It doesn't appear to be racist at all to me. He believes in zero tolerance apparently, he had to go irrespective of the context. |
|
|
|
Post by lordeffinghamhunt on Feb 23, 2013 19:22:01 GMT
But isn't that one rule for one and another rules for others? Could I use that term to a dark gentleman?
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 23, 2013 19:23:58 GMT
"But it is understood Elliott insists the term was not offensive because of the nature of the conversation and as it was between two black men."
To be fair to him, that's exactly what I thought when I read it. It doesn't appear to be racist at all to me. He believes in zero tolerance apparently, he had to go irrespective of the context. So if he'd been congratulating him on something and had said "You're a damn fine nigger Rufus" then that would be a racist remark?  |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Feb 23, 2013 19:27:34 GMT
He believes in zero tolerance apparently, he had to go irrespective of the context. So if he'd been congratulating him on something and had said "You're a damn fine nigger Rufus" then that would be a racist remark? If You believe in zero tolerance then yes, You shouldn't use the word whatever the situation. I can't see why he'd want to use it anyway. Seems daft to me, he deserves all the crap he'll get for being thick. |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 23, 2013 19:35:17 GMT
Resigned from his FA ambassadorial post. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21559781Silly bloke for writing what he did. Like Paul, I'm not sure if the n* word is racist in that context but the rest of the words used were pretty bad for someone with a high profile in the FA and within the Kick it Out campaign. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 23, 2013 19:37:37 GMT
So if he'd been congratulating him on something and had said "You're a damn fine nigger Rufus" then that would be a racist remark? If You believe in zero tolerance then yes, You shouldn't use the word whatever the situation. I can't see why he'd want to use it anyway. Seems daft to me, he deserves all the crap he'll get for being thick. I guess it depends what the definition of zero tolerance is. Whether it's zero tolerance to people being racist or whether it's zero tolerance to people using the word nigger. I think context effects this, as using the word nigger isn't always racist. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Feb 23, 2013 19:40:13 GMT
If You believe in zero tolerance then yes, You shouldn't use the word whatever the situation. I can't see why he'd want to use it anyway. Seems daft to me, he deserves all the crap he'll get for being thick. I guess it depends what the definition of zero tolerance is. Whether it's zero tolerance to people being racist or whether it's zero tolerance to people using the word nigger. I think context effects this, as using the word nigger isn't always racist. For me zero tolerance is if someone is using a word that could be deemed as racist in any context. He should know better given the jobs/roles he has within football. He's been very stupid. Some like the good lord would say racist and I can see that argument too although I don't agree with it. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 23, 2013 19:45:45 GMT
I guess it depends what the definition of zero tolerance is. Whether it's zero tolerance to people being racist or whether it's zero tolerance to people using the word nigger. I think context effects this, as using the word nigger isn't always racist. For me zero tolerance is if someone is using a word that could be deemed as racist in any context. He should know better given the jobs/roles he has within football. He's been very stupid. Some like the good lord would say racist and I can see that argument too although I don't agree with it. Can we agree that he should resign for being a bit of an idiot then, rather than 'for using discrimatory abusive comments to another individual' (the FA's words) then? |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Feb 23, 2013 19:50:42 GMT
For me zero tolerance is if someone is using a word that could be deemed as racist in any context. He should know better given the jobs/roles he has within football. He's been very stupid. Some like the good lord would say racist and I can see that argument too although I don't agree with it. Can we agree that he should resign for being a bit of an idiot then, rather than 'for using discrimatory abusive comments to another individual' (the FA's words) then? A bit of an idiot that depending on Your view may or may not have used discrimatory abusive comments to another individual I think is better. Because by simply using the word some people will think he's been racist, which I think is fair enough although I disagree with that stance. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 23, 2013 19:53:28 GMT
Can we agree that he should resign for being a bit of an idiot then, rather than 'for using discrimatory abusive comments to another individual' (the FA's words) then? A bit of an idiot that depending on Your view may or may not have used discrimatory abusive comments to another individual I think is better. Because by simply using the word some people will think he's been racist, which I think is fair enough although I disagree with that stance. Ok then, except I'm pretty sure he wasn't attempting to be racist when he made the comments. Lord (or whoever) might think he was attempting to be racist but they'd be wrong! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Feb 23, 2013 19:57:37 GMT
A bit of an idiot that depending on Your view may or may not have used discrimatory abusive comments to another individual I think is better. Because by simply using the word some people will think he's been racist, which I think is fair enough although I disagree with that stance. Ok then, except I'm pretty sure he was attempting to be racist when he made the comments. Lord (or whoever) might think he was attempting to be racist but they'd be wrong! ;D I agree but in the current climate it's enough I think to be sacked for/resign over because people will jump on it. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 23, 2013 20:01:31 GMT
Ok then, except I'm pretty sure he was attempting to be racist when he made the comments. Lord (or whoever) might think he was attempting to be racist but they'd be wrong! ;D I agree but in the current climate it's enough I think to be sacked for/resign over because people will jump on it. Yeah I agree he had to go but for the reasons you've just said here mate. |
|
|
|
Post by surreystokie on Feb 23, 2013 20:12:51 GMT
I know Paul as a thoroughly decent, honest hard-working fellow, who was being touted for higher things, within the game, and now admire him all the more for his resignation.
He knows that what he did was wrong/stupid/unbecoming of an ambassador for football and anti-racism in particular. What he certainly would not want, is for people to defend what he rightly considers the undefensible.
If a word is considered worthy of banning, it must be a ban for everyone. Isn't this what the Suarez incident was all about?
Personally, I don't believe that some who have had their careers ruined because of the use of the offensive word, are necessarily racist and fear that it's the OTT way we are presently dealing with it - heavy-handed retribution, rather than steady education - which could ultimately have the opposite effect originally intended, with minority groups suffering because of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by lordeffinghamhunt on Feb 23, 2013 20:13:38 GMT
Load of bollocks this context crap is! The word was used and its a racist word. The rhyme Eeny meeny miney mo isn't racist but that got changed!
And a golly wog on a jam jar wasn't racist but that got taken off
|
|
|
|
Post by lordeffinghamhunt on Feb 23, 2013 23:03:21 GMT
I know Paul as a thoroughly decent, honest hard-working fellow, who was being touted for higher things, within the game, and now admire him all the more for his resignation. He knows that what he did was wrong/stupid/unbecoming of an ambassador for football and anti-racism in particular. What he certainly would not want, is for people to defend what he rightly considers the undefensible. If a word is considered worthy of banning, it must be a ban for everyone. Isn't this what the Suarez incident was all about? Personally, I don't believe that some who have had their careers ruined because of the use of the offensive word, are necessarily racist and fear that it's the OTT way we are presently dealing with it - heavy-handed retribution, rather than steady education - which could ultimately have the opposite effect originally intended, with minority groups suffering because of it. He's supposed to lead by example. What hope is there if he uses the words that he's so much against |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Wheeze on Feb 23, 2013 23:13:11 GMT
Regardless of what he's said the bloke is a first class fucking prick and always has been.
|
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Feb 24, 2013 0:03:56 GMT
This is where the racism card is at it's most indefensible!
You simply can't have one rule for one and one for another and then play the card when it suits!
|
|
