10 hours ago, Brutos said:

No don't care he lost his job...he looks the other side of 45 and if he reached this point in his life and doesn't know how to behave they he deserves that. It's 2019 not 1919.....

That’s quite embarrassing for you then isn’t it? You don’t care someone’s life could be ruined for something that he hasn’t done (hence why he’s not been prosecuted). If you don’t like people shouting abuse at football you’re 100% correct in staying away. Maybe try watching cricket or tennis? You can politely applaud both teams/players after every bit of action. 

 

Football is a passionate sport, whether you’re playing it or supporting a side in it. That’s the nature of the game. To brand everything racist is cringeworthy. Your line ‘you? can see the racially charge intention in his abuse’ gave me a particular chuckle. You can’t see f**k all, except over the top passion. So if anyone gets in an argument with someone of another race it’s instantly a racially charged argument? Not a chance.

 

the clubs hypocrisy stinks as well, backed JT to the hilt but not our own fans, even when there was arguably more evidence against Terry.

It’s nice to see that so many people are genuinely concerned for this guy’s wellbeing.

The thing is, the club HAD to be seen taking strict action on this. If we'd just dropped the investigation or said 'we didn't have enough evidence' (like the courts did) then these pricks would continue coming to the games week in and week out acting the same way. And as a PR exercise, we as a club would look even worse than we already do. 

It's not just that the bloke probably did say those racist things (lip-reading isn't an exact science is it) but his sheer demeanour and behaviour was absolutely disgusting and abhorrent. I really felt embarrassed watching it.

This type of behaviour is just not on and I am glad the club has issued a life ban to him and temp bans to those other scrotes. 

 

Edited July 31, 20196 yr by Blueblur

Seems like a dangerous precedent to set, banning someone when they were not found to be guilty, it does strike me as a PR exercise.

Whether or not the guy said what is claimed, I have no idea, I wasn't there, but for those of you saying you're glad he was banned just because of the abuse he was giving Sterling, that is disappointing to hear. That sort of thing goes on up and down the country every weekend in every ground. Are you saying you've never screamed at an opposition player and thrown out a load of obscenities before? I know I have and I barely get to any games. That 2-2 with Spurs when they kept hacking us down had me on my feet shouting numerous times. And you have to remember, it's not just a ban from football, this guy has had his life turned upside down, reportedly he's lost his job over this, he's been branded a racist by the world, when you search his name I'm sure it will lead straight to these stories now, that's not going to bode well for getting another job in the future (if he hasn't already). You are happy for all of this, just because he looked abusive or because you can apparently see the "racially charged intention"? 

If the guy was guilty, then the ban is fair, but no-one seems to know that for certain and everything is being done on assumption and hearsay.

But I'm sure the club thought they had to do something, especially since there has been spotlight recently on Roman's antisemitism events, and I'm sure they wanted to appear strong for all their sponsors. Unfortunately fairness doesn't seem to come into it anymore.

2 hours ago, Ewell CFC said:

Kick it Out’s spokesman commented that it was a very sad day for football when Chris Houghton got the sack ( this was later recinded)

This implies that he was sacked for racial reasons, and sums up the victim mindset.

I quite like CH, think he comes across very well, however he lost his job because it’s a results business and the results weren’t good enough, not because he’s black, mixed race, or pink with polkedots.

 

 

And  Claudio got sacked after taking the club to its highest posistion for 50 years. Did KIO say it was because he was a foreigner?                                                                         I used to be a right-on leftie and was anti this and anti that, until my eyes were opened and i turned away when the sickening hypocricy double standards became more and more evident.  

Edited July 31, 20196 yr by Dixons

1 hour ago, Blueblur said:

The thing is, the club HAD to be seen taking strict action on this. If we'd just dropped the investigation or said 'we didn't have enough evidence' (like the courts did) then these pricks would continue coming to the games week in and week out acting the same way. And as a PR exercise, we as a club would look even worse than we already do. 

It's not just that the bloke probably did say those racist things (lip-reading isn't an exact science is it) but his sheer demeanour and behaviour was absolutely disgusting and abhorrent. I really felt embarrassed watching it.

This type of behaviour is just not on and I am glad the club has issued a life ban to him and temp bans to those other scrotes. 

 

But that kind of ott behaviour has been going on every week for years without anyone being banned for it.                                                                                                                 I think the rules that are there are clear and fine - Kick them out for racist abuse. Throwing objects at players. Running onto the pitch.  The game will get into a terrible mess if fans start getting banned because someone with power thought a fans expression or demeanor was unacceptable. Where would we draw the line with that kind of nonsense?

Edited July 31, 20196 yr by Dixons

47 minutes ago, Zeta said:

Seems like a dangerous precedent to set, banning someone when they were not found to be guilty, it does strike me as a PR exercise.

Whether or not the guy said what is claimed, I have no idea, I wasn't there, but for those of you saying you're glad he was banned just because of the abuse he was giving Sterling, that is disappointing to hear. That sort of thing goes on up and down the country every weekend in every ground. Are you saying you've never screamed at an opposition player and thrown out a load of obscenities before? I know I have and I barely get to any games. That 2-2 with Spurs when they kept hacking us down had me on my feet shouting numerous times. And you have to remember, it's not just a ban from football, this guy has had his life turned upside down, reportedly he's lost his job over this, he's been branded a racist by the world, when you search his name I'm sure it will lead straight to these stories now, that's not going to bode well for getting another job in the future (if he hasn't already). You are happy for all of this, just because he looked abusive or because you can apparently see the "racially charged intention"? 

If the guy was guilty, then the ban is fair, but no-one seems to know that for certain and everything is being done on assumption and hearsay.

But I'm sure the club thought they had to do something, especially since there has been spotlight recently on Roman's antisemitism events, and I'm sure they wanted to appear strong for all their sponsors. Unfortunately fairness doesn't seem to come into it anymore.

Very well written. He’s not only lost his job ( corporate telecommunications) he’s now unemployable in that world.

It is a PR exercise. No doubt Marina and co brainstormed and came to the conclusion that the club had to be seen to be taking a tough stance, and it’s findings ( use that term loosely) worked backwards from that position.

The poor f**ker whose life is now in ashes is just collateral damage. It’s all a big pose, driven by gobby victim culture busy bodies and media bloodlust because it makes good copy.

Hopefully this climate of fear were living in will be looked back on similarly to McCarthyism- witch hunts, reds under the bed etc

The apologist mentally in here is exactly what I expect and will continue to expect.

11 minutes ago, Brutos said:

The apologist mentally in here is exactly what I expect and will continue to expect.

People up in arms about one man being treated unfairly while completely failing to realise this is how minorities have had live their lives for generations. Lots of hypocrisy going around as expected. 

The more of these types who won’t go to The Bridge because of it the better for me. At very least it might make the virtual waiting room a bit less of a f**ker!

5 hours ago, Blueblur said:

The thing is, the club HAD to be seen taking strict action on this. If we'd just dropped the investigation or said 'we didn't have enough evidence' (like the courts did) then these pricks would continue coming to the games week in and week out acting the same way. And as a PR exercise, we as a club would look even worse than we already do. 

It's not just that the bloke probably did say those racist things (lip-reading isn't an exact science is it) but his sheer demeanour and behaviour was absolutely disgusting and abhorrent. I really felt embarrassed watching it.

This type of behaviour is just not on and I am glad the club has issued a life ban to him and temp bans to those other scrotes. 

 

I mean how many games have you been to? What he did wasn’t out of the ordinary for us nor other teams, I’ve had c**ts fall over the top of me from the rows behind trying to give extended w**ker signs, there are always over zealous arseholes if you banned everyone who did what that guy didn’t you would have half empty stadiums.

I’m all for cutting out racism and although I grew up on the stories of our “firm” and I lused to like a bit of a harmless scrap, I can understand cutting that out too, if you look objectively grown men kicking f**k out of each other over supporting different men kicking a ball round a field is idiotic, but if they didn’t fight at football they would do it somewhere else, but I agree it’s not the right way for decent people to behave.

The banter however is part of football if it’s not venomous and just lads having fun I would hope there isn’t much wrong with that. 

I mean I’ve abused countless players on the tele and I’m sure we all have, and I thought when I see players like messi who particularly aggrieves me, in person, I’ll let him have some choice jeering but I didn’t not because I’m timid but because it’s embarrassing for self respecting people.

They are professionals there to entertain so I don’t like that the guy was going off at Sterling although he is a little twat, but it’s nothing new, watch when a player takes a corner in the opposite end, watch the video of frank warming up on the touch line getting abuse how he handles it...

Sterling is a little twat diva who I truly believe heard no racism but because Rio said there could have been from the studio Sterling went with it because he is that kind of a c**t, and I bet if you got the lot of them together with no one listening white c**ts is the least if what they would have to say, in my experience these people are the most racist they just don’t like it happening to them. 

If you grew up in inner London like I did in the 90’s during the height of rude boy culture you’ll know that white people got more stick than black people so the victim card is really tough to swallow for a Londoner who knows better. 

So it's apologist to question if it's the right thing to do, to tar and feather a man over a crime he had not been proven to commit?

No-one in here is being apologist about racism, everyone is saying that if he was proven to be guilty, then fine, throw the book at him. That is not what's being discussed. It's about whether or not this public shaming of someone, who has not been proven to do anything other than scream obscenities at a footballer from the stands, the same thing which thousands of people do every week, is fair and just. I don't see why some people can't see that. 

 

I just came on here to say this. This is a f**king Joke. The man has had his life ruined now for essentially shouting loudly at someone at a football match... When it boils down to it there is no proof that he used any racial slurs. So by Chelsea banning him they are implying that it is true and have now dragged the mans name through the mud, absolute pussy move. Chelsea should be standing behind its fans and telling the media to get f**ked. If I was him I would be suing for libel and defamation of character. And anyone celebrating this you are essentially celebrating sacrificing this mans life so that you can feel good about yourself stamping out another imaginary boogie man.

1 hour ago, Munkworth said:

People up in arms about one man being treated unfairly while completely failing to realise this is how minorities have had live their lives for generations. Lots of hypocrisy going around as expected. 

The more of these types who won’t go to The Bridge because of it the better for me. At very least it might make the virtual waiting room a bit less of a f**ker!

Come on man, don't be like this, we are allowed to question this decision without being labelleled as apologists or racists. 

There is zero convincing evidence that this bloke was racist, yet he has now lost his job over it and potentially had his life ruined. 

Now he has also been punished by the club, again with no convincing evidence, it's very worrying that this can happen. If it was obvious he was racist then I'm pretty sure most people on here would be more than happy to see him punished. 

As for the pikey thing, not sure how that's racist against West ham fans. But I presume this means opposition fans will now be done for calling us rent boys? 

Edited July 31, 20196 yr by dkw

7 hours ago, Blueblur said:

If we'd just dropped the investigation or said 'we didn't have enough evidence' (like the courts did) 

So if you were accused of a crime it went to court and you were found not guilty or the case was dropped for lack of evidence how would you feel if your work said we don't care we're still sacking you ?.

22 minutes ago, dkw said:

Come on man, don't be like this, we are allowed to question this decision without being labelleled as apologists or racists. 

There is zero convincing evidence that this bloke was racist, yet he has now lost his job over it and potentially had his life ruined. 

Now he has also been punished by the club, again with no convincing evidence, it's very worrying that this can happen. If it was obvious he was racist then I'm pretty sure most people on here would be more than happy to see him punished. 

As for the pikey thing, not sure how that's racist against West ham fans. But I presume this means opposition fans will now be done for calling us rent boys? 

I feel sorry for the guy who’s been made the scape goat but it was always going to be someone if people weren’t willing to move with the times and stop behaviour they’re being told is unacceptable. There’s a fine line between ‘banter’ and just generally being abusive. If you’ve gone full gammon face shouting it I don’t think it counts as banter.

For me the middle-aged men who get their kicks yelling at footballers (racist abuse or otherwise) until they’re red in the face or trying to start imaginary fights with away fans that’ll never happen couldn’t f**k off soon enough. They’re an embarrassment stuck in a bygone era. 

Seems to be a little confusion in this thread. The guy didn’t lose his job because anything he said was deemed , by BT, to be racist,  but because they felt they didn’t want to be associated with someone who vented their spleen so publicly.

You can argue the rights and wrongs of that if you wish but large corporations tend to have policies which mean that a person’s conduct, whether working or not, if deemed to be a poor reflection of their employer can have their employment terminated.

So, can we stop all this ‘he lost his job’ stuff because that’s his problem.

I can’t comment on whether I think he was racist or not because there is conflicting evidence and I suspect we will never know but I do agree this club needs to be a little more consistent.

Also, personally, I don’t care what other clubs fans do - all I care about is what our fans do. If we have racist fans then they should be treated in isolation with none of this ‘whataboutism’ which appears to be prevalent in this thread.

Edited July 31, 20196 yr by Crem

People up in arms about one man being treated unfairly while completely failing to realise this is how minorities have had live their lives for generations. Lots of hypocrisy going around as expected. 

The more of these types who won’t go to The Bridge because of it the better for me. At very least it might make the virtual waiting room a bit less of a f**ker!

That's just normal behaviour I don't really expect any less, I only get surprised when I don't see this behaviour and since 27th of a June 2016 the people who use to hide this behaviour are now empowered to do shout it loud and proud.

 

Anyone who tries to debate the abuse aimed at sterling isn't racist is just in denial.

 

All footballers get abused but with sterling it's absolutely different and they know it's. The media has planted this seed about him as a person and it's spread consciously and unconsciously. So when you see this....

 

 

If you believe this is just someome bantering with a player then you are part of the problem.

 

Singing he runs like a girl is banter.....that picture above goes beyond that.

 

34 minutes ago, Brutos said:

That's just normal behaviour I don't really expect any less, I only get surprised when I don't see this behaviour and since 27th of a June 2016 the people who use to hide this behaviour are now empowered to do shout it loud and proud.

 

Anyone who tries to debate the abuse aimed at sterling isn't racist is just in denial.

 

All footballers get abused but with sterling it's absolutely different and they know it's. The media has planted this seed about him as a person and it's spread consciously and unconsciously. So when you see this....

 

 

If you believe this is just someome bantering with a player then you are part of the problem.

 

Singing he runs like a girl is banter.....that picture above goes beyond that.

 

If you see this is just someone bantering with the player then you are part of the problem.

What drugs are you smoking?

Home end  right by the hoardings- d’you expect after a laiiry passage of play for the home fans to have the craic with the fella?

 

” Raheem old sport. Did you ever hear the one about the Scotsman, the Irishman and the Manc?

 

Edited July 31, 20196 yr by Ewell CFC

20 hours ago, Brutos said:

The responses here are pretty typical and standards responses of " o he didn't say that in that way just because he's black" or " I have black friends"

 

But explain why is it that any abuse that may be directed towards a black person is deemed to be because they are black.  And i don't understand the comment that it doesn't matter what the words are that are said, such as manc c**T, if they are said to a black person its racist intent.

So by that reasoning, whilst the manchester city fans were happily chanting Chelsea rent boys at the Chelsea fans, the white fans in that TV clip abusing Sterling would have simultaneoulsy have been homophobically abused but because the other guy in the clip was black, he wasn't being homophobically abused, that was racism by the entire Man City crowd.

 

On 30/07/2019 at 13:57, Ewell CFC said:

Kangaroo court, where the evidence was arranged to suit the required outcome no doubt.

 

Surely that's not the same instance where there was no evidence of racial abuse? If so jesus christ... 

Obviously the club is afraid of the bad PR it will recieve if they don't take action. 

2 hours ago, Munkworth said:

I feel sorry for the guy who’s been made the scape goat but it was always going to be someone if people weren’t willing to move with the times and stop behaviour they’re being told is unacceptable. There’s a fine line between ‘banter’ and just generally being abusive. If you’ve gone full gammon face shouting it I don’t think it counts as banter.

For me the middle-aged men who get their kicks yelling at footballers (racist abuse or otherwise) until they’re red in the face or trying to start imaginary fights with away fans that’ll never happen couldn’t f**k off soon enough. They’re an embarrassment stuck in a bygone era. 

Now this i agree with. Take away the racial connotations as the immediate response which seems to be the fashion nowadays and you're left with some pretty unsavoury behaviour by somebody who should be able to conduct themselves better, even in the face of so called perceived provocation, and in today's age this should be unacceptable.

Of course it diin't need the media frenzy that it got and wouldn't have happened if racism wasn't alleged.  After all i doubt we'd be hearing Jim White in his faux astonished voice declaring Chelsea have banned a fan for life for showing a w*nker hand gesture to Jurgen Klopp on TV.

1 hour ago, Brutos said:

That's just normal behaviour I don't really expect any less, I only get surprised when I don't see this behaviour and since 27th of a June 2016 the people who use to hide this behaviour are now empowered to do shout it loud and proud.

 

Anyone who tries to debate the abuse aimed at sterling isn't racist is just in denial.

 

All footballers get abused but with sterling it's absolutely different and they know it's. The media has planted this seed about him as a person and it's spread consciously and unconsciously. So when you see this....

 

 

If you believe this is just someome bantering with a player then you are part of the problem.

 

Singing he runs like a girl is banter.....that picture above goes beyond that.

 

Breaking News: You can verbally abuse someone without being racist. 

4 hours ago, Munkworth said:

People up in arms about one man being treated unfairly while completely failing to realise this is how minorities have had live their lives for generations. Lots of hypocrisy going around as expected. 

The more of these types who won’t go to The Bridge because of it the better for me. At very least it might make the virtual waiting room a bit less of a f**ker!

Well I might hurt your narrative a bit here since I'm a minority. I've said before that I've never experienced racism at the Bridge, I've been many times, not too much recently now that I'm working a lot of shifts. I've heard a lot of stories of racism though and my dad wasn't that keen on me going to football games.

But that's anecdotal so whatever, the main point here is the principle, a bloke is getting suspended for going to games because of something he may not have done. So are we just going to ban anybody who's gobby at matches? Say like 90% of people who go?  

 

1 minute ago, Slojo said:

So are we just going to ban anybody who's gobby at matches? Say like 90% of people who go?  

 

Yes, mainly because it’ll be much easier for me to get tickets. 

Just now, Munkworth said:

Yes, mainly because it’ll be much easier for me to get tickets. 

Noted, but I don't care about that. I think the principle matters. 

@Brutos accusing people of being an apologist for defending due process and using his argument from authority is exactly what's wrong with this situation. If so I'll use my own and show just how stupid his argument is.