Scott Hogan

[Vive_La_Villa]

45 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

When in doubt, just add some "Race", "Sexuality" "Religion", or "Ethnicity" bias.

Absolute nonsense.

The average Football fan couldn't give a flying f*ck" about any of the above.

They just call their opinion as they see it. 

People will also have favourites/non favourites for a variety of reasons.

I hate when this weaponised nonsense permeates areas where it doesn't need to.

Surely if McGinn was black we would give him more stick?

Totally agree mate. I find it even more ironic when its a white person thats starts these debates.  

It’s a shame the racism thread got closed.

edit: Find me a white player with the build and stature of Samba and I will happily call him a  beast.  Sorry if that might offend some PC liberals.

keeping on topic. Hogan is shit!

Edited May 10, 2019 by Vive_La_Villa

[Skruff]

If we all could consider ourselves and others as people and a person. Instead of black people, white people etc. That would've been nice. 

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

2 hours ago, Skruff said:

People target players for various reasons. Some get a lot more slag then others. I don't think race is the first thing in people's minds when they slag someone off. But off course we give more leeway to someone whose more similar to ourself. That's our monkey brain at work. 

But if 3 players that's lazy, are being called lazy. But they also happen to have a lot of melanin in their skin. We're racist because they are black? I'm not sure who's the ones seeing colors then. You should be able to call someone lazy without the word racism being thrown around. 

Well I give Kodjia more shit than I give Scott Hogan, so either i'm a sell out or David Icke is right and i'm a shape shifting reptilian.

Edited May 10, 2019 by JAMAICAN-VILLAN

[Mark Albrighton]

So.....I can only guess that the lack of visiting blades supporters on here waxing lyrical about Scott is because they’re too busy petitioning the Sheff Utd owners to part with a substantial slice of that promotion money in order to secure his services on a permanent basis?

[TRO]

1 hour ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Well I give Kodjia more shit than I give Scott Hogan, so either i'm a sell out or David Icke is right and i'm a shape shifting reptilian.

Uncle tom.....I am just kidding JV.....Its all too ridiculous for words.

[Thug]

7 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

If you try explaining yourself then it might help.

Because as far as I can see you've missed it. 

To start off, I’d like to say that this is no way an attack on you.  I applaud anyone who stands up to racism, and I firmly believe that this is your intention.  What follows is my own personal opinion on the matter, and it may be wrong. It’s just how I feel.

Maybe I misunderstand what you’re saying here

On 08/05/2019 at 19:31, Stevo985 said:

That sort of thing is rife. 

Words like “beast” are always applied to black players. Benteke is a beast. Drogba is a beast. Lukaku, what a beast. 

You rarely hear that word used for a big white player. 

I’m assuming you’re suggesting that the word ‘beast’ is being used in a derogatory way because it is only ever applied to black players.

I make this assumption because you start your statement with ‘that sort of thing is rife’.  By what follows, I assume you’re referring to some kind of injustice, and by you’re final sentence I conclude that you believe this to be racially motivated thing.

Where I take exception to this is WHY someone would think that ‘beast’ is derogatory.

If beast was used to describe both white and black players, no one would ever think that this was a derogatory term. They would see it for the reason it was being used - a COMPLIMENT. Take the colour of the player out of the equation, and what do you have? You have a strong, athletic man full of aggression and desire to succeed - A warrior.  The man is A BEAST!

Take an equal collection of white and black men, and the definition stands firm. Take a majority of white men, and the definition stands firm. 

Now, let’s take a sample with ONLY black players. If someone uses the word beast now, even if they mean it for the EXACT same reason - warriors - there will always be some people who start to think a little bit too deep.

’There’s only black men here. Beasts can’t mean warriors.  Beasts MUST mean something bad. If it didn’t, there’d be white players here too, and we KNOW white players MUST be strong, and athletic and so on... so beast MUST mean something bad.’

Heaven forbid we say there are just more black players who have these GOOD qualities. No, no, no. That just doesn’t  compute. Doesn’t make sense. Where are the white people?

No white people? Ok let’s see what beast means.  Beasts are strong, and quick, true.. but they’re stupid! OF COURSE!! That explains why there’s no white people here!’

It makes MUCH more sense that whoever calls these players beasts MUST mean it because black men are stupid.  Because the ONLY good thing they got going for them is they’re stronger, and faster. White man is smarter.

For what it’s worth, when someone says ‘beast’ to me in terms of football, two of the first names that pop into my head are Diego Costa, and Genaro Gattuso.  Neither are black.

Google ‘the beast’ and the first thing that pops up is a fat white bloke that is a **** genius.

This isn’t too different from when there was an uproar over the black child in a t-shirt that read cheeky monkey.  Seriously? Who’s more racist? The person that put the top on the child, or those that believe that it’s ok to call every child in the world a ‘cheeky monkey’ EXCEPT for black children? Why can’t you put a black child in a cheeky monkey t-shirt? Because it’s somehow uncomfortably close to the truth?? Give me a **** break. What’s the take home message from these examples??

Call any child a cheeky monkey, except, you know, black children, cuz you know.. 

Call any strong player a beast except for, err, you know...

How about **** off to both?

There are MANY examples of injustice and racism in this world, we don’t need to invent them. It just dilutes the more important ones.

Tyrone Mings is a BEAST and I love him.  He’s also shown more intelligence than nearly every white defender we’ve had for a LONG time.

End of rant, and as I said before, this may sound aggressive, but I don’t mean any of that aggression towards you. I salute your intentions.

But alas, this is the Scott Hogan thread.

Who is neither black, nor a beast. Which is a proper shame.

 

 

 

[Junxs]

^ This was the same point Danny Baker was trying to make on his sacking from the BBC, apparently it's racist to associate monkeys to back people. However people often refer to kids that aren't black as little monkeys, but thats ok apparently. 

[DaveAV1]

I’m sorry I seem to have lost my way, I’m looking for the Scott Hogan thread....

[YLN]

1 hour ago, Thug said:

To start off, I’d like to say that this is no way an attack on you.  I applaud anyone who stands up to racism, and I firmly believe that this is your intention.  What follows is my own personal opinion on the matter, and it may be wrong. It’s just how I feel.

...

I think you're being very narrow in your interpretation of why beast shouldn't be considered a pejorative for black players. Referring to The Chase's Beast as an example misses the point completely. It's something quite difficult to nail down why referring to large black players using terms usually used to describe enormous powerful animals is not sensitive to race.

Beast when it refers to The Chase man is because he is a very powerful quiz opponent. He's also a very big man. No one is making a comparison to a large feral animal. He is just a fearsome trivia expert who fills out a very large suit. He is The Beast, not a beast.

The use of the term beast or monster as it refers to a black football player has connotations of a feral uncivilised enormous powerful animal. Like a large bear or gorilla. Powerful white strikers like Harry Kane don't get referred to in these terms because it's considered that their play is more intelligent and technical, and doesn't rely on pure physicality and strength like a black player. 

It's a cultural quirk that means that beasts like Didier Drogba will find it harder to get into management than Harry Kane. And young black people will read about people who look like them being referred to in derogatory, dehumanising terms in ways that white people will not. 

 

(Yes Harry Kane got referred to as a beast by an opposition player after some match against Dortmund, but also within those results "Harry Kane's deadly artistry fires Spurs past Dortmund")

[Thug]

1 hour ago, YLN said:

I think you're being very narrow in your interpretation of why beast shouldn't be considered a pejorative for black players. Referring to The Chase's Beast as an example misses the point completely. It's something quite difficult to nail down why referring to large black players using terms usually used to describe enormous powerful animals is not sensitive to race.

Beast when it refers to The Chase man is because he is a very powerful quiz opponent. He's also a very big man. No one is making a comparison to a large feral animal. He is just a fearsome trivia expert who fills out a very large suit. He is The Beast, not a beast.

The use of the term beast or monster as it refers to a black football player has connotations of a feral uncivilised enormous powerful animal. Like a large bear or gorilla. Powerful white strikers like Harry Kane don't get referred to in these terms because it's considered that their play is more intelligent and technical, and doesn't rely on pure physicality and strength like a black player. 

It's a cultural quirk that means that beasts like Didier Drogba will find it harder to get into management than Harry Kane. And young black people will read about people who look like them being referred to in derogatory, dehumanising terms in ways that white people will not. 

 

(Yes Harry Kane got referred to as a beast by an opposition player after some match against Dortmund, but also within those results "Harry Kane's deadly artistry fires Spurs past Dortmund")

Once again, I want to be clear here.  This response is in the interest of debate, and I do not mean to suggest that I believe you to be harbouring thoughts of a racist nature at all, and indeed believe quite the opposite.  I have read this back before I'm posting it, and there are places where it does sound very much like I'm pointing a  heavy finger in your direction.  This is not my intention, but I do not know how to change it without re-typing everything - so apologies in advance.

 

However, I wish to thank you for highlighting my point perfectly.

 

"why beast shouldn't be considered a pejorative for black players" 

Black players and white players a are both human.  They should be equally offended by being compared to an animal.  By suggesting a black player should be more offended you are in a round-about way suggesting that a black player is somehow more closely linked to being an actual beast - the 'feral' type.

 

"Beast when it refers to The Chase man is because he is a very powerful quiz opponent"

perceived interpretation of the word beast when referring to a white man.  I have not seen this definition placed anywhere.  There are no asterisks and small print to state this.  This has been left to open interpretation, and you have decided to see it as this. 

I wholeheartedly agree with the definition of a very powerful opponent.

 

"No one is making a comparison to a large feral animal"

Indeed.  And the same holds true when referring to a black footballer.  It is still meant as a powerful opponent.  Why has your perceived interpretation of the word beast when referring to a black man?  I have not seen this definition placed anywhere.

What happened to a very powerful opponent?  Why do you think can't apply in the case of a black footballer? Why must it suddenly mean a feral animal?

I have never heard the word beast used in a context where the pundit or the journalist is suggesting a direct comparison to a feral animal.  Why would you, or anyone, else think that they are?

 

"The use of the term beast or monster as it refers to a black football player has connotations of a feral uncivilised enormous powerful animal, like a large bear or gorilla."

Really? I was thinking more along the line of Lions, but I guess a black man could never be a Lion.  Lions are cool, yeah? What about a shark?   Of all the wonderful beasts in this world, why bear or Gorilla?

 

"It's a cultural quirk that means that beasts like Didier Drogba will find it harder to get into management than Harry Kane". 

Yes.  True.  Not because he is a 'beast',  but generally because he is black. Black players clearly are not afforded the same opportunities to manage.  Usually because people are making bizarre assumptions as highlighted above.

Dwight Yorke will have a harder time than Drogba getting a managerial job, and no one has ever referred to him as a beast. (Although his life choices may have a bigger part to play than his colour)

 

"And young black people will read about people who look like them being referred to in derogatory, dehumanising terms in ways that white people will not". 

You have interpreted it as a derogatory, dehumanising term - because it is referring to a black player.  When it was applied to a white man on a quiz show, or when it is Diego Costa, or Connor McGreggor - it is a powerful opponent. 

Personally, I'm still seeing a very powerful opponent here, and I would hope most young black people would see it like that too.

 

Akinfenwa has no objection to being called a beast.  He has embraced it, and indeed has called his autobiography "The Beast".

Christian Benteke has happily referred to himself as a beast on several occasions if you care to check his twitter account.

CONTEXT is everything.

There's a huge difference between someone saying "That Senegalese team is like 11 beasts on the field who haven't got a clue what they're doing" and "The man is a beast! He's shown power and desire and has completely bullied the opposition".

 

In conclusion, my interpretation of the word "beast" is no more narrow than yours.

Only I change it's definition based on CONTEXT, yours has changed based on the colour of the persons skin (with good intention)

----------------

On a side note, this has gone WAY off topic now.  I would be happy to continue this conversation in a more appropriate thread.

 

[Dave J]

17 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Totally agree mate. I find it even more ironic when its a white person thats starts these debates.  

It’s a shame the racism thread got closed.

edit: Find me a white player with the build and stature of Samba and I will happily call him a  beast.  Sorry if that might offend some PC liberals.

keeping on topic. Hogan is shit!

At last some common sense in this thread - I have been majorly surprised this thread  has derailed in the way it has been.

[HanoiVillan]

23 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

keeping on topic. Hogan is shit!

 

5 hours ago, Dave J said:

At last some common sense in this thread

Knew you'd come round, Dave

[djdabush]

I notice he’s not even mentioned our promotion on social media. Former players who barely even played for us are celebrating our success and one our current players doesn’t even mention it. I hope Sheffield United come and take him off our hands because as well as being a pretty limited footballer, I think he probably resents us now

[alreadyexists]

4 minutes ago, djdabush said:

I notice he’s not even mentioned our promotion on social media. Former players who barely even played for us are celebrating our success and one our current players doesn’t even mention it. I hope Sheffield United come and take him off our hands because as well as being a pretty limited footballer, I think he probably resents us now

I doubt they will mate, he’s a lower championship player at best and even though we all wanted him to come good, I think that’s up has sailed. Sell him to the first bidder.

[AVFCDAN]

There will be someone in the championship who will pay us 3-4 million, he's got to be worth that to someone.

Cut our losses on that one and chalk it up as part of the bigger picture of gaining promotion.

[8pints]

[rodders0223]

3 minutes ago, AVFCDAN said:

There will be someone in the championship who will pay us 3-4 million, he's got to be worth that to someone.

Cut our losses on that one and chalk it up as part of the bigger picture of gaining promotion.

£40k-£50k a week.

Spoilers : There won't.

 

[AVFCDAN]

2 minutes ago, rodders0223 said:

£40k-£50k a week.

Spoilers : There won't.

 

We'll see if he wants to play football or just earn a wage on our bench then.

[rodders0223]

4 minutes ago, AVFCDAN said:

We'll see if he wants to play football or just earn a wage on our bench then.

Indeed, he seems like a good lad and probably quite hurt at how it has all panned out. Still a lot of money to walk away from, though it has been done before.

[Demitri_C]

I think he will leave on laon again. Bristol City is my guess