|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Jul 31, 2012 8:49:08 GMT
I thought you weren't posting on such threads again Stafford? To be honest, given the summing up by the judge in the legal case, the FA have very little choice but to bring football related charges to JT. The judge basically confirmed that he had used racist language, questioned the sincerity and validity of his evidence before concluding that he was a lucky boy due to lip reading not being a 100% conclusive method of finding someone guilty of such a charge. He basically got off due to a "lack of substantial evidence". To give you an example of how this can work, I once worked with a solicitor who had to defend a guy charged with sexually abusing his young daughter. He too got off with the crime on similar grounds to Terry. He too was guilty as hell! The law is an ass, Terry is guilty as hell and he should be subjected to the same ban as Suarez. It has absolutely nothing to do with the PC brigade. I agree with what you are saying mate but I also think that if they charge Terry they also have to charge AF or anyone else who ever abuses/winds up another player regardless of what is being said. It can all be said to bring the game into disrepute.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jul 31, 2012 8:51:30 GMT
I don't think SS is a racist and have never said that. I perfectly see his point and disagree with it fundamentally. I don't think people should be allowed to racially abuse other people and neither does SS when it comes down to it. That is the point I am trying to bring out.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jul 31, 2012 8:51:58 GMT
Ferdinand may well get charged as well but the tarriff of punishment for racial abuse will surely be far higher.
Terry racially abused Anton Ferdinand and should be subjected to a similar ban to that dished out to Suarez.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2012 8:55:54 GMT
I don't think SS is a racist and have never said that. I perfectly see his point and disagree with it fundamentally. I don't think people should be allowed to racially abuse other people and neither does SS when it comes down to it. That is the point I am trying to bring out. fair enough but you have consistently said that Stafford feels it to be ok that people are racially abused which in turn gives other posters a false impression of him and he is therefore continually accused of being racist by people when he quite obviously isn't, personally i can see the point in some of Stafford's arguments at the basic level but feel it fails to take into account other mitigating factors such as history etc. (hence my disagreement in general with most of his posts) but at the same time i see no need to get into a personal slanging match on a serious thread where i offer to lock him in a room with a black person etc..... that really is stooping to a juvenile level IMO and not really something warranted on a thread considering the sensitivity of the issue
|
|
|
Post by redwhite on Jul 31, 2012 9:02:42 GMT
I thought you weren't posting on such threads again Stafford? To be honest, given the summing up by the judge in the legal case, the FA have very little choice but to bring football related charges to JT. The judge basically confirmed that he had used racist language, questioned the sincerity and validity of his evidence before concluding that he was a lucky boy due to lip reading not being a 100% conclusive method of finding someone guilty of such a charge. He basically got off due to a "lack of substantial evidence". To give you an example of how this can work, I once worked with a solicitor who had to defend a guy charged with sexually abusing his young daughter. He too got off with the crime on similar grounds to Terry. He too was guilty as hell! The law is an ass, Terry is guilty as hell and he should be subjected to the same ban as Suarez. It has absolutely nothing to do with the PC brigade. Completely right, but let Stafford have a go at people for being "PC", it's the only way he can let his anger out when racism is taken more seriously than he wants it to be. Please don't call me a prick Stafford
|
|
|
Post by redwhite on Jul 31, 2012 9:12:19 GMT
I don't think SS is a racist and have never said that. I perfectly see his point and disagree with it fundamentally. I don't think people should be allowed to racially abuse other people and neither does SS when it comes down to it. That is the point I am trying to bring out. Stafford-Stokie - "I have in the past called a player a cheating black twat"
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Jul 31, 2012 9:13:16 GMT
I thought you weren't posting on such threads again Stafford? To be honest, given the summing up by the judge in the legal case, the FA have very little choice but to bring football related charges to JT. The judge basically confirmed that he had used racist language, questioned the sincerity and validity of his evidence before concluding that he was a lucky boy due to lip reading not being a 100% conclusive method of finding someone guilty of such a charge. He basically got off due to a "lack of substantial evidence". To give you an example of how this can work, I once worked with a solicitor who had to defend a guy charged with sexually abusing his young daughter. He too got off with the crime on similar grounds to Terry. He too was guilty as hell! The law is an ass, Terry is guilty as hell and he should be subjected to the same ban as Suarez. It has absolutely nothing to do with the PC brigade. Completely right, but let Stafford have a go at people for being "PC", it's the only way he can let his anger out when racism is taken more seriously than he wants it to be. Please don't call me a prick Stafford It doesn't make me angry at all. Of course racism is serious. I just think that racism is about someones race and not just the colour of their skin. Things are said as an insult/wind up all the time. Most people that do this find an obvious insult that describes the person and will wind them up. In this context I see no difference in saying fat, ginger or skin colour etc. If in the case of Gillingham that it is true that they made players train because they are black then that is a completely different scenario. Then someone is being treated different because of their race/colour. That is of course not acceptable.
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Jul 31, 2012 9:16:10 GMT
I don't think SS is a racist and have never said that. I perfectly see his point and disagree with it fundamentally. I don't think people should be allowed to racially abuse other people and neither does SS when it comes down to it. That is the point I am trying to bring out. Stafford-Stokie - "I have in the past called a player a cheating black twat" Correct but that was said in the same context of calling Kitson a lazy ginger twat. It was a description of the person. I see all people the same as me with regard to skin colour.
|
|
|
Post by redwhite on Jul 31, 2012 9:18:41 GMT
Stafford-Stokie - "I have in the past called a player a cheating black twat" Correct but that was said in the same context of calling Kitson a lazy ginger twat. It was a description of the person. I see all people the same as me with regard to skin colour. So calling someone a "cheating black twat", in your view, isn't racist? (genuine question)
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Jul 31, 2012 9:20:58 GMT
Correct but that was said in the same context of calling Kitson a lazy ginger twat. It was a description of the person. I see all people the same as me with regard to skin colour. So calling someone a "cheating black twat", in your view, isn't racist? (genuine question) No. When said and meant in the context I have described then I don't think it is. It is a description of the bloke on the pitch.
|
|
|
Post by boscfc on Jul 31, 2012 9:24:00 GMT
So calling someone a "cheating black twat", in your view, isn't racist? (genuine question) No. When said and meant in the context I have described then I don't think it is. It is a description of the bloke on the pitch. oh dear.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 31, 2012 9:25:10 GMT
De ja vue this thread.
Carbon copy of last months JT trial thread.
|
|
|
Post by rubyonrails on Jul 31, 2012 9:26:51 GMT
The ginger/black thing is an interesting discussion point. How is it that one can one be worse than the other?
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Jul 31, 2012 9:27:27 GMT
De ja vue this thread. Carbon copy of last months JT trial thread. Your correct. I think I will leave it again now. We just go round in circles. I don't mean/try to offend they are just my opinions.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jul 31, 2012 9:57:56 GMT
The ginger/black thing is an interesting discussion point. How is it that one can one be worse than the other? facepalm
|
|
|
Post by rubyonrails on Jul 31, 2012 10:21:41 GMT
The ginger/black thing is an interesting discussion point. How is it that one can one be worse than the other? facepalm How is that a facepalm? You often hear people with ginger hair getting taunted on TV and piss-taken everywhere. I've never understood that in a world where discrimination by colour seems to exclude people with ginger hair. Is it because they are not a race? Or is it that history has been lost as to the original ginger race, whoever they were? It's a puzzle.
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Jul 31, 2012 10:40:10 GMT
How is that a facepalm? You often hear people with ginger hair getting taunted on TV and piss-taken everywhere. I've never understood that in a world where discrimination by colour seems to exclude people with ginger hair. Is it because they are not a race? Or is it that history has been lost as to the original ginger race, whoever they were? It's a puzzle. Forget it mate. In some peoples eye's if they ain't white you can say nothing against them.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Jul 31, 2012 10:53:17 GMT
I do agree with one point on this thread. From what I read of the evidence at the trial, the FA had good grounds to charge Anton Ferdinand with bringing the game into disrepute. If they had charged both him and Terry, then natural justice would have been served - although I accept that Terry's punishment (in the event they were found guilty of the FA charge) should be stronger than Ferdinand's, given the racial content of his abuse.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jul 31, 2012 14:26:37 GMT
For once LP is right. A misconduct charge for both of them.
And SS is still arguing that people should be allowed to shout racist abuse at black people. From a safe distance or from behind a keyboard obv.
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jul 31, 2012 14:29:14 GMT
How is that a facepalm? You often hear people with ginger hair getting taunted on TV and piss-taken everywhere. I've never understood that in a world where discrimination by colour seems to exclude people with ginger hair. Is it because they are not a race? Or is it that history has been lost as to the original ginger race, whoever they were? It's a puzzle. Go and read somewhere about the history of slavery and then somewhere else about what happens when racists get control of things. Then compare those two things to taking the piss out of people for being ginger or fat or thin or pigeon toed or bald.
|
|
|
Post by skip on Jul 31, 2012 14:40:32 GMT
Fucking hell, what is so difficult to understand? John Terry used tasteless racist colour terminology as an insult knowing full well it would anger his black opponent. This doesn't make him racist in the eyes of the law but it is not in the spirit on respect in the game, by a long, long chalk. This is not the same as calling someone "ginger" or "fat" although quite frankly if that is what passes for "banter" amongst grown men then heaven help us. The FA have every right to charge him - every duty to if you ask me - if you don't then you are complicit in the acceptance of racist colour terminology creeping back into society.
I like GreyMan's idea of people who think it's only harmless [sporting] banter should be made to call a black man a black cunt to his face with witnesses with video recorders in attendance.
|
|
|
Post by skip on Jul 31, 2012 14:42:52 GMT
How is that a facepalm? You often hear people with ginger hair getting taunted on TV and piss-taken everywhere. I've never understood that in a world where discrimination by colour seems to exclude people with ginger hair. Is it because they are not a race? Or is it that history has been lost as to the original ginger race, whoever they were? It's a puzzle. Forget it mate. In some peoples eye's if they ain't white you can say nothing against them. sorry to butt in but if a white man purposefully knocked into you to spill your pint would you call him a cunt, a clumsy cunt or a clumsy white cunt? The chances are his race or skin tone would play no part in your decision to ask him to buy you another or to step outside. Ergo, "black cunt" i.e. being specific about race or skin tone is, er, racist.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2012 15:54:55 GMT
Fucking hell, what is so difficult to understand? John Terry used tasteless racist colour terminology as an insult knowing full well it would anger his black opponent. This doesn't make him racist in the eyes of the law but it is not in the spirit on respect in the game, by a long, long chalk. This is not the same as calling someone "ginger" or "fat" although quite frankly if that is what passes for "banter" amongst grown men then heaven help us. The FA have every right to charge him - every duty to if you ask me - if you don't then you are complicit in the acceptance of racist colour terminology creeping back into society. I like GreyMan's idea of people who think it's only harmless [sporting] banter should be made to call a black man a black cunt to his face with witnesses with video recorders in attendance. so you don't think that an obese person would slap you if you were locked in a room and insulted him for being a fat c##t??? if they do then by your logic it's the same thing...kinda ruined your own argument there
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Jul 31, 2012 16:19:28 GMT
Fucking hell, what is so difficult to understand? John Terry used tasteless racist colour terminology as an insult knowing full well it would anger his black opponent. This doesn't make him racist in the eyes of the law but it is not in the spirit on respect in the game, by a long, long chalk. This is not the same as calling someone "ginger" or "fat" although quite frankly if that is what passes for "banter" amongst grown men then heaven help us. The FA have every right to charge him - every duty to if you ask me - if you don't then you are complicit in the acceptance of racist colour terminology creeping back into society. I like GreyMan's idea of people who think it's only harmless [sporting] banter should be made to call a black man a black cunt to his face with witnesses with video recorders in attendance. So when you have kids at school who actually kill themselves due too bullying for being fat or ginger that is ok? As long as you don't mention their colour? Give ya fuckin head a wobble kid. It is down to how the person receives the insult as to judge if one is worse than the other not some fuckin pc twat!!
|
|
|
Post by skip on Jul 31, 2012 17:26:14 GMT
Fucking hell, what is so difficult to understand? John Terry used tasteless racist colour terminology as an insult knowing full well it would anger his black opponent. This doesn't make him racist in the eyes of the law but it is not in the spirit on respect in the game, by a long, long chalk. This is not the same as calling someone "ginger" or "fat" although quite frankly if that is what passes for "banter" amongst grown men then heaven help us. The FA have every right to charge him - every duty to if you ask me - if you don't then you are complicit in the acceptance of racist colour terminology creeping back into society. I like GreyMan's idea of people who think it's only harmless [sporting] banter should be made to call a black man a black cunt to his face with witnesses with video recorders in attendance. So when you have kids at school who actually kill themselves due too bullying for being fat or ginger that is ok? As long as you don't mention their colour? Give ya fuckin head a wobble kid. It is down to how the person receives the insult as to judge if one is worse than the other not some fuckin pc twat!! We don't live in a world of binary oppositions; bullying of kids by kids is wrong, regardless of whether they use weight, hair colour or anything else to try and undermine the other. My old man was a copper for 30 years so don't condescend me with regards to taking shit at school through no fault of your own - that went down a treat with the bullies, the nutters, the skivers, the petty thieves and the spineless hangers on. (none of them had the conkers to do anything though, wankers.). Anyway, I digress... for a grown man who is paid millions of pounds a year to play football in front of a global television audience of tens of millions, using racist colour terminology is beyond embarrassing and wholly unjustifiable. Plus, when you think how many cameras are on him at any one time and he still doesn't clock it, you realise how totally as thick as shit he really is. As for calling me kid, how predictable, I'm 42.
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Jul 31, 2012 17:48:00 GMT
so you don't think that an obese person would slap you if you were locked in a room and insulted him for being a fat c##t??? It's well known fat people can't get close enough to anyone to punch them. They could belly push them ala Big Daddy. That's if they can get off their mobility scooters! It really is like groundhog day ................. etc
|
|
|
Post by skip on Jul 31, 2012 23:47:57 GMT
it's only like Groundhog Day because of the flat earth society on here.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Aug 1, 2012 0:02:44 GMT
cant stand the little scrotal sack but this is well out of order. if he has been found innocent of the race charges in a Court of law surely all f.a can charge him with now is bringing the game into disrepute,in which case ferdinand should be charged with the very same offence surely? There is no proof that he's innocent, in fact there is a lot of evidence that he is guilty, it's just the court couldn't prove that he was guilty beyond reasonable doubt so couldn't take action. The FA, however, have a lower burden of proof so they can use the fact that John Terry's story was extremely unlikely and take action rather than having to prove him guilty. He doesn't need to prove his innocence they needed to prove his guilt, they failed, that should have been it.
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Aug 1, 2012 9:02:52 GMT
My last input on this thread. My mate has just posted this on facebook. This is a direct quote.
"It has come to my attention I can no longer refer to myself as black but as "shaded", this is the approved political correct buzz word. You can politely f@ckoff I'm black thank you!"
Proof if needed that all the political correct bollox is dreamed up buy white do gooding morons with nowt better to do. No black person would dream up bollox like that. ;D
|
|
|
Post by mosquito on Aug 1, 2012 9:07:13 GMT
My last input on this thread. My mate has just posted this on facebook. This is a direct quote. "It has come to my attention I can no longer refer to myself as black but as "shaded", this is the approved political correct buzz word. You can politely f@ckoff I'm black thank you!" Proof if needed that all the political correct bollox is dreamed up buy white do gooding morons with nowt better to do. No black person would dream up bollox like that. ;D Political correctness gone stark raving mad ;D
|
|