Manchester United

[Kenneth]

I don't see a correlation between Luis Suarez using Evra's skin colour in a derogatory way, intended to insult or provoke him and being sanctioned for it, with the choice to rename a chocolate confectionery item.

Let me guess, it's all PC gone mad.

[Kenneth]

This is the position the FA have got themselves into through the little Englander / ignorance of other languages and cultures. The Suarez hearing concluded that there is no place for certain words on a football pitch regardless of context, and not wanting to go into the Suarez thing again but that is IMO a bad position to get yourself into, as context is everything, but that ruling has set a difficult precedent.

I get what you're saying, but I would be interested to hear of a footballing context where the word negro could be appropriately used. Anyone remember a time at work when they could have slipped it into a situation in an appropriate fashion.

[Exiled_red]

I get what you're saying, but I would be interested to hear of a footballing context where the word negro could be appropriately used. Anyone remember a time at work when they could have slipped it into a situation in an appropriate fashion.

It's the Spanish word for black, so in a conversation between Spanish speaking players it's possible. It is the equivalent of saying anyone who uses the word "black" (in English) regardless of context has committed a race related offence, I think most people would consider that crazy. "Pass me that black tape/bottle/...", "That guy in the black hat/shirt..." not necessarily commonly used but again all kinds of things in this type of context

[Kenneth]

Ok, fair enough amongst Spanish speakers when referencing black objects etc.. but in both if these instances, if was directed towards another person. In Suarez's case, he was found to have added black to his insults of Evra as an adjective, which the FA (and almost everyone else) view as racist abuse. Using Negrito as a noun is very different.

And let's be honest, the only reason the FA are bothering to look at the Cavani one is because of all the Liverpool fans hitting twitter because they fail to understand that distinction.

[Harv]

I don't see a correlation between Luis Suarez using Evra's skin colour in a derogatory way, intended to insult or provoke him and being sanctioned for it, with the choice to rename a chocolate confectionery item.

Let me guess, it's all PC gone mad.

It's not that hard is it? For starters im speaking more about the Cavani incident than the Suarez one.

The correlation is you're taking 1 language and shoehorning your beliefs and ideals from another language and culture into it, completely ignoring any context or language structure. It's ridiculous and actually quite offensive that people think English is the default language everyone in the world should speak and from now on everything needs to translate directly into English in a nice and friendly PC way.

[Harv]

I get what you're saying, but I would be interested to hear of a footballing context where the word negro could be appropriately used. Anyone remember a time at work when they could have slipped it into a situation in an appropriate fashion.

Yeah pretty ****ing regularly if im speaking Spanish.

This is what im getting at. The world doesn't revolve around English speaking nations FFS.

[Kenneth]

Yeah pretty ****ing regularly if im speaking Spanish.

This is what im getting at. The world doesn't revolve around English speaking nations FFS.

Sure, but irrespective of the spoken language, if you add black or the equivalent to insults, to a black person, you're being racist. "I called him a black *******, but he never knew his father and he is black so it wasn't racist" doesn't wash, even if said in Spanish. It's true, interpreting language, particularly other languages and/or the mixing of languages is fraught with issues, so I think trying to understand intent is vital, ie I agree that context is key. Suarez was taunting an opposition player whist referencing his race and was rightly sanctioned for it, Cavani was trying to congratulate a mate.

I'm no fan of the policing of language over intent; some old dear uses the term coloured sincerely and gets hounded on social media for it, it's disgusting and unhelpful. Whereas talking about people with a funny tinge is more revealing of attitude.

[Harv]

Sure, but irrespective of the spoken language, if you add black or the equivalent to insults, to a black person, you're being racist. "I called him a black *******, but he never knew his father and he is black so it wasn't racist" doesn't wash, even if said in Spanish. It's true, interpreting language, particularly other languages and/or the mixing of languages is fraught with issues, so I think trying to understand intent is vital, ie I agree that context is key. Suarez was taunting an opposition player whist referencing his race and was rightly sanctioned for it, Cavani was trying to congratulate a mate.

I'm no fan of the policing of language over intent; some old dear uses the term coloured sincerely and gets hounded on social media for it, it's disgusting and unhelpful. Whereas talking about people with a funny tinge is more revealing of attitude.

Agreed.

We're veering into analysing the Suarez vs Evra thing again here though. What they both said were as bad as each other. But only 1 got a ban. It was a witch-hunt and he was made an example of, rightly or wrongly.

My rant was started on the Cavani thing really. Its absolutely ludicrous to fine, ban or force him to apologise for what he's said, because there is simply nothing remotely offensive about it. Filthy Manc or not

[Exiled_red]

Obviously there are cases where black and other words regardless of the language can be used to cause offence, but there are cases where those words can be used in a completely innocent context. The conclusions after the Suarez case effectively said that there was a zero tolerance for certain words and concluded that context did not matter. It was highlighted by some at the time as not taking into account that such words could be used innocently in other languages or cultures, but the FA did not consider this.

As I said I think that this is a stupid ruling, but it set a precedent and that is the framework that the FA have to look at these incidents in. It looks to me that the FA have backed themselves into a corner and my interest in it is purely from that point of view as well as watching Man Utd fans make the arguments that that attacked our fans for making.

I am not defending Suarez or attacking Cavani. I am sure there will be some on our side expressing outrage that he doesn't get an 8 game ban which clearly isn't justified. As I have said on other subjects I just enjoy the FA jumping from one mess to another with the rulings and precedents that they set

[Kenneth]

Where do you get that from? That wasn't the ruling as I remember it. Suarez said he would not to use the word negro on a football pitch again as part of his evidence, but where do you get this bit from?:

The conclusions after the Suarez case effectively said that there was a zero tolerance for certain words and concluded that context did not matter

The FA report included the following:

We received expert evidence as to the use of the word "negro" in Uruguay and other areas of Latin America. It is often used as a noun to address people, whether family, friends or passers-by, and is widely seen as inoffensive. However, its use can also be offensive. It depends on the context. It is inoffensive when its use implies a sense of rapport or the attempt to create such rapport. However, if it were used, for example, with a sneer, then it might carry negative connotations. The Spanish language experts told us that if Mr Suarez said the things that Mr Evra alleged, they would be considered racially offensive in Uruguay and other regions of Latin America (paragraphs 162 to 202 above).

They didn't just conclude word = bad = sanction.


I suspect you're referring to this section..

Whether the words or behaviour are abusive or insulting is an objective matter; it does not depend on whether the alleged offender intended his words to be abusive or insulting

But I really don't think that supports your characterisation above. It's not talking about the use of a single word context free.

[Exiled_red]

Where do you get that from? That wasn't the ruling as I remember it. Suarez agreed not to use the word negro on a football pitch as part of accepting his sanction, but where do you get this bit from?:

It's essentially from memory of the report and discussions at the time I haven't looked at any of it recently. But I remember the regardless of context part being mentioned a number of times. I remember a discussion myself and some mates I played football with had, one of the lads was a South American Spanish speaker (non-LFC fan) who brought up the effective banning of the Spanish word for black and how culturally ignorant and xenophobic it made the FA look.

As I say I haven't looked at it in years so perhaps I am wrong, have misremembered something or have inadvertently taken something out of context or believed the press reporting of the case itself but that was something that I took away at the time and I wasn't the only one.

[Buzzo]

I think you can only be cautious around racism and be lead.

One incidence always springs to mind for me in the workplace about 5 years ago. The office I worked for a pretty big Fashion label was undergoing a lot of systems updates and regularly had all manner of people up visiting from London. Typically they would have a late taxi to the airport on a Friday afternoon.

There was a black woman who came up (I don't recall her name) but at the time she was the only black person within the office.

I was in my office chatting to a colleague when a Taxi driver popped his head round the door. He said he had to take the woman to the airport and he knew she had a flight to catch. She was in a meeting, and was in the basement so I said I'd phone down. He said he was to go down to help her with a case, so if we could describe her to him, he would go down and look for her......

Knowing the protocols around that description were a challenge.

"Err, I think she is wearing a red top".

[Cerbie]

"Err, I think she is wearing a red top".

That is what drives me crazy about this country, why is describing someone's colour considered a negative or unacceptable? I lived and worked in Trinidad for 3 years recently and they use whatever descriptor is easiest to pick someone out. I was the white guy one day and the grey haired man in a blue shirt the next. They use White, Black, Red, Indian, Latino and Chinese without prejudice.

Cavani has nothing to apologise for at all. Suarez was in all likelihood trying to provoke Evra or was at least biting back (sorry) at Evra's comment. It is in the past and we should leave it there and move on.

[Mr Pink]

"Err, I think she is wearing a red top".

Haha, I think to be fair, saying “she is a black lady” is not racist, but if you said “she is a negrita” it would be...

The N-word (the bad N word, worse than negrita) is used non offensively in many instances- think Denzel Washington in Training day or Samuel L Jackson in most his movies... just because they’re using the word in a non offensive matter, doesn’t make it a non offensive word...

I don’t really care if cavani is banned or not- I think it was racist, but 100% accidental and he had good intentions- unlike Bernardo last year... his argument seemed to be that Mendy wasn’t offended (probably actually was), so no one else should be either...

[Buzzo]

That is what drives me crazy about this country, why is describing someone's colour considered a negative or unacceptable? I lived and worked in Trinidad for 3 years recently and they use whatever descriptor is easiest to pick someone out. I was the white guy one day and the grey haired man in a blue shirt the next. They use White, Black, Red, Indian, Latino and Chinese without prejudice.

Totally, it felt 100% appropriate to describe her this way, but, there was just that nagging doubt about using the colour of someones skin to be the defining factor.

From a practical POV it was 100% the most effective way to describe her.

As a country we have unresolved issues around racism, and I suppose until we have resolved them we will always have these areas of uncertainty.