Ian Wright says criticism of Raheem Sterling is racist
Discussion
jcremonini said:
I’m struggling with the language ? Lol - I’ll let the casual observer decide on which of us is doing that.
I'm a casual observer, what was clear in how I read the situation and :JT's lawyer came up with a BS excuse for JT using the language (wasn't throwing an insult, was repeating back to his accuser what his accuser said) in order to argue reasonable doubt
wjb sees BS argument for what it is and says imagine if you were in a similar situation at work and someone accused you of a racial slur - you natural reaction is to respond "WTF" or "I certainly did not" and it is completely unnatural to repeat verbatim the phrase back to your accuser.
Alpinestars continues that line of inquiry with an odd comment about stating racism isn't illegal as an alternative A). Seeing as the original A) was JT's b
ks excuse it implies the legality comment was a similarly daft and unlikely response. Given its oddness I haven't got a clue whether AS is saying that is not what we would say at work or what JT said.Some other random and totally subjective observations:
The two prominent supporters of JT are Chelsea fans - surprise!
The people who are not are not - another surprise!
JT was an excellent player but a complete scumbag of a man, so my views as to the likelihood of what he said are made up unles someone has a recording - unfair I know but there you go
Davos123 said:
I think you're missing the point. Not every black player is going to be singled out when they do this, particularly not ones who don't in some way fit the media stereotype of how a black man looks and acts. Sterling had kids when he was young and has tattoos - seemingly that's reason enough for the media to go after him.
I don't get this argument - the are certain players who I just take a dislike to - some are white, some are black (Asians are under-represented but I like Son)I dislike Sterling because he seems to promote his success in a flash way, the manner in which left Liverpool (and his scumbag of an agent) although that was wearing off as I was thinking he was being treated unfairly and actually working hard for City/England. Then he gets an AK47 tattoo - what a plank! Apparently an anti-gun statement not a gangsta thing - which I may have believed if there was a big red cross over the gun, but that wouldn't look cool would it
Rashford on the other hand seems like a polite, modest young man who always gives his all on the pitch - he comes across as likeable.
Either buying a house for their mum should be applauded
Alpinestars said:
Melchett1905 said:
Did Marcus Rashford get a lot of st when he bought his mum a house?
https://youtu.be/_WVazuggb6Mt when he bought his mum a house? AD has also chosen Rashford as a comparison.
It just convinces me it's more about an individual rather than the colour of their skin.
Adam B said:
jcremonini said:
I’m struggling with the language ? Lol - I’ll let the casual observer decide on which of us is doing that.
The two prominent supporters of JT are Chelsea fans - surprise!The people who are not are not - another surprise!
JT was an excellent player but a complete scumbag of a man, so my views as to the likelihood of what he said are made up unles someone has a recording - unfair I know but there you go
Melchett1905 said:
The fact is JT was found not guilty. Do we accept that decision or do many carry on saying he is still guilty, mainly because he played for Chelsea, was successful, slept with Wayne Bridge's missus.
People are found not guilty when there is insufficient compelling evidence to convict which might because they are genuinely innocent or because the prosecution fail to make a good enough case. That is what I accept. But yes some of my opinion comes about from some of the behaviour of JT and his family.Melchett1905 said:
Darren Lewis of the Mirror (a black journalist) ran some stories on JT in the past. Does that make Darren Lewis racist or is he just reporting on the individual because it makes news and sells papers?
No idea of the stories, but like all papers they write what will sell - and they generally write things that follow the general narrative in the public perception of good guy vs bad guy, some of which is undeserved and some of which is.Melchett1905 said:
Ask all the young black players at Chelsea what they think of JT and how he's gone out of his way at time and helped them. The fact is JT was found not guilty. Do we accept that decision or do many carry on saying he is still guilty, mainly because he played for Chelsea, was successful, slept with Wayne Bridge's missus. Darren Lewis of the Mirror (a black journalist) ran some stories on JT in the past. Does that make Darren Lewis racist or is he just reporting on the individual because it makes news and sells papers?
He was found not guilty as a result of their being insufficient evidence. The judge said it was POSSIBLE that it wasn’t an insult, and as a result “their being A DOUBT”, the only verdict that can be reached is not guilty. It’s a very low bar JT had to get over. It doesn’t mean he didn’t have intent - that’s for individuals to judge. And for the hard of thinking, that doesn’t mean I think the Court was wrong.
Adam B said:
I'm a casual observer, what was clear in how I read the situation and :
JT's lawyer came up with a BS excuse for JT using the language (wasn't throwing an insult, was repeating back to his accuser what his accuser said) in order to argue reasonable doubt
wjb sees BS argument for what it is and says imagine if you were in a similar situation at work and someone accused you of a racial slur - you natural reaction is to respond "WTF" or "I certainly did not" and it is completely unnatural to repeat verbatim the phrase back to your accuser.
Alpinestars continues that line of inquiry with an odd comment about stating racism isn't illegal as an alternative A). Seeing as the original A) was JT's bks excuse it implies the legality comment was a similarly daft and unlikely response. Given its oddness I haven't got a clue whether AS is saying that is not what we would say at work or what JT said.
Some other random and totally subjective observations:
The two prominent supporters of JT are Chelsea fans - surprise!
The people who are not are not - another surprise!
JT was an excellent player but a complete scumbag of a man, so my views as to the likelihood of what he said are made up unles someone has a recording - unfair I know but there you go
The point I made about racism not being illegal was a swipe at the fan who abused Sterling. He apparently replied in a twitter quote to the Chelsea fans who abused the black passenger in Paris, saying “it’s not illegal to be racist”. It’s a great defence. JT's lawyer came up with a BS excuse for JT using the language (wasn't throwing an insult, was repeating back to his accuser what his accuser said) in order to argue reasonable doubt
wjb sees BS argument for what it is and says imagine if you were in a similar situation at work and someone accused you of a racial slur - you natural reaction is to respond "WTF" or "I certainly did not" and it is completely unnatural to repeat verbatim the phrase back to your accuser.
Alpinestars continues that line of inquiry with an odd comment about stating racism isn't illegal as an alternative A). Seeing as the original A) was JT's b
ks excuse it implies the legality comment was a similarly daft and unlikely response. Given its oddness I haven't got a clue whether AS is saying that is not what we would say at work or what JT said.Some other random and totally subjective observations:
The two prominent supporters of JT are Chelsea fans - surprise!
The people who are not are not - another surprise!
JT was an excellent player but a complete scumbag of a man, so my views as to the likelihood of what he said are made up unles someone has a recording - unfair I know but there you go
Alpinestars said:
The point I made about racism not being illegal was a swipe at the fan who abused Sterling. He apparently replied in a twitter quote to the Chelsea fans who abused the black passenger in Paris, saying “it’s not illegal to be racist”. It’s a great defence.
Oh I see, thanks for explaining - then not sure why people are thinking you were referring to JT.Isn't racial incitement illegal?
Alpinestars said:
Melchett1905 said:
Ask all the young black players at Chelsea what they think of JT and how he's gone out of his way at time and helped them. The fact is JT was found not guilty. Do we accept that decision or do many carry on saying he is still guilty, mainly because he played for Chelsea, was successful, slept with Wayne Bridge's missus. Darren Lewis of the Mirror (a black journalist) ran some stories on JT in the past. Does that make Darren Lewis racist or is he just reporting on the individual because it makes news and sells papers?
He was found not guilty as a result of their being insufficient evidence. The judge said it was POSSIBLE that it wasn’t an insult, and as a result “their being A DOUBT”, the only verdict that can be reached is not guilty. It’s a very low bar JT had to get over. It doesn’t mean he didn’t have intent - that’s for individuals to judge. And for the hard of thinking, that doesn’t mean I think the Court was wrong.
Adam B said:
Alpinestars said:
The point I made about racism not being illegal was a swipe at the fan who abused Sterling. He apparently replied in a twitter quote to the Chelsea fans who abused the black passenger in Paris, saying “it’s not illegal to be racist”. It’s a great defence.
Oh I see, thanks for explaining - then not sure why people are thinking you were referring to JT.Isn't racial incitement illegal?
It is illegal, but a point that was missed on Mr Wing. Highlights his view of racism if the statement has been accurately reported though.
This thread has lost its way somewhat. You guys are going round in circles about John Terry; even if he is a racist it is still only one person.
I thought the discussion was whether, in general, black players are treated differently to white ones because of their colour.
So, Paul Pogba. The suggestion (by Adrian "I need to stir the pot to get people to listen to Talk Sport" Durham) is that you can't call him lazy because somehow that promotes a stereotype. No, no it doesn't. It's because he's lazy! It's a valid criticism of his performance, just like it is when referring to Mesut Ozil, Eden Hazard or Charlie Austin.
And as for Raheem Sterling, he has had stick because of his monumentally stupid gun tattoo, his woeful England performances (much better recently), the laughing gas thing, and turning up late to England training. Poor decisions (especially in front of goal in an England shirt)? Definitely. Treated harshly because, and only because, he's black? Don't think so.
I thought the discussion was whether, in general, black players are treated differently to white ones because of their colour.
So, Paul Pogba. The suggestion (by Adrian "I need to stir the pot to get people to listen to Talk Sport" Durham) is that you can't call him lazy because somehow that promotes a stereotype. No, no it doesn't. It's because he's lazy! It's a valid criticism of his performance, just like it is when referring to Mesut Ozil, Eden Hazard or Charlie Austin.
And as for Raheem Sterling, he has had stick because of his monumentally stupid gun tattoo, his woeful England performances (much better recently), the laughing gas thing, and turning up late to England training. Poor decisions (especially in front of goal in an England shirt)? Definitely. Treated harshly because, and only because, he's black? Don't think so.
Brave Fart said:
This thread has lost its way somewhat. You guys are going round in circles about John Terry; even if he is a racist it is still only one person.
I thought the discussion was whether, in general, black players are treated differently to white ones because of their colour.
So, Paul Pogba. The suggestion (by Adrian "I need to stir the pot to get people to listen to Talk Sport" Durham) is that you can't call him lazy because somehow that promotes a stereotype. No, no it doesn't. It's because he's lazy! It's a valid criticism of his performance, just like it is when referring to Mesut Ozil, Eden Hazard or Charlie Austin.
And as for Raheem Sterling, he has had stick because of his monumentally stupid gun tattoo, his woeful England performances (much better recently), the laughing gas thing, and turning up late to England training. Poor decisions (especially in front of goal in an England shirt)? Definitely. Treated harshly because, and only because, he's black? Don't think so.
Not sure anyone is suggesting it’s only became he’s black. I thought the discussion was whether, in general, black players are treated differently to white ones because of their colour.
So, Paul Pogba. The suggestion (by Adrian "I need to stir the pot to get people to listen to Talk Sport" Durham) is that you can't call him lazy because somehow that promotes a stereotype. No, no it doesn't. It's because he's lazy! It's a valid criticism of his performance, just like it is when referring to Mesut Ozil, Eden Hazard or Charlie Austin.
And as for Raheem Sterling, he has had stick because of his monumentally stupid gun tattoo, his woeful England performances (much better recently), the laughing gas thing, and turning up late to England training. Poor decisions (especially in front of goal in an England shirt)? Definitely. Treated harshly because, and only because, he's black? Don't think so.
Brave Fart said:
This thread has lost its way somewhat. You guys are going round in circles about John Terry; even if he is a racist it is still only one person.
I thought the discussion was whether, in general, black players are treated differently to white ones because of their colour.
So, Paul Pogba. The suggestion (by Adrian "I need to stir the pot to get people to listen to Talk Sport" Durham) is that you can't call him lazy because somehow that promotes a stereotype. No, no it doesn't. It's because he's lazy! It's a valid criticism of his performance, just like it is when referring to Mesut Ozil, Eden Hazard or Charlie Austin.
And as for Raheem Sterling, he has had stick because of his monumentally stupid gun tattoo, his woeful England performances (much better recently), the laughing gas thing, and turning up late to England training. Poor decisions (especially in front of goal in an England shirt)? Definitely. Treated harshly because, and only because, he's black? Don't think so.
Exactly my thoughts. I don't see black players unfairly picked on by the media. You can look at anything and twist the angle as much as you want to find offence about something. I thought the discussion was whether, in general, black players are treated differently to white ones because of their colour.
So, Paul Pogba. The suggestion (by Adrian "I need to stir the pot to get people to listen to Talk Sport" Durham) is that you can't call him lazy because somehow that promotes a stereotype. No, no it doesn't. It's because he's lazy! It's a valid criticism of his performance, just like it is when referring to Mesut Ozil, Eden Hazard or Charlie Austin.
And as for Raheem Sterling, he has had stick because of his monumentally stupid gun tattoo, his woeful England performances (much better recently), the laughing gas thing, and turning up late to England training. Poor decisions (especially in front of goal in an England shirt)? Definitely. Treated harshly because, and only because, he's black? Don't think so.
I know black players do suffer racial abuse there is no denying that. To says it's fueled by negative stories in the press I'm not so sure. Some people are just so thick they would do it any way. Like people who resort to any form of personal insult in a debate or heated argument. What should the press do? Not run any negative stories about anyone is case of offence?
There is also a culture in this country of race baiting. Making out things are racist when they simply are not.
I noticed on Twitter yesterday that certain people were trying to make out former footballer Dave Kitson is racist because he got certain black players names wrong on his instagram account. When you look at his account he does the same for white players too. It's just something he thinks is funny. All quite innocent really. But people are trying to stir racial tensions. This is just as bad.
Melchett1905 said:
slept with Wayne Bridge's missus.
He didn't do that either. He was accused of sleeping with Wayne Bridge's ex girlfriend, 9 months after they'd split, which is a bit different from his wife. JT has never commented on the accusation, and the woman in question has said categorically that it never happened. TwigtheWonderkid said:
Alpinestars said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
So did you, in an earlier post.
I’m sure that makes it ok then. Melchett1905 said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Alpinestars said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
So did you, in an earlier post.
I’m sure that makes it ok then. Which banned returnee are you?
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff