Jump to content

Greg Clarke - Racist or PC victim ?


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Do you not know how to use Google?

Here you go. If you need any help with the big words let me know.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-54888197

The BBC, not exactly the best ones to provide an explanation of what is wrong with the terminology used by Greg Clarke, as demonstrated by their stupid warning about the content.

And you're becoming quite adept at patronising posters whose opinions don't agree with yours, aren't you?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sheaf Saint said:

I wasn't outraged, I was just asking the question. But this time you have used it deliberately, without the slightest awareness of what a c*nt it makes you look, on this of all threads. 

Please educate yourself on the origin of the term so you can understand how inappropriate it is. 

Educate yourself 😆hysterical. 

I tried to educate myself by looking in the dictionary and it told me that the word "mong" is slang for "a foolish person." It's still funny that you jumped to outrage over a typo. Oh and Mings was acting incredibly foolish so it's not that out of place then going by that definition. 

Edited by hypochondriac
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Turkish said:

ah bless, going on the attack. I asked you what you thought, not what the BBC tells you to think. What's up, cant make up your own opinions?

That article explains why some people find the word offensive, I'm not sure what more I can add.

Do I need to draw something in crayons for you?

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, aintforever said:

That article explains why some people find the word offensive, I'm not sure what more I can add.

Do I need to draw something in crayons for you?

It's your opinion i asked for,, sorry if you that means you need to think for yourself instead of being told what you should think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He was on borrowed time for his handling of the recent Project Big Picture nonsense. 

The use of the word 'coloured' is at best clumsy, at worst offensive. His description on gay players making a 'life choice' is ridiculous and incredibly stupid too. The fact that he then went on to compound these statements with lazy stereotypes about Girls/Womens football and South Asians in the IT department is almost laughable. 

My experience of those in charge of my local FA is that it is almost entirely ran by old white men, who haven't got a clue about modern football. The total lack of investment in the local grassroots game in my area is only now slowly (and I mean painfully so) being rectified. There is huge demand for girls football in the area, but a total lack of facilities and very little effort on the part of the local FA to encourage it. Sunday Mens football is almost dead. Saturday football suffers from poor organisation, lack of facilities and bizarre decisions on scheduling. 

The problem is that in a normal setting, Government would probably come in and enforce change - but if that happened, FIFA would actually ban England from all competitions (I am not even joking!). 

The sooner that we get young, progressive, ex - players in charge of the FA the better. Of course this is just my personal opinion and fully expect to be shot-down. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, edprice1984 said:

He was on borrowed time for his handling of the recent Project Big Picture nonsense. 

The use of the word 'coloured' is at best clumsy, at worst offensive. His description on gay players making a 'life choice' is ridiculous and incredibly stupid too. The fact that he then went on to compound these statements with lazy stereotypes about Girls/Womens football and South Asians in the IT department is almost laughable. 

My experience of those in charge of my local FA is that it is almost entirely ran by old white men, who haven't got a clue about modern football. The total lack of investment in the local grassroots game in my area is only now slowly (and I mean painfully so) being rectified. There is huge demand for girls football in the area, but a total lack of facilities and very little effort on the part of the local FA to encourage it. Sunday Mens football is almost dead. Saturday football suffers from poor organisation, lack of facilities and bizarre decisions on scheduling. 

The problem is that in a normal setting, Government would probably come in and enforce change - but if that happened, FIFA would actually ban England from all competitions (I am not even joking!). 

The sooner that we get young, progressive, ex - players in charge of the FA the better. Of course this is just my personal opinion and fully expect to be shot-down. 

You refer to "lazy stereotypes". He was referring to what was said to him, and what he's seen. Why is it wrong to mention as a fact something that one sees and hears as a fact? I have daughters, when they were younger and did footy training. they hated having the ball booted at them. That's a statement of fact, not a stereotype. 

I'm with you completely on the gay point though. Describing sexuality as any kind of choice shows a complete lack of awareness. 

I have no idea of the make up of the FA. I agree though that ex players relatively fresh out of the game should be involved. You've not suggested that those players should be black. If you were implying that, we'd disagree - give the job to the best candidates regardless of race. Positive discrimination, for me, is discriminatory and should have no place. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whole fcking sports bulletin on bbc this morning was about this. So boring and the earnest sanctimonious bs spouted and didn’t talk about one other story.

Didn’t even show Rahm’s mental golf shot at Augusta. Never seen anything like it

if anyone’s interested a recent Sam Harris podcast about Trump’s popularity is interesting. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, egg said:

You refer to "lazy stereotypes". He was referring to what was said to him, and what he's seen. Why is it wrong to mention as a fact something that one sees and hears as a fact? I have daughters, when they were younger and did footy training. they hated having the ball booted at them. That's a statement of fact, not a stereotype. 

I'm with you completely on the gay point though. Describing sexuality as any kind of choice shows a complete lack of awareness. 

I have no idea of the make up of the FA. I agree though that ex players relatively fresh out of the game should be involved. You've not suggested that those players should be black. If you were implying that, we'd disagree - give the job to the best candidates regardless of race. Positive discrimination, for me, is discriminatory and should have no place. 

 

I think he was referring to coming out as being gay as a life choice rather than the choice being gay.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aintforever said:

The article refers mainly to the US, which has a vastly different history regarding racism than the UK, so much so, there's no comparison. The word "coloured" harks back to a time when "coloreds" endured segregation, among other evils, and is rightly seen in that context as offensive. Conversely, in South Africa the term is used without offence apparently, despite the Aparteid history where blacks were seen as unfit to mix with the white minority in any way, about as bad as it could be.

So where does that leave the UK with term. We have never practiced slavery, segregation or state sponsored persecution of our non-white population. A handful of NF nutters and a few nasty coppers is no comparison to what's happened, and is happening, in the US.

I always thought the term "coloured" was more respectful than "black" for example in this country. Again, the same words in different order can give offence , or not . "Person of colour", fine - "Coloured Person", take him down. Who has decided this in our country and with what authority ? No one seems to know. Many people get "offended" because they're told to. The BLM movement was spawned on the back of police murdering black people at will, which is f*** all to do with this country.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

I think he was referring to coming out as being gay as a life choice rather than the choice being gay.

That's not how I heard it, but regardless, the words gay and choice in the same breath aren't clever. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, kyle04 said:

The article refers mainly to the US, which has a vastly different history regarding racism than the UK, so much so, there's no comparison. The word "coloured" harks back to a time when "coloreds" endured segregation, among other evils, and is rightly seen in that context as offensive. Conversely, in South Africa the term is used without offence apparently, despite the Aparteid history where blacks were seen as unfit to mix with the white minority in any way, about as bad as it could be.

So where does that leave the UK with term. We have never practiced slavery, segregation or state sponsored persecution of our non-white population. A handful of NF nutters and a few nasty coppers is no comparison to what's happened, and is happening, in the US.

I always thought the term "coloured" was more respectful than "black" for example in this country. Again, the same words in different order can give offence , or not . "Person of colour", fine - "Coloured Person", take him down. Who has decided this in our country and with what authority ? No one seems to know. Many people get "offended" because they're told to. The BLM movement was spawned on the back of police murdering black people at will, which is f*** all to do with this country.

It's the same with the etymology of more benign words, their meanings change over time, it's just the way it is and really should be no big deal. 

Just like no one decided that cunt was going to be a high ranking swear word, it just became one. It's only an assemblage of four letters and means the same thing as it did when it was first used but because of the values loaded on to it, it's a word you can't use at work. But you wouldn't get told off calling someone a dick.

As far as I can see there is no reason for Paki to be offensive, but it is deemed so by many Pakistanis, so I wouldn't use it.

Edited by Fan The Flames
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, whelk said:

Whole fcking sports bulletin on bbc this morning was about this. So boring and the earnest sanctimonious bs spouted and didn’t talk about one other story.

Didn’t even show Rahm’s mental golf shot at Augusta. Never seen anything like it

if anyone’s interested a recent Sam Harris podcast about Trump’s popularity is interesting. 
 

That was something else, and I don't even like golf.  I even showed the missus, and she doesn't like golf either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, egg said:

You refer to "lazy stereotypes". He was referring to what was said to him, and what he's seen. Why is it wrong to mention as a fact something that one sees and hears as a fact? I have daughters, when they were younger and did footy training. they hated having the ball booted at them. That's a statement of fact, not a stereotype. 

I'm with you completely on the gay point though. Describing sexuality as any kind of choice shows a complete lack of awareness. 

I have no idea of the make up of the FA. I agree though that ex players relatively fresh out of the game should be involved. You've not suggested that those players should be black. If you were implying that, we'd disagree - give the job to the best candidates regardless of race. Positive discrimination, for me, is discriminatory and should have no place. 

 

Of course the alternative way of viewing it was he was talking about coming out being a lifestyle choice and if a player decides to do that and is comfortable with that then team mates should support that. Certainly that's how i would read the comment without hoping it would offend me (i'm not saying thats you but some would be)

 

The real issue is once you run out in front of 60,000 people and you decided on Monday that you wanted to disclose your sexuality – and I would never pressure anybody to disclose their sexuality – what I would want to do is to know that anybody who runs out onto the pitch and says, ‘I’m gay. I’m proud of it and I’m happy. It’s a life choice, and I’ve made it because my life is a better place’, I’d like to believe and I do believe they would have the support of their mates in the changing room.”

Edited by Turkish
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kyle04 said:

The article refers mainly to the US, which has a vastly different history regarding racism than the UK, so much so, there's no comparison. The word "coloured" harks back to a time when "coloreds" endured segregation, among other evils, and is rightly seen in that context as offensive. Conversely, in South Africa the term is used without offence apparently, despite the Aparteid history where blacks were seen as unfit to mix with the white minority in any way, about as bad as it could be.

So where does that leave the UK with term. We have never practiced slavery, segregation or state sponsored persecution of our non-white population. A handful of NF nutters and a few nasty coppers is no comparison to what's happened, and is happening, in the US.

I always thought the term "coloured" was more respectful than "black" for example in this country. Again, the same words in different order can give offence , or not . "Person of colour", fine - "Coloured Person", take him down. Who has decided this in our country and with what authority ? No one seems to know. Many people get "offended" because they're told to. The BLM movement was spawned on the back of police murdering black people at will, which is f*** all to do with this country.

Spot on, especially the bit in bold.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Of course the alternative way of viewing it was he was talking about coming out being a lifestyle choice and if a player decides to do that and is comfortable with that then team mates should support that. Certainly that's how i would read the comment without hoping it would offend me (i'm not saying thats you but some would be)

 

The real issue is once you run out in front of 60,000 people and you decided on Monday that you wanted to disclose your sexuality – and I would never pressure anybody to disclose their sexuality – what I would want to do is to know that anybody who runs out onto the pitch and says, ‘I’m gay. I’m proud of it and I’m happy. It’s a life choice, and I’ve made it because my life is a better place’, I’d like to believe and I do believe they would have the support of their mates in the changing room.”

Cheers, reading the whole quote you can see that his intentions were honourable. Where he fell down was the use of the word choice, which in the context of saying other things which seemingly cause offence, wasn't too clever. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, egg said:

Cheers, reading the whole quote you can see that his intentions were honourable. Where he fell down was the use of the word choice, which in the context of saying other things which seemingly cause offence, wasn't too clever. 

Its choice of words in the racism outrage too, his point was that black and female footballers get a lot of grief on social media, if he’d have said people of colour get a lot of grief on social media then Everyone would have applauded him. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Not a hope in hell at the FA.  It'll be a white bloke between 50 and 60.

Nah, they'll go all BBC. It'll be a black ex player or e female ex player, which is fine if its on merit but I suspect that a white male candidate now has zero chance of getting the job on merit. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, egg said:

Nah, they'll go all BBC. It'll be a black ex player or e female ex player, which is fine if its on merit but I suspect that a white male candidate now has zero chance of getting the job on merit. 

Agreed. Not a chance will it be an old white man regardless of their ability. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, igsey said:

From what I understand this case was more of a "straw that broke the camel's back" scenario rather than him losing his job over one poorly-worded phrase.

This is the sum total of it.  Using the phrase 'coloured people' is a classic bumbling boomer mistake that in itself doesn't add up to that much - though he hardly qualifies for a pass given his position.  It's more that he's seemed recently to have managed to combine being devious and incompetent on an epic scale.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Saint_Jonny said:

Fortunately the baby boomers of Saints Web don't get to decide what is offensive to a specific group of people. 

Clarke used a bunch of archaic terms and has been rightly put back in his box. 

That article was on the money but it reminded me of going to Graceland and hearing Elvis refer to the guy that sang "(your love is) lifting me higher" as the "coloured Elvis"....it was a bit awkward listening to it then but yeah, as I said, it was a classification and something someone like him should have known about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off topic this but in the last few days on my local Facebook Neighbourhood watch page someone said there was an Asian man in a red top and jeans looking in and out of car ports on one of the roads. Schoolboy error that. So many people raged into the poster stating why he couldn't just be described as a man and then even a few were saying you can't call him a man and just a person. I believe the original poster of this was eventually booted from the group when trying to defend his wording while just trying to help others keep a look out for some criminal activity. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Hockey_saint said:

That article was on the money but it reminded me of going to Graceland and hearing Elvis refer to the guy that sang "(your love is) lifting me higher" as the "coloured Elvis"....it was a bit awkward listening to it then but yeah, as I said, it was a classification and something someone like him should have known about.

You just don't get this history thing, do you? Elvis died 44 years ago, and was raised in the South of the US, so a little understanding of historical context ought to be a mitigating factor to be taken into account by any sensible person. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Wait for that terminology to catch on and news features will be riveting!  "A person was shot today whilst walking on a brdige.  Police are currently looking for a different person".  That should help narrow it down :mcinnes:

You are assuming they identify as a human.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, skintsaint said:

Slightly off topic this but in the last few days on my local Facebook Neighbourhood watch page someone said there was an Asian man in a red top and jeans looking in and out of car ports on one of the roads. Schoolboy error that. So many people raged into the poster stating why he couldn't just be described as a man and then even a few were saying you can't call him a man and just a person. I believe the original poster of this was eventually booted from the group when trying to defend his wording while just trying to help others keep a look out for some criminal activity. 

How dare they assume his gender!

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, skintsaint said:

Slightly off topic this but in the last few days on my local Facebook Neighbourhood watch page someone said there was an Asian man in a red top and jeans looking in and out of car ports on one of the roads. Schoolboy error that. So many people raged into the poster stating why he couldn't just be described as a man and then even a few were saying you can't call him a man and just a person. I believe the original poster of this was eventually booted from the group when trying to defend his wording while just trying to help others keep a look out for some criminal activity. 

Sounds about right these days. You can imagine the police interviewing him as a witness :

"Can you describe the person you saw" - "A man"

"Can you remember anything about his appearance" - "Sidney Poitier's my favourite actor"

"You saw his face, can you describe his ethnicity" - "Can I go now ?"

Police are looking for a man in connection with the incident. If anyone has seen a man, please call ......

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2020 at 21:30, rallyboy said:

Had to step down for being totally out of touch with society and thus unfit to do the job.

Not especially racist, but his job involves awareness of several subjects.

He displayed none.

 

Basically this, and too stupid to realise that language is important, and revealed his underlying attitudes. Being gay is a "life choice", really? He said a women’s coach had told him that the lack of women’s goalkeepers was due to girls not liking the ball being kicked at them. Why even mention that, even if it were true? About the only cliched attitude he didn't express was that most women footballers are lesbian.. 😀

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, suewhistle said:

Basically this, and too stupid to realise that language is important, and revealed his underlying attitudes. Being gay is a "life choice", really? He said a women’s coach had told him that the lack of women’s goalkeepers was due to girls not liking the ball being kicked at them. Why even mention that, even if it were true? About the only cliched attitude he didn't express was that most women footballers are lesbian.. 😀

That’s not what he said 

As for you other point, well if that's a reason why there aren't more female goalkeepers then of course it should be mentioned? Why shy away from the truth because a few people might get offended by it? Bizarre logic.

You should listen to this guy Sue, read his book, you'll learn a lot.  he's a hero of mine and an absolute legend, he believes we shouldn't hide from the truth because it might upset people https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LQ1isMTDjY

Edited by Turkish
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, whelk said:

I heard lots of women don’t want to play unless they can wear a pink dress. 

I Heard a lot of girls are put off taking up football as they worried about coming out as straight and are worried they might get abuse from the fans and in the changing rooms from their team mates

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2020 at 21:49, suewhistle said:

 He said a women’s coach had told him that the lack of women’s goalkeepers was due to girls not liking the ball being kicked at them. Why even mention that, even if it were true? About the only cliched attitude he didn't express was that most women footballers are lesbian.. 😀

Because in the context of why girls don't come into the game and become goalkeepers, it's entirely correct to give an explanation as to why girls don't come into the game and become goalkeepers. 

When the truth offends and can't be spoken, there is a problem. 

I believe what he was told. I have 2 daughters and tried to get them into footy. They hated getting the ball booted at them. And getting muddy. And getting cold. They both quit. One went on to do dance, and the other trampolining. Very well in fact. 

In the real world, the reality often matches the stereotypes. 

Edited by egg
Link to post
Share on other sites

My daughter played football for years and every match she played there were always two goalkeepers. A lot of them were shit and some only saved with their legs because they weren't natural keepers but they were happy to have balls hit at them. After all plenty of girls do martial arts, box, play rugby...

In my opinion it's a supply issue snd a coaching issue. My son plays and a lot of young boys become goalkeepers to get to into teams they couldn't out on pitch. It's a face saving move, they then get into it and get specific coaching. This doesn't happen in all girls football, yet. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

My daughter played football for years and every match she played there were always two goalkeepers. A lot of them were shit and some only saved with their legs because they weren't natural keepers but they were happy to have balls hit at them. After all plenty of girls do martial arts, box, play rugby...

In my opinion it's a supply issue snd a coaching issue. My son plays and a lot of young boys become goalkeepers to get to into teams they couldn't out on pitch. It's a face saving move, they then get into it and get specific coaching. This doesn't happen in all girls football, yet. 

All girls are different, I can only say what mine were like. Based on their experience, I can accept what Clarke was told, and in the context of the forum, why he raised it. People in authority cannot be fearful of giving anecdotes and explanations in case it breaches some unwritten social rules. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})