Racism in Football

[Panto_Villan]

2 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

There's no need for a middle ground

Just for clarity, are you saying that you're fine with that situation and there's no need to change anything there because having people partly but not entirely agree with the protest is fine? Basically, it's fine to disagree with the protest provided you're not going as far as to boo?

[Stevo985]

9 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

Just for clarity, are you saying that you're fine with that situation and there's no need to change anything there because having people partly but not entirely agree with the protest is fine? Basically, it's fine to disagree with the protest provided you're not going as far as to boo?

No I'm saying there's no need for anyone kneeling or on the side of those kneeling to find a middle ground with anyone who disagrees with it. Whether they're booing or not.

Edit: I think what you're saying is if the racists could manage to not boo, would I be ok with that? Well yes. You can't stop people having racist views but if they could restrain themselves so they're not booing an anti racism gesture that would be nice. The ideal situation is that people just aren't racist. But that's not really an option

Edited June 10, 2021 by Stevo985

[ml1dch]

1 hour ago, Genie said:

I agree with the sentiment that racists can’t be seen to win, but I have a feeling the cowards in charge of football will push to stop the kneeling down if/when the booing gets worse and worse (which I think it will).

They're a pretty tin-eared lot, but I'd be very surprised if they want to deal with the fallout from "Premier League / FA bans footballers from protesting against racism"

If Mings / Rashford et al are told that they are not allowed to, they don't strike me as the sort of people to just shrug their shoulders and accept it.

[Panto_Villan]

15 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

No I'm saying there's no need for anyone kneeling or on the side of those kneeling to find a middle ground with anyone who disagrees with it. Whether they're booing or not.

Edit: I think what you're saying is if the racists could manage to not boo, would I be ok with that? Well yes. You can't stop people having racist views but if they could restrain themselves so they're not booing an anti racism gesture that would be nice. The ideal situation is that people just aren't racist. But that's not really an option

Nah, that's not quite what I was saying. I've actually deleted the snide reply I was going to make after reading your edit as you've given me an honest answer,  so I'll give you one too.

You might be right that it's impossible to reach the people booing. They might all just be genuine racists, and even if they're not - well, I guess you might not want to bring people who are willing to boo an anti-racism gesture into your movement, even if they were booing politics rather than anti-racism per se (which I think they are). I just think there's some people that sit somewhere between the two extremes that could be brought in with a little extra effort or consideration, and taking a hardline "us and them" stance kinda precludes bringing those people on board. Those were the hypothetical people I was referring to who weren't cheering but could be convinced to.

My only real controversial view here is that I don't think kneeling is a politically neutral gesture like most other people here do. What I was suggesting wasn't abandoning kneeling to appease the racists and stop them booing, but that footballers could have picked a different gesture that might have brought some of the waverers in (like myself, or people who who sit further towards the middle of the spectrum). Maybe the people I'm talking about are an incredibly niche slice of the population but I can only go on what I know personally.

Perhaps I wasn't clear about that and spent too much time arguing about minor details, which came across as apologism for the booing. It wasn't intended to be that. However I feel like this thread is a bit of an echo chamber by people with relatively similar views, and I wanted to provide a perspective from someone who broadly but not entirely agrees with the views usually being expressed.

[Genie]

13 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

They're a pretty tin-eared lot, but I'd be very surprised if they want to deal with the fallout from "Premier League / FA bans footballers from protesting against racism"

If Mings / Rashford et al are told that they are not allowed to, they don't strike me as the sort of people to just shrug their shoulders and accept it.

I could be wrong, and hope I’m wrong, but my prediction is that kneeling before kick off will get replaced by something else (extremely reluctantly) because the pre-match kneel, boo, cheer, boo, argy bargy is deemed to be damaging the brand by the big wigs.

I hope I’m wrong but I reckon that’s the way it will go.

[Keyblade]

This whole thing reminds me of the famous MLK quote:

The knee is honestly the most innocuous, and sad to say kind of ineffectual measure against racism that I can think of, even more so in English football whereas unlike American football it isn't done during a national anthem, and it's literally just like 10 seconds before kickoff. If people are against that then you can only conclude that they don't want anything done about the state of affairs, one that is actually pretty bleak given how far we've advanced as a society.

[ccfcman]

The thing that really irks me is whether it was Kaepernick and NFL players or footballers, that folks take issue with kneeling. I cant think of a more elegant and considered variation on protesting. It makes the person vulnerable and still shows respect.

Humans however never fail to surprise and gammon can never quite be overcooked it seems.

[ml1dch]

12 minutes ago, Genie said:

I could be wrong, and hope I’m wrong, but my prediction is that kneeling before kick off will get replaced by something else (extremely reluctantly) because the pre-match kneel, boo, cheer, boo, argy bargy is deemed to be damaging the brand by the big wigs.

I hope I’m wrong but I reckon that’s the way it will go.

Obviously I could also be wrong, but I just don't see how that situation manifests itself. Does the Premier League order all the clubs to tell their players to stop? What if the players decide that their cause is more important than the Premier League brand? What sanction does the Premier League start handing out to e.g Marcus Rashford when he decides that he is going to do it anyway? A fine? A ban?

If the league decides they don't want to be seen handing out bans to players for the crime of "peacefully protesting against racism for a few seconds before the game starts" and the sanction is nothing, what's to stop them from carrying on?

It will stop when the players decide they want to stop doing it, and I don't think that dickheads booing them is going to be the thing that makes them want to stop. 

Edited June 10, 2021 by ml1dch

[Genie]

3 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Obviously I could also be wrong, but I just don't see how that situation manifests itself. Does the Premier League order all the clubs to tell their players to stop? What if the players decide that their cause is more important than the Premier League brand? What sanction does the Premier League start handing out to e.g Marcus Rashford when he decides that he is going to do it anyway? A fine? A ban?

If the league decides they don't want to be seen handing out bans to players for the crime of "peacefully protesting against racism for a few seconds before the game starts" and the sanction is nothing, what's to stop them from carrying on?

It will stop when the players decide they want to stop doing it, and I don't think that dickheads booing them is going to be the thing that makes them want to stop. 

Currently the games have a bit of a fake start don’t they, whistle, kneel, “real” whistle, game starts.

I assume the PL or FA could tell the refs to just crack on with the game as normal. If some players want to kneel once the game has started or before the whistle goes that’s up to them.

Its all done unofficially at the moment so I don’t think there’s anything to clamp down on. They’d just be doing it normally. 

[leemond2008]

Without getting into the rights and wrongs of it, I would like to know how the players themselves feel about it.

I've just read that Scotland have confirmed that they will not be taking the knee when they play England, now obviously that will include McGinn, so he won't be taking the knee when playing for Scotland yet he will when he plays for the Villa in the premiership (if we continue it into next season)

Won't that in itself send mixed messages?

 

I think that some of the players would undoubtedly prefer to show their commitment to anti-racism in other ways but feel pressured into taking the knee, I think that the F1 has got the right idea where they all line up and in support of anti-racism and some elect to take the knee and some don't, the message doesn't appear diluted for it in any way.

[Davkaus]

13 minutes ago, leemond2008 said:

I think that the F1 has got the right idea where they all line up and in support of anti-racism and some elect to take the knee and some don't, the message doesn't appear diluted for it in any way.

Doesn't this confuse the fans? Do they just boo at half volume?

[mottaloo]

On 08/06/2021 at 19:46, Follyfoot said:

Lets put it this way, the chant Ni***er Ni***er lick my boots was quite common on the Holte in the 70's despite the bottom left being occupied by a load a Rastafarians and a lot of black Villa fans in general 

Jeez, you've just took me back over 40 years there.....i remember that chant and even as a spotty early teenager i was gobsmacked by it and would look open-mouthed at any black villa fan nearby hoping they wouldn't explode with anger, but wouldn't blame them if they did by chinning one of the gobshites singing it.

Wasn't that at the same time as the tv programme Roots ? Shouts of "oi ! Kunte Kinte !" or "chicken George" ....that in an unintentional way didn't help matters, in my opinion anyway 

[fruitvilla]

3 hours ago, Keyblade said:

The knee is honestly the most innocuous, and sad to say kind of ineffectual measure against racism that I can think of, even more so in English football whereas unlike American football it isn't done during a national anthem, and it's literally just like 10 seconds before kickoff. If people are against that then you can only conclude that they don't want anything done about the state of affairs, one that is actually pretty bleak given how far we've advanced as a society.

I don't think it is ineffectual ... it puts a spotlight on those that boo ...  Racism is a product of a lack of education, stupidity and fear. We can educate people but that won't alleviate the fear or the stupidity. 

We can't legislate against stupidity ... Look at who people put into power ...  Viktor Orban, Hungarian PM, blamed the NI players for the booing exhibited by some fans. It is almost as though he believes that those that booed have absolutely no self control (in a sense this is true). 

Ultimately, I think, we need examples of gentle pressure (like taking the knee) against fear and stupidity.

Be the change you want to see in the world.

Edited June 10, 2021 by fruitvilla
double is

[Keyblade]

24 minutes ago, fruitvilla said:

I don't think it is ineffectual ... it puts a spotlight on those that boo ...  Racism is is a product of a lack of education, stupidity and fear. We can educate people but that won't alleviate the fear or the stupidity. 

We can't legislate against stupidity ... Look at who people put into power ...  Viktor Orban, Hungarian PM, blamed the NI players for the booing exhibited by some fans. It is almost as though he believes that those that booed have absolutely no self control (in a sense this is true). 

Ultimately, I think, we need examples of gentle pressure (like taking the knee) against fear and stupidity.

Be the change you want to see in the world.

Yeah fair enough, I was more referring to how it was before the booing. But now they've turned it into a powerful message ironically. Taking the knee is now sticking it to these people.

[blandy]

7 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

There are sections of the press that work very hard to associate BLM with the Black Lives Matter Global Network, that's not accidental, and it's a very convenient way to devalue the movement, but it's absolutely not what BLM is.

I perceive it to be that the Kneeling started way back  - Martin Luther King's times and non-violent protest to Police brutality in America.

It was re-energised as a gesture of protest by Colin Kapernick, and then took on further life following George Floyd's murder by a Police and a widespread Black Lives Matter protest by all kids and sections of US society..

THEN it was adopted/hijacked by a newly formed marxist(ish) "Political" BLM grass roots organisation.

When the players in the UK started the kneeling, they had the BLM on their shirts, because they were doing the same as the mass protests in the US - just highlighting their wish for black people to be treated fairly and equally.

Once the political adoption by the BLM marxist bunch started, the players stopped wearing the BLM on their shirts, but kept the anti-racism gesture. That was wise. They have explicitly and repeatedly said and written that their kneeling is NOT supportive of the marxists. People who associate, or claim to, their kneeling with the marxists and therefore boo it, after having been repeatedly informed that it is not supportive of the marxists in any way, might not be racist, but the only other explanation for people ignoring the truth is that they are monumentally ignorant.

"I am going to kneel for 15 seconds to demonstrate my support for equality"

"Boooo, I've decided you're a marxist/I am a racist".

"clearly, we're need to continue this kneeling, because their are audibly some people who racist or too stupid to just be silent for 15 seconds during an anti-racism campaign"

[Genie]

It’s going to be awkward if there’s players in the England squad who didn’t want to do it any longer when you have very vocal backers of it in Rashford and Mings.

[Panto_Villan]

9 minutes ago, blandy said:

I perceive it to be that the Kneeling started way back  - Martin Luther King's times and non-violent protest to Police brutality in America.

It was re-energised as a gesture of protest by Colin Kapernick, and then took on further life following George Floyd's murder by a Police and a widespread Black Lives Matter protest by all kids and sections of US society..

THEN it was adopted/hijacked by a newly formed marxist(ish) "Political" BLM grass roots organisation.

When the players in the UK started the kneeling, they had the BLM on their shirts, because they were doing the same as the mass protests in the US - just highlighting their wish for black people to be treated fairly and equally.

Once the political adoption by the BLM marxist bunch started, the players stopped wearing the BLM on their shirts, but kept the anti-racism gesture. That was wise. They have explicitly and repeatedly said and written that their kneeling is NOT supportive of the marxists. People who associate, or claim to, their kneeling with the marxists and therefore boo it, after having been repeatedly informed that it is not supportive of the marxists in any way, might not be racist, but the only other explanation for people ignoring the truth is that they are monumentally ignorant.

"I am going to kneel for 15 seconds to demonstrate my support for equality"

"Boooo, I've decided you're a marxist/I am a racist".

"clearly, we're need to continue this kneeling, because their are audibly some people who racist or too stupid to just be silent for 15 seconds during an anti-racism campaign"

What you're saying in the bolded part regarding the history of the organisation and how it ties into kneeling isn't quite accurate. Nothing that needs to change your conclusions, but there's no harm in getting the history correct (you can look it up on Wikipedia if you want to verify what I'm saying).

The BLM political movement actually began back in 2012ish around the Trayvon Martin case. So it wasn't so much that the social movement occurred and then BLM the political organisation hijacked it, it was rather that BLM the political movement organised rallies in 2020 in support of George Floyd as they had done in previous years for people like Eric Garner and Michael Brown, but this time they were attended by far more people and a far wider spectrum of people than before. Probably because the Floyd video was so shocking.

Some time afterwards people started to realise that actually the Black Lives Matter political organisation had much wider and more controversial aims than the generic black rights causes many were marching in support of, so the PL and some other organisations that had supported BLM thinking it was purely an anti-racism organisation quietly stopped publicly supporting it and started to support generic anti-racism instead. I think a lot of anti-racism supporters did the same (I certainly did). But prior to that there was no black lives matter movement, it was only Black Lives Matter.

This is why I don't understand how people deny that taking the knee is a politically charged gesture linked to BLM - it was widely performed at rallies organised by BLM the political organisation, by people giving their support and money to BLM the political organisation. It's totally fine to believe that footballers when they say that they now aren't taking the knee in support of any particular organisation. However, it's pretty strange to deny that there's a clear connection between taking the knee and BLM the political organisation.

[Panto_Villan]

So following the discussions I had earlier today, I actually text my mate who is a university lecturer on the topic of modern and historical black identity about what his views were on the choice of kneeling as a gesture was. His reply was:

"Definitely a clear link between kneeling and BLM, although it's hard to pin down why they're doing it."

"I guess it's just whether they're willing to believe them when [footballers] say they're doing it for racism or if the response is too boo regardless. Maybe they're right but I reckon it makes them a bit of a dick regardless.

"Totally sure the row would have been less heated if they'd chosen a different gesture than kneeling."

He's someone paid to think about this stuff for a living, so I thought it'd be worth adding to the discussion. Make of it what you will.

Edited June 10, 2021 by Panto_Villan

[Keyblade]

3 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

"I guess it's just whether they're willing to believe them when [footballers] say they're doing it for racism"

I mean why wouldn't you believe them, is the question? It's quite obvious this isn't being done in support of some amorphous organization, but even if you weren't clued in, why wouldn't you take the players at their word? Unless of course you need it to be about the organization so your opposition to it doesn't lose credibility. These are all general "you's"' by the way.

[OutByEaster?]

1 hour ago, Panto_Villan said:

"Totally sure the row would have been less heated if they'd chosen a different gesture than kneeling."

He's someone paid to think about this stuff for a living, so I thought it'd be worth adding to the discussion. Make of it what you will.

I'm not totally sure that less heated would be a good thing. The booing works to expose the existence of a racism that's been hidden away for years and to bring the discussion into the public eye, it helps keep issues around racism in the national discussion and can help people educate themselves on racism and racist behaviours in a way that maybe wearing a t-shirt wouldn't do.

The kneeling works.