Quantcast

Rascal racism

710

Football’s impudent scamps have long caused more annoyance than actual harm to their clubs.  Many live by a different moral code to the rest of us which leads to all sorts of excesses, including the occasional violent bust-up.

Can you kick a team mate on the training field and punch him in the dressing room?  You bet, there are hundreds of precedents for you.  You can certainly kick lumps out of an opponent, but what about doling out racial references in the middle of a game?

The use of a racist term in my office, and I’m sure your workplace, would lead to summary disciplinary procedures, but football has a way of looking at miscreants through rose tinted lenses.  The hoary old defence on these occasions, be if for footballers or anyone else, is ‘He’s not a racist, some of his best friends are….’.

This doesn’t matter.  The guilty party may be more rascal than racist but he needs to be treated in the same way anyone else using racist language in the workplace would be.  English football has done enormous work to combat racism since the 1980s but it’s in danger of undermining these efforts by accommodating people who should know better.

You can order a hard copy of CQN Magazine, issue 5, with credit/debit card or Paypal and buy direct from the UK for only £3.50 + £1.50 postage and packing.  Shipping costs £2 to ROI, £3 to Europe and £4 to the rest of the known universe.  Click on the link below to order.

Click here to view the new issue of CQN Magazine online for free. You can support the online edition by making a discretionary donation here.

Many thanks to those who have helped get the magazine off and flying this year. Everyone who has contributed (or even read) are invited to the Cathedral House Hotel in Glasgow on Friday evening for a Christmas drink. Target time is 20:30, see you there.

Click Here for Comments >
Share.

About Author

710 Comments
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 17

  1. So I saw “Moneyball” recently.

     

     

    Excellent film written by the excellent writer of the equally excellent “The Social Network”.

     

     

    Brad Pitt plays a slightly less handsome version of Paul67.

     

     

    At one point he says “When your enemy’s making mistakes, don’t interrupt him.”

     

     

    Hmmmmm. (thumbsup)

  2. The Honset Cover-Up

     

     

    “It’s the equivalent of standing at Morrison’s supermarket trying to pay for a loaf of bread with an Asda voucher”

     

     

    Not if you’re the one who needs to use that voucher to buy the bread.

  3. Pogrebnyak scored 106 goals in 308 games.

     

     

    A goal in every 3 games.

     

    His best spell was at Zenith.

     

    Averaged a goal every 4 games for Stuttgart.

  4. Ten Men Won The League on

    Look for Jelavic to head for Russia, it means the Huns can hold on to him till mid February

  5. A football club in financial trouble, players leaving or refusing to play. Journalists ask officials about the problems.

     

     

    Another football club in financial trouble is repeatedly asked who they will be signing with no mention of any financial issues.

     

     

    Funny that

  6. KJamBhoy says:

     

    22 December, 2011 at 13:51

     

     

    Being an opportunist thief and someone who hasn’t produced the correct train ticket is totally different.

     

    The conductor spoke to the 19 year old like a child and the 19 year old reacted like an erse.

     

     

    Communication is poor. The big man made an error of judgement. Watch the video. He expected the boy to walk. When he didn’t he kind of stopped and then followed through and papped him off. he had went too far and had to get the guy off.

     

     

    It’s not a fine or jail time the 3 involved need just a good boot up the erchie!

     

     

    LB

  7. !!Bada Bing!! Kano 1000 on

    Livibhoy-Agree, the ones we need to get rid of are Loovens,Rasmussen.imo.Also time to stop players going to press conferences,the lapdogs ask them loaded questions and twist their answers,send out Lenny or big Jo

  8. The Honest Cover-up on

    Will be interesting to see the verdict on the Big Man’s case. I would personally never class that as “assault”.

     

    If the Big Man is found guilty after the Hearts thug skipped down the step celebrating a Not Proven verdict then we really have lost the plot.

  9. !!Bada Bing!! Kano 1000 – Livibhoy-Agree, the ones we need to get rid of are Loovens,Rasmussen.imo.Also time to stop players going to press conferences,the lapdogs ask them loaded questions and twist their answers,send out Lenny or big Jo

     

     

    Personally I would send out our devil dug, Hoopy.

     

     

    Either that, or Lord Humongous.

     

     

    But I’m pretty sure Lord Humongous is a hun. (thumbsup)

  10. Neil Lennon has confirmed Celtic trio Scott Brown, Adam Matthews and James Forrest have all been asked if they’d be interested in representing Team GB in next year’s Olympic Games.

     

     

    Letters from Football Association have been sent to every potential player for the home nations to see if they would be prepared to represent the country at the summer games in London.

     

     

    The Scottish Football Association and their Welsh counterparts say their stance on the issue won’t change, fearing that participation threatens the country’s independence as a footballing nation.

     

     

    Fifa claims each nation’s football sovereignty won’t be threatened by the move.

     

     

    The men’s team will be managed by Stuart Pearce. Last week he confirmed he will not select any player for Team GB if they have played a part in England’s Euro 2012 campaign.

     

     

    Three over-23 players are allowed in the 18-man squad and Brown would fall into this category if he decided he wished to participate.

     

     

    After receiving responses from the players, Pearce will make a final selection in the summer.

  11. Awe_Naw_No_Annoni_Oan_Anaw_Noo – Getting some of our bhoys into Team GB is the only thing that would make London 2012 worth watching.

     

     

    Make it so. (thumbsup)

  12. MWD

     

     

    In the spirit of Christmas we shall agree to differ :-)

     

     

    I know what you’re saying but I think there’s a way to conduct yourself and the young guy let himself down badly. Admittedly I know the same accusation could be levelled at the other fella.

     

     

    You going for drinks tomorrow?

  13. It was 1955 the last time Killie won at Celtic Park, I think in league play.

     

    Christmas eve is a big banana skin lying right there in front of us.

     

    I’m sure Neil has the team thinking only as far as this game

     

    but it must be hard not to be thinking about next Wednesday as well.

     

    Saturday is our task; three points, then on to the 28th.

  14. Ten Men Won The League on

    WGS

     

     

    His name wasn’t mentioned

     

     

    My info was mostly concerning the tax dodgers. They are looking for a wide player and were interested in Driver, but he rejected the move as he wants to go down south

  15. Afternoon, bhoys, what’s your thoughts on the team for the Killie game, at least 1 change with big Dan out, pity he has been solid in there with Victor. Is it Thomas as a straight swap or does Kelvin get the nod, he has been on the bench for the last few games?

     

    Possible Joe in for Charlie at LB ??

     

    I would leave the middle and front alone , I like the shape we have with 5 across the middle when required it gives protection to the defence , and when we attack it becomes 4-3-3 with the full backs also pushing forward.

     

     

    Looking forward to going to the game on Christmas Eve game rather than shopping

     

    come on you bhoys in green

     

     

    PS loved the video of the Leeds game, still have a program from Hampden game , neighbour a Dun Utd fan went and I was too young to be taken so said my mum, got the program as consolation !!!

  16. The Honest Cover-up @ 14:01

     

     

    Your comparison between the boy kicked off the train and someone trying to buy bread with a voucher didn’t make any sense to me. Would you be so quick to get annoyed at someone buying bread with a voucher and thus holding you up in a queue, if you’d been in that situation yourself once?

  17. Extraordinary says:

     

    22 December, 2011 at 13:42

     

     

    On the ‘Boyd to Celtic’ (non-)story … it could reasonably be argued that – at this point in time, with the Ibrokes coffers being empty and forlorn – it would be remiss of Celtic not to say they’d also be interested in any player the stickies said they were interested in signing …

  18. Caption contest;

     

    There’s only enough room for one Aberdonian at a time in the back of this.

  19. First, my apologies for being such a shockingly infrequent poster…

     

     

    Been reading back through the previous blog this morning and had to revisit one of the issues debated. It’s the question of whether the term ‘coloured’ is racist and whether we should use ‘coloured’ or ‘black’ in reference to people of African descent.

     

     

    Several posters debated which word was the more offensive. I don’t think this is about causing offence as such – offence is a bit of a red herring here. Instead it’s about being aware of the progress made in dismantling the subtler mechanics of discrimination. And language is always going to be at the centre of that because it’s such a powerful tool of oppression.

     

     

    A sociologist once explained the ‘coloured’ issue to me like this…

     

     

    In the past people spoke of ‘white’ people and ‘coloured’ people. In recent years there’s been a strong push from the black community to change that to ‘white’ people and ‘black’ people. Because the latter conveys a much greater sense of equality between the two groups.

     

     

    To say there are white people and everyone else is coloured gives a sense that white people are the standard and everyone else just goes in a ‘miscellaneous’ bucket. Semantically, it places white people above everyone else – the standard and the non-standard. The language is singling out white people as something special. Everyone else is simply non-white.

     

     

    One or two guys posting said they felt ‘black’ is more offensive than ‘coloured’. I have nothing but respect for these guys because they’re genuinely acting out of a desire to get it right. Unfortunately though, they’ve got it wrong.

     

     

    Their belief comes from older thinking, the kind that believes that anything described as black is bad. It’s a natural mistake – our language talks of “black days” and “blackened characters” as though black itself is reprehensible. So our guys will want to avoid referring to a decent person as such – and instead use the word ‘coloured’.

     

     

    Trouble is, in this context it will always come across as a euphemism – revealing that our guy feels there’s something inherently wrong with blackness. A black person will find this confusing because the black community has been professing nothing but its sheer pride in being black for decades through the media – and throughout the world for centuries.

     

     

    A black person you speak to when using the term ‘coloured’ will probably not be offended. But that’s not the point. They will also not take what you have to say seriously because your language shows a basic lack of awareness. “He’s a nice enough guy but he hasn’t got a clue” might be the black person’s conclusion.

     

     

    Remember, it’s not about offending the person, it’s about missing an opportunity to make a meaningful connection across cultures and see parallel issues in our communities. And that’s the real tragedy of it.

     

     

    On the subject of this otherwise phenomenal website generally, when it comes to issues of race and culture I have to confess to occasional feelings ranging from disappointment to outright depression.

     

     

    The whole reason I lurk here is to take in the incredible depth of detailed analysis – especially into the media and Scottish society – and their use of language. The general standard of awareness and commentary on social, political and cultural issues is incisive like laser surgery. It makes me proud to be a Celt.

     

     

    But then just sometimes I feel totally deflated when that acuity disappears once those incredible faculties are turned on a subject beyond Timdom and the Irish diaspora. Then suddenly I start reading people talking about things like ‘political correctness gone mad’. Some even display a wilful obtuseness designed to dismiss the experiences of other cultures which are often in analogous situations to our own.

     

     

    There are many on here who can apply our Celtic laser surgery to all other complex issues brilliantly – and I thank God for those posters. But there are also some who are incapable or unwilling to do so. Given our background, history – and what’s going on in the present day – that’s another tragedy.

     

     

    Some even dismiss semantics as some kind of irrelevance, disingenuously ignoring the fact most of the blood spilled on the cqn carpet during its legendary arguments is a direct result of… semantics.

     

     

    I want to conclude by returning briefly to the ‘coloured’ question. The easiest way I can see to explain the subtleties of this issue is to use a Celtic analogy. Or indeed to raise a proposal…

     

     

    I propose that we no longer refer to our team as Celtic. Instead, I propose we refer to it as ‘the green half of the Old Firm’.

     

     

    Why? Because it’s not offensive. It’s also descriptively accurate. Also, lots of Celtic fans in the past have referred to ‘the Old Firm match’. I’m sure if I went on to the official Celtic website and did a word search on ‘Old Firm’ I would bring back dozens, if not hundreds of references to it. And even our current management, board and players have used the ‘Old Firm’ term.

     

     

    So there’s absolutely no reason why we shouldn’t call ourselves ‘the green half of the Old Firm.’ And any politically correct numpties who disagree should get a life.

     

     

    “For we only know that there’s gonna be a show

     

    And the green half of the Old Firm will be there”

     

     

    (Sorry to hit and run, but literally MUST rush off right now. Will check blog later and come back to some points if any are raised)

  20. The Honest Cover-up says:

     

    22 December, 2011 at 13:39

     

     

    Can’t believe people on here are having a go at the Big Man. Describing him as a bully is completely unfair. He didn’t randomly pick on someone to throw out for a laugh.

     

    ______________________

     

     

    I was one of those who called the ‘Big Man’ a bully.

     

    I could not judge him any other way.

     

    There was NO need for his Charles Bronson impersonation.

     

    There was NO physical threat to anybody.

     

    As somebody else asked earlier, ..had the guy who was having an exchange with the ticket collector been of similar proportions to himself,

     

    do you think he would have been so aggresive ?

     

    No…. Neither do I.

     

    That makes him a BULLY.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 17