Racism in football Thread.

[Savannah boy]

Arimaman, where in my post does it say dat Carolina doh have racism? 

[Andre]

fordy,

CASL refereeing is a joke.

who you with Xtreme? allyuh is a boss side. i play for jamhuric fc against allyuh already. i say switch to the ADASL for better competition.

i eh active in dat league again because of the bull. but you go always find mih in noonday running ball on their nice fields...i prefer 1-4. the back fields a lil rough these days.

[Andre]

big up UEFA.

leh we see if it happen.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/8131082.stm

Uefa tightens anti-racism rules

Uefa has given referees the power to abandon matches in the event of racist chanting inside a stadium.

European football's governing body has implemented a three-step procedure that comes into force with immediate effect.

The referee should first demand over the public address system that fans' racist behaviour should stop.

The next step is to suspend the match for up to 10 minutes with the teams sent to the dressing room. If that does not work, the game should be abandoned.

Uefa president Michel Platini said there would be no compromise in his organisation's stance against racism in football.

"Our policy on racism is one of zero tolerance," said Platini.

"It was necessary to give the pitch people the means to do something, and we have determined the parameters and lines of conduct, whereby in important cases of racist behaviour in a stadium, a referee must stop the match.

"There are people of authority such as the referee and match delegate who can consult before deciding to temporarily suspend a match for five or 10 minutes, in agreement with officials responsible for security - and from then, if the atmosphere remains negative, the match must be stopped."


BBC Sport's Peter Scrivener

Platini first revealed plans to abandon matches in April of this year after Inter Milan striker Mario Balotelli was racially abused by Juventus fans.

The Italian authorities ordered Juve to play their next home league game behind closed doors.

England players Ashley Cole and Shaun Wright-Phillips were subjected to racial abuse when they played against Spain at Real Madrid's Bernabeu Stadium in 2004.

The decision was taken at a meeting of Uefa's executive committee in Vilnius, Lithuania.
Story from BBC SPORT:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/sport2/hi/football/8131082.stm

[Toppa]

Excellent.

[Bourbon]

Good.

[sammy]

so if a side losing, they could make some racist chants and have the game suspended?

[Mad Scorpion a/k/a Big Bo$$]

so if a side losing, they could make some racist chants and have the game suspended?

And what would be the benefit for them?  I doubt platini an dem so short sighted that it eh provide for such tactics.

[dinho]

is about time they implement a rule like this..

[weary1969]

  UEFA

[Filho]

i wonder if the game gets replayed or if the team with the racist fans loses the points? if it is the former, then that is a valid question by sammy

what if both teams have vocally racist fans?

the ruling could also attract racist groups who don't give a flying f*ck about football and just want a public forum to be seen.

nice idea..hope they have the details sorted

[freakazoid]

WHat does abandon mean? I hope it means that the  team loses

[mwanasoka]

Excellent ! 

WHat does abandon mean? I hope it means that the  team loses

I hope it really means a 3-0 loss for de offending team.

If it eh punitive, it eh mean nutten.

[Tenorsaw]

Platini working...he seems expecially focused on the ills of the game.  Next up:  curbing wanton big spending.....

[acb]

so if a side losing, they could make some racist chants and have the game suspended?

glad to see you making sense as EPL outta season  

but very valid point. I don't see it happening in La Liga or Serie A per se - but moreso in the UEFA Cup and Champions League matches.

I think they generalised "abandon" because any accusation will only be upheld pending a full investigation - otherwise lots of loopholes in the broad understanding and application of this rule can be exploited - just like the case you pointed out.

what if both teams have vocally racist fans?
the ruling could also attract racist groups who don't give a flying f*ck about football and just want a public forum to be seen.

In many cases that's exactly what it is. There was a match this past season in Germany where a pocket of fans were chanting pro-Nazi slogans and supporters of the same side pointed them out to authorities - so it would be unfair to punish the fans who are inherently good just because of a few rotten apples.

Then comes the curious case of Balotelli who was singled out on a team comprising other black players - not because he was black, but because of his attitude - an interpretation endorsed by other black players. How do you deal with that, without saying that it's ok to make racist chants once it's not really racist?

[Zeppo]

Inter Starlet Mario Balotelli To Be Given Anti-Racism Award

[fishs]

 The funny thing about racism is that yuh cyar buy yuh way out of it.
All the millionare ballers, when they in an airport or a train station and nobody recognise them or even in some cases when they do still face the looks and vibes that yuh is still ah nigger.
I expererience it all the time, no words are passed is just vibes, standing in line to buy something and people securing the purses tighter, looking at yuh straight in yuh eye as if to say you should not be in the same atmosphere as them.
At football games these people express that openly maybe because of alco consumption, a feeling of anonymity, mob strenght or whatever.
To say that you can justify fans calling a player nigger is absolute rubbish.
If racism can be stamped of sporting events , they maybe we will be on the way to a more tolerant world, Touches may be right when he says that rasicm is a fact of life but it is a fact of life for the uninformed and the twats.

[Rodney]

As everyone saying yuh can't justify racist comments, in whatever scenario....they still racist and therefore racism. If I am angry with someone, there are multitudes of things I could call that individual to insult them, make it personal but still not make it racist. The fact that I look at them and decide the best course of action is to insult their colour or ethnicity shows quite clearly that I have no problem with making insulting comments about another race and as that practice is a big part of racism....you would have to say I can't be a major supporter good race relations (and that is being diplomatic). If you truely support good race relations, you would insult a person as an individual rather than classyifying them Black, White, Indian etc.

To justify such practices.....and try to classify things just gives racists more oppertunity to vent their hate and get away with it. As they would argue "I ain't racist, I was just angry and wasn't thinking".

Hadn't seen this before, very surprised by Seedorf....like he have racist neighbours and fraid they go give him ah beating or something.

[sjahrain]

Has Gulitt Rykaard Ba Klibert Weah Seedoff been subjected to similar treatment

Raspect

[Zeppo]

Russia defends record on racism in WC bid



Russia World Cup bid chief defends racism track record

The head of Russia's 2018 World Cup bid has defended the country's track record in dealing with racism in football. Alexei Sorokin denies Russian football has a problem with racist fans, despite recent controversy in a league game.

Lokomotiv Moscow fans celebrated Peter Odemwingie's sale in the transfer window with a banner showing a banana and the message: "Thanks West Brom". Lokomotiv escaped sanction, but Sorokin told BBC Sport: "The RFU doesn't accept any demonstrations of racism." 

(continue)

[Tenorsaw]

Blame Fifa...they need to be consistently hardline on this issue:  increase the fines on clubs and associations found guilty of racism astronomically, and ban them.  Only then will they realize that this is serious "business" and take responsibility for the actions of their fans.

[Observer]

Seriously, the way FIFA is courting Russia, it leads one to conclude that FIFA's Racism campaign is just media hype.
Russia is by far one of the most open racist nations on the planet. Dick Advocat is on record as saying he was not allowed to sign black players at Zenith SP. Just recently upon the transfer of a player to West Brom fans in Russia had a huge banner saying thank you West Brom with a banana on it.

Recently in Ukraine ( I know its not Russia but Blokin openly stated that black players have no place in the League.

For once I would like to see FIFA make a stand and set an example for what they preach.

[Bourbon]

No its not just words.



Its a mamaguy.

[Quags]

Its money buddy ,which more important making Billions or helping black ppl to be liked by whites .

[ZANDOLIE]

Seriously, the way FIFA is courting Russia, it leads one to conclude that FIFA's Racism campaign is just media hype.
Russia is by far one of the most open racist nations on the planet. Dick Advocat is on record as saying he was not allowed to sign black players at Zenith SP. Just recently upon the transfer of a player to West Brom fans in Russia had a huge banner saying thank you West Brom with a banana on it.

Recently in Ukraine ( I know its not Russia but Blokin openly stated that black players have no place in the League.

For once I would like to see FIFA make a stand and set an example for what they preach.

FIFA will nod their head in agreement and wag their fingers for show, but the anti-racism thing is wall-paper.

Even our very own special advisor overthrow the DFA and put Mr. Patrick John back in charge of Dominica football.

We may even have a T&T player in Ukraine soon.

Real $$$$$ at play, FIFA execs sleeping good tonight.

[kicker]

FIFA can't stop racism, so yes until everyone takes action, it's just words. 

[sammy]

FIFA can't stop racism, so yes until everyone takes action, it's just words. 

people have to stop being racist - not fifa.

[asylumseeker]

 

FIFA can't stop racism, so yes until everyone takes action, it's just words. 

people have to stop being racist - not fifa.

Hold on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Wait a minute!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sure, FIFA's mandate is not to stop racism everywhere ... however, FIFA's mandate IS to stop/not entertain/denounce racism at its venues (broad interpretation of the word 'venues') and as a global actor (essentially damn near everywhere!) FIFA can "stop" racism in its neck of the woods.

Observer highlights the example of Russia. I agree with him fully. However, let's be clear: the vocal expressions of bigotry continuing in the game are not exclusively an indication that FIFA is wholly engaged in platitudes. In part of the accounting these expressions are a recognition by some purveyors of hatred that times are a-changing again. Europe will have to come to terms with the consequence of its various misadventures across Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Latin America. I guess Nostradamus didn't foresee the reverse consequence and cross-pollination of expansionism.

For four years FIFA has committed funding to this campaign and the campaign has been influential. I'm not deluded into thinking it's not making a difference.

FIFA has an opportunity to create teachable moments and is actively rather than passively engaged in that opportunity. Part of this matter related to Russia is the corporate nexus of clubs and federations,their influence and how they are to be held accountable beyond Russian borders for commercial transactions with social and cultural implications. This no doubt has to be engaged differently than the approach taken with confronting the skinhead or neo-Nazi at street level.

Yet, I recall a similar corporate dilemma regarding divestment and apartheid South Africa. As David Nakhid can attest, the Sullivan Principles were definitely JUST words and not "just words". Thus, here we are post-apartheid. Does racism persist in South Africa today? Yes, of course. However, have we had a sea-change in the conduct of the status quo? Absolutely so. Similarly, FIFA's campaign is an agent of change not the final arbiter of change.

What I find disturbing is the defeatist sentiment that it's "just words". What sort of spectacular results are we seeking after four years regarding an endemic phenomenon of varying manifestations and proportions that transcends centuries?

It would be worse if the organization did nothing.

[jai john]

Yes they can !!! 

[ZANDOLIE]

Sure, FIFA's mandate is not to stop racism everywhere ... however, FIFA's mandate IS to stop/not entertain/denounce racism at its venues (broad interpretation of the word 'venues') and as a global actor (essentially damn near everywhere!) FIFA can "stop" racism in its neck of the woods.

That is not FIFA's mandate. FIFA's primary mandate is to build and spread the game and generate revenues. Anti-racism is obstensible, an externality

the vocal expressions of bigotry continuing in the game are not exclusively an indication that FIFA is wholly engaged in platitudes. In part of the accounting these expressions are a recognition by some purveyors of hatred that times are a-changing again. Europe will have to come to terms with the consequence of its various misadventures across . I guess Nostradamus didn't foresee the reverse consequence and cross-pollination of expansionism.

The most vocal part of european racism does not come from nations that were colonizers of Africa, Asia, the Middle East or Latin America. Spain and Portugal notwithstanding, it comes from nations that never consolidated their populations for more than brief periods of time, at least not enough to go on longstanding colonial adventures around the globe before the 20th century.


For four years FIFA has committed funding to this campaign and the campaign has been influential. I'm not deluded into thinking it's not making a difference.

It may have less to do with FIFA efficacy than the co-option by individual national football associations of messages of tolerence and acceptance coming from the state apparatus. Expect to even see an increase in intolerence in some of these countries by dint of recent waves of anti-immigration and nationalist sentiment.

 
FIFA has an opportunity to create teachable moments and is actively rather than passively engaged in that opportunity. Part of this matter related to Russia is the corporate nexus of clubs and federations,their influence and how they are to be held accountable beyond Russian borders for commercial transactions with social and cultural implications. This no doubt has to be engaged differently than the approach taken with confronting the skinhead or neo-Nazi at street level.

Eh? In other words nutten going on.

Yet, I recall a similar corporate dilemma regarding divestment and apartheid South Africa... Does racism persist in South Africa today? Yes, of course. However, have we had a sea-change in the conduct of the status quo? Absolutely so. Similarly, FIFA's campaign is an agent of change not the final arbiter of change.

Big BIG difference here! Unlike Europeans, who are passive receptors of the anti-racism message, South Africans themselves were active, VESTED agents of INSTITUTIONAL change. The genie was already emerging. DeKlerk was smart enough to buy his people time by smiling and playing like he help rub the bottle.

What I find disturbing is the defeatist sentiment that it's "just words". What sort of spectacular results are we seeking after four years regarding an endemic phenomenon of varying manifestations and proportions that transcends centuries?

It would be worse if the organization did nothing.

So why restrict possibilites to only two choices? Other options exist. Why dosen't FIFA expend more resources on developing domestic leagues so a greater number athletes can earn a decent living from local sports, instead of supporting the current star system where talent is immediately whisked away to Europe?IMO FIFA's anti-racism 'work' serves mostly to grease the passage of non-whites into euro football so  astronomical sums of money pass hands and feed the monopoly. And men like Jack and Sepp.

Anti-racism itself is a EURO CONSTRUCT with all its attendent baggage and assumptions. So me eh go be drinking that flava of cool-aid anytime soon.

[asylumseeker]

Sure, FIFA's mandate is not to stop racism everywhere ... however, FIFA's mandate IS to stop/not entertain/denounce racism at its venues (broad interpretation of the word 'venues') and as a global actor (essentially damn near everywhere!) FIFA can "stop" racism in its neck of the woods.

That is not FIFA's mandate. FIFA's primary mandate is to build and spread the game and generate revenues. Anti-racism is obstensible, an externality

Clearly, the fight against racism in and around the game has been incorporated into its mission and mandate.

What's the cost of racism? It's an unquantifiable socially unacceptable social cost when viewed from the prism of orthodox contemporary valuation. Even if FIFA is being pragmatic, self-interested and commercially vested in having this campaign ... I'm willing to be a free rider benefiting from it. Racism isn't a mere externality.

the vocal expressions of bigotry continuing in the game are not exclusively an indication that FIFA is wholly engaged in platitudes. In part of the accounting these expressions are a recognition by some purveyors of hatred that times are a-changing again. Europe will have to come to terms with the consequence of its various misadventures across . I guess Nostradamus didn't foresee the reverse consequence and cross-pollination of expansionism.

The most vocal part of european racism does not come from nations that were colonizers of Africa, Asia, the Middle East or Latin America. Spain and Portugal notwithstanding, it comes from nations that never consolidated their populations for more than brief periods of time, at least not enough to go on longstanding colonial adventures around the globe before the 20th century.

I recognized this variable in the equation. I deem it particularly irrelevant because the blacks and browns and yellows and what-have-yous: the "multi-cultural unwashed" have washed up on European shores everywhere ... hence we have ppl running for political office in Slovenia and Russia, and possessing citizenship in other places ... this is a consequence of European expansionism, not necessarily colonialism.

For four years FIFA has committed funding to this campaign and the campaign has been influential. I'm not deluded into thinking it's not making a difference.

It may have less to do with FIFA efficacy than the co-option by individual national football associations of messages of tolerence and acceptance coming from the state apparatus. Expect to even see an increase in intolerence in some of these countries by dint of recent waves of anti-immigration and nationalist sentiment.

 
FIFA has an opportunity to create teachable moments and is actively rather than passively engaged in that opportunity. Part of this matter related to Russia is the corporate nexus of clubs and federations,their influence and how they are to be held accountable beyond Russian borders for commercial transactions with social and cultural implications. This no doubt has to be engaged differently than the approach taken with confronting the skinhead or neo-Nazi at street level.

Eh? In other words nutten going on.

Yet, I recall a similar corporate dilemma regarding divestment and apartheid South Africa... Does racism persist in South Africa today? Yes, of course. However, have we had a sea-change in the conduct of the status quo? Absolutely so. Similarly, FIFA's campaign is an agent of change not the final arbiter of change.

Big BIG difference here! Unlike Europeans, who are passive receptors of the anti-racism message, South Africans themselves were active, VESTED agents of INSTITUTIONAL change. The genie was already emerging. DeKlerk was smart enough to buy his people time by smiling and playing like he help rub the bottle.

There's not a difference merely because one scenario appears to be more extenuated than the other. The critical point is that agencies of change also include actors that are perceived as passive and benign. History when revisited shows us that these contributors are no less influential in outcomes. Just because FIFA has a corrupt underbelly does not negate its relevance as a social justice actor.

What I find disturbing is the defeatist sentiment that it's "just words". What sort of spectacular results are we seeking after four years regarding an endemic phenomenon of varying manifestations and proportions that transcends centuries?

It would be worse if the organization did nothing.

So why restrict possibilites to only two choices? Other options exist. Why dosen't FIFA expend more resources on developing domestic leagues so a greater number athletes can earn a decent living from local sports, instead of supporting the current star system where talent is immediately whisked away to Europe?IMO FIFA's anti-racism 'work' serves mostly to grease the passage of non-whites into euro football so  astronomical sums of money pass hands and feed the monopoly. And men like Jack and Sepp.

Anti-racism itself is a EURO CONSTRUCT with all its attendent baggage and assumptions. So me eh go be drinking that flava of cool-aid anytime soon.

How is anti-racism an "Euro-construct?"