|
Post by foster on Jun 29, 2020 15:54:39 GMT
To be fair Orbs, you are the one that keeps bringing everything back to colour and race. African doesn't mean black. It means people from Africa. This includes north Africans who are mainly not black. There's absolutely nothing wrong in wondering about a player's ability to play in winter if he has limited experience in that environment. The same would apply to anyone in any sport playing in an environment they're not accustomed to. I agree with you here Fozzie - but the reason I'm bringing it back to colour and race is because the thread is about BLM and taking the knee. I think there is something wrong (and racist/prejudiced) in a supporter/coach/manager stating that a black African player wouldn't fit in in Britain because of the climate. I hope you would too. If someone said that a Black player would struggle to handle the winter season because they're specifically Black then yes. But give me an example where someone has said that? If someone said that an African or Middle Eastern player (of any colour) might struggle to handle the winter season because they're not used to playing in the harsh weather conditions, then no, that's not racist..... which is basically what everyone is saying, apart from you mate. If a white player from Denmark joins a league in Africa and a local commentator or local fans ask themselves 'Hmmm, I wonder if this guy will be able to perform in the summer heat?', that is not racist and has nothing to do with the person being white. Obviously the player from Denmark could be Black and the same question could also be asked. It just wouldn't work in this example.
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Jun 29, 2020 15:56:26 GMT
You can’t say the crowd at Stoke should be 10-15% BAME just because of that, football is a niche hobby. Football as a sport isn't 'niche' and it isn't niche for blokes so why aren't black or Asian folk more equally represented - its a fair enough question. Nobody is saying that there should be an exact split but even from a business perspective it would surely be of interest to know why 10-15% of your local population aren't interested in coming through the turnstyles rather than just shrugging shoulders and thinking they probably just prefer cricket or kabaddi. According to information provided by the Sony Pictures Network India, over 100 million people in India watched the earlier world cup qualifiers (the data includes both Sony TV channels and streaming services). That's out of a population where about half have tv's so about 20% of the population watched the world cup. The number of folk who watched the final here so biggest came not involving England was only about 30-35% so even in India its no longer niche let alone folk who've lived here for generations. So should gospel choirs in the UK have 87% white people to match the population demographic? I find your arguments about numbers ludicrous, and more akin to cultural imperialism than anything else. The BBC were telling me that the countryside is racist yesterday. Maybe there are actually differences between cultures and races after all.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jun 29, 2020 16:12:59 GMT
Spot on being prejudice is not an issue unless you act on it then its discrimination and race could be applied to that racial discrimination. So are you saying that being prejudice is ok as long as you don't act upon it? The point is unless I told you or acted on my prejudice you wouldn't know would you. Being prejudice is not a crime it's a personal private thought and it can be about anything and harms nobody unless you act on it. As a stoke fan I assume you're prejudice everytime we play but you dont run on the pitch and kick the opposition keepers face in do you but you hope he scores an own goal. I know it's a silly comparison in relation to race but the point is a valid one
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Jun 29, 2020 16:18:58 GMT
Football as a sport isn't 'niche' and it isn't niche for blokes so why aren't black or Asian folk more equally represented - its a fair enough question. Nobody is saying that there should be an exact split but even from a business perspective it would surely be of interest to know why 10-15% of your local population aren't interested in coming through the turnstyles rather than just shrugging shoulders and thinking they probably just prefer cricket or kabaddi. According to information provided by the Sony Pictures Network India, over 100 million people in India watched the earlier world cup qualifiers (the data includes both Sony TV channels and streaming services). That's out of a population where about half have tv's so about 20% of the population watched the world cup. The number of folk who watched the final here so biggest came not involving England was only about 30-35% so even in India its no longer niche let alone folk who've lived here for generations. The population of Stoke is about 260k and the stadium now holds 30,089 but even when it was lower it was only certain games where full capacity was reached. We’ve also got another football club in the City so yes, it is a niche hobby. There are many reasons that BAME people would choose to not take that much of an active interest in football. Plenty of white people don’t have that much of an active interest either. If you think it’s down to racism that’s up to you but I’d need a bit more to go on than what you’ve provided so far. Got be honest reckon I've got a challenge on my hands if you're still classing football as niche. Stoke and Vale can house 50,000 so that's capacity for 20% of the population catered for. Over 50% of men have played in a football team so there is absolutely no way does this fall into niche for males and about 40% have watched a game live too. It is arguably niche though for women, homosexuals and BAME's though. Do you dispute football historically has been mysoginistic and homophobic and this could affect those folk wanting to attend? Now I'm not saying racism is the only reason but what about - Who took you to your first game? Vast majority of folk would say their dad (I was my aunty) in 1985 age 5 at Aberdeen. I went every game but she wouldn't take me to a Rangers or Celtic game because of the meither surrounding it. At that time can you imagine being a black kid seeing Regis and Walters getting bananas chucked at them, bullets in the post and hearing songs like 'N****r lick my boots' from the terraces and your dad going 'tell you what fancy going see Stoke/ the Albion/ etc?' Regis said himself he never experienced much racism outside football but inside the grounds he had to put up with shite like that for a decade. I left Stoke 20 years ago but the four seasons 86-90 my old man took me shaped me - Stoke losing at the weekend still pisses me off for days. If he hadn't taken me would i still be arsed or bother getting season tickets with my mates in school when Stoke were shit and I could've just watched Man U on tv? Started watching Dundee United here and its nothing like the same investment - they can lose and i'm not bothered 5 minutes later. I thought this was quite interesting too in that someone not interested in football until their 20's has a perception, correct or not, that football is racist: www.vice.com/en_uk/article/4wmny9/im-a-25-year-old-man-and-ive-only-just-got-into-football-484 My daughter is into football with playing it being what she's missed most during lockdown and is now same age I was when I went to my first game. I should be doing cartwheels but hand on heart I'm honestly conflicted about taking her and her sex is a distinct second to her being noticably mixed race.
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jun 29, 2020 16:28:33 GMT
I agree with you here Fozzie - but the reason I'm bringing it back to colour and race is because the thread is about BLM and taking the knee. I think there is something wrong (and racist/prejudiced) in a supporter/coach/manager stating that a black African player wouldn't fit in in Britain because of the climate. I hope you would too. If someone said that a Black player would struggle to handle the winter season because they're specifically Black then yes. But give me an example where someone has said that? If someone said that an African or Middle Eastern player (of any colour) might struggle to handle the winter season because they're not used to playing in the harsh weather conditions, then no, that's not racist..... which is basically what everyone is saying, apart from you mate. If a white player from Denmark joins a league in Africa and a local commentator or local fans ask themselves 'Hmmm, I wonder if this guy will be able to perform in the summer heat?', that is not racist and has nothing to do with the person being white. Obviously the player from Denmark could be Black and the same question could also be asked. It just wouldn't work in this example. Ok, so we agree on the first point then. I've never said that anyone on here has said that though. I've just heard it before and used it as an example of why racism still exists in football. (I know you think it does too...) The second point isn't about the player 'not being used to playing in the harsh weather conditions' it would be about the assertion that they wouldn't be able to cope because of their skin colour/country of origin. They are 2 different things. I do also agree with your second point too but that's not what I'm saying. It's the initial assumption that they can't not just that 'they aren't used to it' that's the problem. In the third point - again it's not about the weather. It's about the initial thought that because the player is white, they might not cope. That's what I'm saying about the pre-judgement or the prejudice. Deciding that a player can or can't play based on their skin colour in whatever weather conditions you like. If the skin colour is the initial thought then there's an issue.
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Jun 29, 2020 16:29:39 GMT
Not disputing the second chance at all but find it interesting it is more likely a racist gets a second chance, especially in the current climate, than there is of a black manager being appointed. I could probably give 50 names of managers I'd have ahead of Malky and not one would be black. Don't buy the because they like cricket they don't go football bit to be honest. Premier League produce content purely in Hindi and its a huge growing market over there. Here, its hardly like Indian folk choose to go watch county cricket instead but seem to prefer to watch it on tv than go the ground. On your second point. I regularly attend local cricket all over Staffordshire and south Cheshire on Saturday afternoons and would estimate that roughly half or just under that both playing and spectating are Indian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi. So again it’s all about personal preferences of the individual. I get that it is personal preference but what if driving it? Pressume though you do both cricket and football so why isn't it recipricated?
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jun 29, 2020 16:31:44 GMT
But I'm asking you now what you think? The discussion is about BLM and taking a knee after all. I still think it's an interesting assertion/comment that people make. If your asking me about the organisation BLM I'm afraid I think they are divisive rather than inclusive and are not a force for good. As for taking a knee as a one off show of support no issues at all but if somebody chose not to take a knee than that's fine too. I'd much rather the NHS was abazened on the back of shirts and a BLM badge not this way round. I'm prejudice I hope SCFC win every week and England win the world cup and I dont like some people I've met. No I'm asking about if you thought it was racist to hold a view that (for example) a black African player might not be picked to play or bought in the first place because a club thought they wouldn't play well when it was cold/during the winter? Edit: and also asking if you think it's ok to be prejudiced as long as you don't act upon it?
|
|
|
Post by Rick Grimes on Jun 29, 2020 16:32:14 GMT
The population of Stoke is about 260k and the stadium now holds 30,089 but even when it was lower it was only certain games where full capacity was reached. We’ve also got another football club in the City so yes, it is a niche hobby. There are many reasons that BAME people would choose to not take that much of an active interest in football. Plenty of white people don’t have that much of an active interest either. If you think it’s down to racism that’s up to you but I’d need a bit more to go on than what you’ve provided so far. Got be honest reckon I've got a challenge on my hands if you're still classing football as niche. Stoke and Vale can house 50,000 so that's capacity for 20% of the population catered for. Over 50% of men have played in a football team so there is absolutely no way does this fall into niche for males and about 40% have watched a game live too. It is arguably niche though for women, homosexuals and BAME's though. Do you dispute football historically has been mysoginistic and homophobic and this could affect those folk wanting to attend? Now I'm not saying racism is the only reason but what about - Who took you to your first game? Vast majority of folk would say their dad (I was my aunty) in 1985 age 5 at Aberdeen. I went every game but she wouldn't take me to a Rangers or Celtic game because of the meither surrounding it. At that time can you imagine being a black kid seeing Regis and Walters getting bananas chucked at them, bullets in the post and hearing songs like 'N****r lick my boots' from the terraces and your dad going 'tell you what fancy going see Stoke/ the Albion/ etc?' Regis said himself he never experienced much racism outside football but inside the grounds he had to put up with shite like that for a decade. I left Stoke 20 years ago but the four seasons 86-90 my old man took me shaped me - Stoke losing at the weekend still pisses me off for days. If he hadn't taken me would i still be arsed or bother getting season tickets with my mates in school when Stoke were shit and I could've just watched Man U on tv? Started watching Dundee United here and its nothing like the same investment - they can lose and i'm not bothered 5 minutes later. I thought this was quite interesting too in that someone not interested in football until their 20's has a perception, correct or not, that football is racist: www.vice.com/en_uk/article/4wmny9/im-a-25-year-old-man-and-ive-only-just-got-into-football-484 My daughter is into football with playing it being what she's missed most during lockdown and is now same age I was when I went to my first game. I should be doing cartwheels but hand on heart I'm honestly conflicted about taking her and her sex is a distinct second to her being noticably mixed race. We we were talking about the attendance at Stoke specifically with your bizarre suggestion that there’s a problem because the crowd isn’t 10-15% BAME. I didn’t get your point in the first place and your subsequent posts afterwards haven’t made it much clearer at all .... You’re also getting too bogged down by the word niche here but irregardless there’s only a small population of the city that attends football matches. I don’t get your point about 50k capacity .....it’s not used because there’s not that many people interested enough to attend the games.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jun 29, 2020 16:38:47 GMT
If your asking me about the organisation BLM I'm afraid I think they are divisive rather than inclusive and are not a force for good. As for taking a knee as a one off show of support no issues at all but if somebody chose not to take a knee than that's fine too. I'd much rather the NHS was abazened on the back of shirts and a BLM badge not this way round. I'm prejudice I hope SCFC win every week and England win the world cup and I dont like some people I've met. No I'm asking about if you thought it was racist to hold a view that (for example) a black African player might not be picked to play or bought in the first place because a club thought they wouldn't play well when it was cold/during the winter? Edit: and also asking if you think it's ok to be prejudiced as long as you don't act upon it? Well I've answered the second one and admitted I'm prejudice in my support for SCFC and my hatred of whiskey and I'm fine with that not an issue whatsoever. If the question for part one is as you've asked and including the words Black African player then my answer is yes absolutely it would be and I'm sure most reasonable people would agree.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Jun 29, 2020 16:39:22 GMT
On your second point. I regularly attend local cricket all over Staffordshire and south Cheshire on Saturday afternoons and would estimate that roughly half or just under that both playing and spectating are Indian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi. So again it’s all about personal preferences of the individual. I get that it is personal preference but what if driving it? Pressume though you do both cricket and football so why isn't it recipricated? May I be so bold as to say the Asian culture simply embraces cricket traditionally rather than football? You can try and ram something down people’s throats as much as you like (not you I mean generally) but if they prefer one sport to another culturally or otherwise than that’s the way it is isn’t it? Why try and force people to like something? The Americans have had Football/Soccer forced upon them since the 60s and while its grown in popularity a bit they simply don’t want to play it compared to the more traditional sports in their culture. It couldn’t be any clearer could it?
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jun 29, 2020 16:43:02 GMT
Ron Noades, the chairman of Crystal Palace, gave an interview on Channel 4, dealing with what he called “the problem with black players”. “When it’s behind them, it’s chaos,” he said. “I don’t think too many of them can read the game. When you’re getting into the mid-winter you need a few of the hard white men to carry the athletic black players through.”
Events last week were a throwback to this grim age in English football. West Ham’s director of player recruitment, Tony Henry, said the club did not want to sign any more African players. In an email, Henry complained that African players – a continent of 1.2 billion people, banded together – “have a bad attitude” and “cause mayhem” when they are not playing, so he didn’t want too many in the squad. Henry has since been sacked.
Article from The Independent Feb 2018 although admittedly Noades hasn't been chairman of Palace for years.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Jun 29, 2020 16:47:01 GMT
Ron Noades, the chairman of Crystal Palace, gave an interview on Channel 4, dealing with what he called “the problem with black players”. “When it’s behind them, it’s chaos,” he said. “I don’t think too many of them can read the game. When you’re getting into the mid-winter you need a few of the hard white men to carry the athletic black players through.” Events last week were a throwback to this grim age in English football. West Ham’s director of player recruitment, Tony Henry, said the club did not want to sign any more African players. In an email, Henry complained that African players – a continent of 1.2 billion people, banded together – “have a bad attitude” and “cause mayhem” when they are not playing, so he didn’t want too many in the squad. Henry has since been sacked. Article from The Independent Feb 2018 although admittedly Noades hasn't been chairman of Palace for years. Like you say, Henry has been sacked for his comments and rightly so. Also Like you say Noades’ comments were years ago and don’t apply today. Just my opinion. There will always be people, especially from the older generation who will hold archaic views but times have changed and I’ve not heard any comments like the above for a good while which all points to racism being successfully eradicated in football in the main.
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jun 29, 2020 16:53:11 GMT
Ron Noades, the chairman of Crystal Palace, gave an interview on Channel 4, dealing with what he called “the problem with black players”. “When it’s behind them, it’s chaos,” he said. “I don’t think too many of them can read the game. When you’re getting into the mid-winter you need a few of the hard white men to carry the athletic black players through.” Events last week were a throwback to this grim age in English football. West Ham’s director of player recruitment, Tony Henry, said the club did not want to sign any more African players. In an email, Henry complained that African players – a continent of 1.2 billion people, banded together – “have a bad attitude” and “cause mayhem” when they are not playing, so he didn’t want too many in the squad. Henry has since been sacked. Article from The Independent Feb 2018 although admittedly Noades hasn't been chairman of Palace for years. Like you say, Henry has been sacked for his comments and rightly so. Also Like you say Noades’ comments were years ago and don’t apply today. Just my opinion. There will always be people, especially from the older generation who will hold archaic views but times have changed and I’ve not heard any comments like the above for a good while which all points to racism being successfully eradicated in football in the main. I think it's pretty safe to say if those views were around then they will still be around now in some shape or other. I'm not sure many black players would agree with you that 'racism has been successfully eradicated in football in the main.' By your sentence it means it still exists and therefore more work needs to be done. Hence my original post in the debate that was to state the kick racism out of football campaign hasn't been hugely successful. I just think it is still a big issue whereas maybe some other folk think it's not all that bad. TBH even if it's not all that bad it's still awful.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jun 29, 2020 16:55:07 GMT
Ron Noades, the chairman of Crystal Palace, gave an interview on Channel 4, dealing with what he called “the problem with black players”. “When it’s behind them, it’s chaos,” he said. “I don’t think too many of them can read the game. When you’re getting into the mid-winter you need a few of the hard white men to carry the athletic black players through.” Events last week were a throwback to this grim age in English football. West Ham’s director of player recruitment, Tony Henry, said the club did not want to sign any more African players. In an email, Henry complained that African players – a continent of 1.2 billion people, banded together – “have a bad attitude” and “cause mayhem” when they are not playing, so he didn’t want too many in the squad. Henry has since been sacked. Article from The Independent Feb 2018 although admittedly Noades hasn't been chairman of Palace for years. Both disgraceful incidents and quite right racist too.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Jun 29, 2020 17:01:10 GMT
Like you say, Henry has been sacked for his comments and rightly so. Also Like you say Noades’ comments were years ago and don’t apply today. Just my opinion. There will always be people, especially from the older generation who will hold archaic views but times have changed and I’ve not heard any comments like the above for a good while which all points to racism being successfully eradicated in football in the main. I think it's pretty safe to say if those views were around then they will still be around now in some shape or other. I'm not sure many black players would agree with you that 'racism has been successfully eradicated in football in the main.' By your sentence it means it still exists and therefore more work needs to be done. Hence my original post in the debate that was to state the kick racism out of football campaign hasn't been hugely successful. I just think it is still a big issue whereas maybe some other folk think it's not all that bad. TBH even if it's not all that bad it's still awful. I said “in the main” because I believe prejudice of any kind will never be eradicated in my view. Because there are folk and always will be folk who disagree with the sentiments described and that goes both ways and in all directions. Despite that a lot of work has been done and continues to be done on these issues and I believe it is working “in the main”. The world isn’t perfect, people have opinions which I don’t agree with and I’m fine with that. If someone thinks I’m a bell end or find something to poke fun at well that’s life I’m afraid, rise above it and show you’re the better person.
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Jun 29, 2020 17:01:20 GMT
Ron Noades, the chairman of Crystal Palace, gave an interview on Channel 4, dealing with what he called “the problem with black players”. “When it’s behind them, it’s chaos,” he said. “I don’t think too many of them can read the game. When you’re getting into the mid-winter you need a few of the hard white men to carry the athletic black players through.” Events last week were a throwback to this grim age in English football. West Ham’s director of player recruitment, Tony Henry, said the club did not want to sign any more African players. In an email, Henry complained that African players – a continent of 1.2 billion people, banded together – “have a bad attitude” and “cause mayhem” when they are not playing, so he didn’t want too many in the squad. Henry has since been sacked. Article from The Independent Feb 2018 although admittedly Noades hasn't been chairman of Palace for years. I think if you dig deep enough you could find an example for anything whether it’s racism, police brutality or anything you care to mention. The good thing is that a lot of the examples used are from the 80s. Thankfully things have improved and both policing and the fight against racism are moving in the right direction. There will always be isolated cases of course.
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Jun 29, 2020 17:08:26 GMT
Football as a sport isn't 'niche' and it isn't niche for blokes so why aren't black or Asian folk more equally represented - its a fair enough question. Nobody is saying that there should be an exact split but even from a business perspective it would surely be of interest to know why 10-15% of your local population aren't interested in coming through the turnstyles rather than just shrugging shoulders and thinking they probably just prefer cricket or kabaddi. According to information provided by the Sony Pictures Network India, over 100 million people in India watched the earlier world cup qualifiers (the data includes both Sony TV channels and streaming services). That's out of a population where about half have tv's so about 20% of the population watched the world cup. The number of folk who watched the final here so biggest came not involving England was only about 30-35% so even in India its no longer niche let alone folk who've lived here for generations. It IS a fair enough question. If our away day the season before last at the Hawthorns is anything to go by, black fans wouldn't want to be in a Stoke crowd. Family/friends of a black Stoke player were abused by a number of knuckle draggers posing as potters fans, and then asked to relocate by police and stewards. Racism exists and it exists in OUR club just as it does in other clubs and the wider society, and it's not just a black/white issue by any stretch of the imagination I'm not convinced that the BLM actions are the answer but something needs to be done. In this country we have a raft of 'anti discrimination laws' which don't seem to have resolved very much either. Wish I knew the answer I took my mrs with me into a cricket club about 10 years ago to watch Stoke with my mates on the tele when we were visiting. I got slightly delayed at the door going in so she was ten yards in front. Not realising she was with me the lad standing in earshot asked 'what the fuck is a paki doing in here!' That's within 30 seconds of taking her into a Stoke football crowd. No idea what the answer is - regulation never works as diktat top down doesn't guarantee buy in bottom up and if anything it just speeds up the cycle. South Sea bubble caused legislation to be passed to avoid any future financial crashes and that worked out mint!
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jun 29, 2020 17:09:14 GMT
Ron Noades, the chairman of Crystal Palace, gave an interview on Channel 4, dealing with what he called “the problem with black players”. “When it’s behind them, it’s chaos,” he said. “I don’t think too many of them can read the game. When you’re getting into the mid-winter you need a few of the hard white men to carry the athletic black players through.” Events last week were a throwback to this grim age in English football. West Ham’s director of player recruitment, Tony Henry, said the club did not want to sign any more African players. In an email, Henry complained that African players – a continent of 1.2 billion people, banded together – “have a bad attitude” and “cause mayhem” when they are not playing, so he didn’t want too many in the squad. Henry has since been sacked. Article from The Independent Feb 2018 although admittedly Noades hasn't been chairman of Palace for years. Just noticed - That's not our old Tony Henry is it?
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jun 29, 2020 17:10:29 GMT
I think it's pretty safe to say if those views were around then they will still be around now in some shape or other. I'm not sure many black players would agree with you that 'racism has been successfully eradicated in football in the main.' By your sentence it means it still exists and therefore more work needs to be done. Hence my original post in the debate that was to state the kick racism out of football campaign hasn't been hugely successful. I just think it is still a big issue whereas maybe some other folk think it's not all that bad. TBH even if it's not all that bad it's still awful. I said “in the main” because I believe prejudice of any kind will never be eradicated in my view. Because there are folk and always will be folk who disagree with the sentiments described and that goes both ways and in all directions. Despite that a lot of work has been done and continues to be done on these issues and I believe it is working “in the main”. The world isn’t perfect, people have opinions which I don’t agree with and I’m fine with that. If someone thinks I’m a bell end or find something to poke fun at well that’s life I’m afraid, rise above it and show you’re the better person. That's the point being prejudice is not illegal and people have them it's another way of saying dislikes something or someone. Discrimination IS illegal and it's when somebody acts with prejudice to deny a job opportunity (for example) on grounds of race,religion gender,sexuality etc, it becomes sexual discrimination etc and by definition the act if applied to race would be a racist act.
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jun 29, 2020 17:24:08 GMT
I said “in the main” because I believe prejudice of any kind will never be eradicated in my view. Because there are folk and always will be folk who disagree with the sentiments described and that goes both ways and in all directions. Despite that a lot of work has been done and continues to be done on these issues and I believe it is working “in the main”. The world isn’t perfect, people have opinions which I don’t agree with and I’m fine with that. If someone thinks I’m a bell end or find something to poke fun at well that’s life I’m afraid, rise above it and show you’re the better person. That's the point being prejudice is not illegal and people have them it's another way of saying dislikes something or someone. Discrimination IS illegal and it's when somebody acts with prejudice to deny a job opportunity (for example) on grounds of race,religion gender,sexuality etc, it becomes sexual discrimination etc and by definition the act if applied to race would be a racist act. It would be the 2010 equality act and the protected characteristics that would be broken. Being prejudice isn't saying you dislike someone or something though. It's much stronger than that. The google definition is: preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience. "prejudice against people from different backgrounds" It's a fine line between being prejudice and discriminating too - one could easily flow into the other. 'Unconscious bias' probably happens a lot.
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Jun 29, 2020 17:51:30 GMT
Football as a sport isn't 'niche' and it isn't niche for blokes so why aren't black or Asian folk more equally represented - its a fair enough question. Nobody is saying that there should be an exact split but even from a business perspective it would surely be of interest to know why 10-15% of your local population aren't interested in coming through the turnstyles rather than just shrugging shoulders and thinking they probably just prefer cricket or kabaddi. According to information provided by the Sony Pictures Network India, over 100 million people in India watched the earlier world cup qualifiers (the data includes both Sony TV channels and streaming services). That's out of a population where about half have tv's so about 20% of the population watched the world cup. The number of folk who watched the final here so biggest came not involving England was only about 30-35% so even in India its no longer niche let alone folk who've lived here for generations. So should gospel choirs in the UK have 87% white people to match the population demographic? I find your arguments about numbers ludicrous, and more akin to cultural imperialism than anything else. The BBC were telling me that the countryside is racist yesterday. Maybe there are actually differences between cultures and races after all. Of course there are differences in culture - I'm not saying that 4% of the population of Scotland should be represented playing curling or that 96% of the kabaddi Scotland should be white so you're taking a hammer to a strawman of your own making. However, asking why the number one sport in this country, enjoyed worldwide, is not even remotely watched by anywhere near proportional split of their ethnic population is a fair question along with asking whether open racism in the 80's affects it. I'd find it culturally insensitive and a bit weird if a choir was made up of 87% white folk and started singing 'Wade in the Water' with gusto. I wouldn't find it weird or culturally insensitive that 13% down the Brit on matchday were BAME.
|
|
|
Post by leicspotter on Jun 29, 2020 17:54:31 GMT
It IS a fair enough question. If our away day the season before last at the Hawthorns is anything to go by, black fans wouldn't want to be in a Stoke crowd. Family/friends of a black Stoke player were abused by a number of knuckle draggers posing as potters fans, and then asked to relocate by police and stewards. Racism exists and it exists in OUR club just as it does in other clubs and the wider society, and it's not just a black/white issue by any stretch of the imagination I'm not convinced that the BLM actions are the answer but something needs to be done. In this country we have a raft of 'anti discrimination laws' which don't seem to have resolved very much either. Wish I knew the answer I took my mrs with me into a cricket club about 10 years ago to watch Stoke with my mates on the tele when we were visiting. I got slightly delayed at the door going in so she was ten yards in front. Not realising she was with me the lad standing in earshot asked 'what the fuck is a paki doing in here!' That's within 30 seconds of taking her into a Stoke football crowd. No idea what the answer is - regulation never works as diktat top down doesn't guarantee buy in bottom up and if anything it just speeds up the cycle. South Sea bubble caused legislation to be passed to avoid any future financial crashes and that worked out mint! Your Mrs shouldn't have to face that sort of thing...nor should anyone else...
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 29, 2020 17:56:04 GMT
I said “in the main” because I believe prejudice of any kind will never be eradicated in my view. Because there are folk and always will be folk who disagree with the sentiments described and that goes both ways and in all directions. Despite that a lot of work has been done and continues to be done on these issues and I believe it is working “in the main”. The world isn’t perfect, people have opinions which I don’t agree with and I’m fine with that. If someone thinks I’m a bell end or find something to poke fun at well that’s life I’m afraid, rise above it and show you’re the better person. That's the point being prejudice is not illegal and people have them it's another way of saying dislikes something or someone. Discrimination IS illegal and it's when somebody acts with prejudice to deny a job opportunity (for example) on grounds of race,religion gender,sexuality etc, it becomes sexual discrimination etc and by definition the act if applied to race would be a racist act. So a male perspective parliamentary candidate that is excluded from a all female shortlist Has been a victim of sexual discrimination
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jun 29, 2020 18:01:25 GMT
That's the point being prejudice is not illegal and people have them it's another way of saying dislikes something or someone. Discrimination IS illegal and it's when somebody acts with prejudice to deny a job opportunity (for example) on grounds of race,religion gender,sexuality etc, it becomes sexual discrimination etc and by definition the act if applied to race would be a racist act. So a male perspective parliamentary candidate that is excluded from a all female shortlist Has been a victim of sexual discrimination Ah that's positive discrimination as some call it.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jun 29, 2020 18:01:52 GMT
That's the point being prejudice is not illegal and people have them it's another way of saying dislikes something or someone. Discrimination IS illegal and it's when somebody acts with prejudice to deny a job opportunity (for example) on grounds of race,religion gender,sexuality etc, it becomes sexual discrimination etc and by definition the act if applied to race would be a racist act. It would be the 2010 equality act and the protected characteristics that would be broken. Being prejudice isn't saying you dislike someone or something though. It's much stronger than that. The google definition is: preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience. "prejudice against people from different backgrounds" It's a fine line between being prejudice and discriminating too - one could easily flow into the other. 'Unconscious bias' probably happens a lot. Ok.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 29, 2020 18:03:55 GMT
So a male perspective parliamentary candidate that is excluded from a all female shortlist Has been a victim of sexual discrimination Ah that's positive discrimination as some call it. But still discrimination
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jun 29, 2020 18:08:17 GMT
Ah that's positive discrimination as some call it. But still discrimination Positive discrimination has been around for some time to increase the numbers of women on a board of directors and increasing BAME employees to meet quotas etc. It is an acceptable method to recruit people. In the full sence if the word yes it is but its an accepted method.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 29, 2020 18:22:29 GMT
Positive discrimination has been around for some time to increase the numbers of women on a board of directors and increasing BAME employees to meet quotas etc. It is an acceptable method to recruit people. In the full sence if the word yes it is but its an accepted method. Unless on merit your the best qualified and your not considered To me that is not acceptable in any form
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jun 29, 2020 18:28:23 GMT
Positive discrimination has been around for some time to increase the numbers of women on a board of directors and increasing BAME employees to meet quotas etc. It is an acceptable method to recruit people. In the full sense if the word yes it is but its an accepted method. Unless on merit your the best qualified and your not considered To me that is not acceptable in any form Unfortunately mate thems the rules.
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Jun 29, 2020 18:35:17 GMT
I took my mrs with me into a cricket club about 10 years ago to watch Stoke with my mates on the tele when we were visiting. I got slightly delayed at the door going in so she was ten yards in front. Not realising she was with me the lad standing in earshot asked 'what the fuck is a paki doing in here!' That's within 30 seconds of taking her into a Stoke football crowd. No idea what the answer is - regulation never works as diktat top down doesn't guarantee buy in bottom up and if anything it just speeds up the cycle. South Sea bubble caused legislation to be passed to avoid any future financial crashes and that worked out mint! Your Mrs shouldn't have to face that sort of thing...nor should anyone else... She didn't hear as they waited until she walked past and obviously didn't realise I was trying catch up.
|
|