Woolwich v Tottenham Hotspur 2/12/18

[Guido 🇺🇦]

This is such a grey area, and people here have taken such a stand that I find it very hard that we can ever call out any individual ever again unless they use explicit language.

Actions can be spun, words can't. So it'll have to literally be a slur from now on to have any sort of certainty.

If that's the case, it's dangerous territory.

Someone makes a monkey gesture and I go ''oi, cut that out''...then he goes ''what you on about, I'm scratching my armpits.''. Then his similarly minded mates back him up.

Seems we're giving people an easy out.

Scratching his armpits whilst going Ooo-Ooo is quite damming

 

[Guido 🇺🇦]

I think his point is, without the recorded evidence and just a simple confrontation from fellow fans it's easy to get away with by lying about your motives.

Not all racism at football is caught on camera. I've heard some vile things at football grounds.

There was evidence, he was caught red-handed and pleaded guilty

 

[SchmoodSpur]

Scratching his armpits whilst going Ooo-Ooo is quite damming

I'm not on about this individual case. I'm on about in general. If you cut out the language, it's easy to manipulate the intent of your actions.

Nazi salute? Nah mate, was just waving at Benny Ekotto!

 

[SchmoodSpur]

There was evidence, he was caught red-handed and pleaded guilty

You're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm not on about this individual case. I'm talking about what can we do now presented with similar actions if we're just to believe people's explanations. As we have with our Spurs boy.

 

[MVP]

Yep, now you are getting it. But it was investigated, not only was he seen doing in a still photograph, he was also viewed in moving pictures, he was also heard by those around him and his intended victim Dwight Yorke chanting Oooo-Oooo noises whilst doing it. He also pleaded guilty as charged, so yeah apart from this he could have been scratching his armpits. (annoyingly the cunt was only banned from football for 5yrs!!).

Do you not see the differences in this case to the incident that has just happened?

Fair enough, there is a lot more evidence in that case but if it was just the still picture alone with him not making any noise, it would probably just come down to his word.

 

[sammyspurs]

If some peoples arguments follow than they will have to be given the benefit of the doubt.
E.g The hissing is just showing displeasure not the sound of a gas chamber.

No because throwing a banana skin can be a silly mistake.
It can be nothing at all outside a football ground.

Mimicking the sound of a gas chamber towards someone you associate with “the Jews” is not the same.

Is this argument genuinely happening?
Cos I’m out

 

[sammyspurs]

Scratching his armpits whilst going Ooo-Ooo is quite damming

Next they’ll be saying that if we want to avoid being hypocritical we have to give the benefit of the doubt to someone shouting “Nig*er” because he could have Tourette’s.

What an utterly bizarre place this can be
ochfacepalm:

 

[SchmoodSpur]

Next they’ll be saying that if we want to avoid being hypocritical we have to give the benefit of the doubt to someone shouting “Nig*er” because he could have Tourette’s.

What an utterly bizarre place this can be
ochfacepalm:

I've addressed the action/language difference on the previous page.

 

[MVP]

No because throwing a banana skin can be a silly mistake.
It can be nothing at all outside a football ground.

Mimicking the sound of a gas chamber towards someone you associate with “the Jews” is not the same.

Is this argument genuinely happening?
Cos I’m out

Throwing a banana skin outside a football ground in the direction of a black person certainly means something
Someone can make that argument and I've shown the different meanings of hissing.
They could also say they weren't aware of the historical connotations or they just said it with out any racial meaning. Not a believable explanation but they could still put it forward. Just pure ignorance like the fella who threw the banana skin.
Very often groups that abuse black players deny that it has anything to with race.

 

[MVP]

Next they’ll be saying that if we want to avoid being hypocritical we have to give the benefit of the doubt to someone shouting “Nig*er” because he could have Tourette’s.

What an utterly bizarre place this can be
ochfacepalm:

They could argue that they meant nigger as a term of endearment such as friend and they can point to black people using it themselves.

 

[Guido 🇺🇦]

I'm not on about this individual case. I'm on about in general. If you cut out the language, it's easy to manipulate the intent of your actions.

Nazi salute? Nah mate, was just waving at Benny Ekotto!

Sure I get that. In isolation that's exactly it, but many aren't in isolation, many of those acts are done whilst waving a Nazi flag, or attending a rally/march, most are accompanied with language and or noises. There are some other attributing factors that you can apply. If you can't apply them or link them, then it makes it hard to prove. But a person in those situations could have a visit by the old bill to their house where they may or may not find something that links him to being a racist, what's on his hard drive, what sites does he visit, what does he say in emails, texts, chatroom and forums. What groups does he belong to etc.etc..that's called an investigation.

The entire point is a photograph frozen in time means fuck all, add to it historical references, a media whose only interest is a) to be First to report it with zero regards for accuracy because clicks mean more $$$ than accuracy b) They might enjoy being a provocative/antagonistic media. Then add a baying public who are absolutely focused on being part of the righteous (no matter what side of the argument they are on) and you have a bloke misjudged, falsely accused, maliciously attacked, all debated by people who weren't even there, who's only reference is a still photograph, a frozen moment in time taken from one angle.

It makes everyone look like utter cunts. I've been there, I've been a cunt I've been judgemental too many times to count, I will probably will do so again, but I've done it enough times to know that tt's just time to chill gather the evidence, asses it calmly explore other angles and trust experts who have access to everything to investigate it. (That last bit is hard for some to do, including me as I've witnessed Police racism first had multiple times but that's a whole other can of worms).

 

[sammyspurs]

Throwing a banana skin outside a football ground in the direction of a black person certainly means something
Someone can make that argument and I've shown the different meanings of hissing.
They could also say they weren't aware of the historical connotations or they just said it with out any racial meaning. Not a believable explanation but they could still put it forward. Just pure ignorance like the fella who threw the banana skin.
Very often groups that abuse black players deny that it has anything to with race.

But throwing a banana skin can mean nothing at all. A child can throw a banana skin at his sister.

Chelsea fans hissing is about the gas chamber. They could say anything they want which is why they are never arrested for it.

Because hissing isn’t a crime.
It doesn’t change its meaning though.

 

[MVP]

Sure I get that. In isolation that's exactly it, but many aren't in isolation, many of those acts are done whilst waving a Nazi flag, or attending a rally/march, most are accompanied with language and or noises. There are some other attributing factors that you can apply. If you can't apply them or link them, then it makes it hard to prove. But a person in those situations could have a visit by the old bill to their house where they may or may not find something that links him to being a racist, what's on his hard drive, what sites does he visit, what does he say in emails, texts, chatroom and forums. What groups does he belong to etc.etc..that's called an investigation.

The entire point is a photograph frozen in time means fuck all, add to it historical references, a media whose only interest is a) to be First to report it with zero regards for accuracy because clicks mean more $$$ than accuracy b) They might enjoy being a provocative/antagonistic media. Then add a baying public who are absolutely focused on being part of the righteous (no matter what side of the argument they are on) and you have a bloke misjudged, falsely accused, maliciously attacked, all debated by people who weren't even there, who's only reference is a still photograph, a frozen moment in time taken from one angle.

It makes everyone look like utter cunts. I've been there, I've been a cunt I've been judgemental too many times to count, I will probably will do so again, but I've done it enough times to know that tt's just time to chill gather the evidence, asses it calmly explore other angles and trust experts who have access to everything to investigate it. (That last bit is hard for some to do, including me as I've witnessed Police racism first had multiple times but that's a whole other can of worms).

Would you say it's wrong to judge that guy who was doing a monkey gesture based purely of that photograph?
To me I don't think it's wrong at all.

 

[Guido 🇺🇦]

Fair enough, there is a lot more evidence in that case but if it was just the still picture alone with him not making any noise, it would probably just come down to his word.

Yes, because all you have then in that scenario is a photograph of an individual scratching his armpits.

 

[Guido 🇺🇦]

Would you say it's wrong to judge that guy who was doing a monkey gesture based purely of that photograph?
To me I don't think it's wrong at all.

Completely wrong, how do you know that is a monkey gesture? It's a picture of a man with his hands under his arms.

(we know it was a monkey gesture because he was moving his arms up and down in that motion. We know it was a monkey gesture because he was going Ooo-Ooo. We know it was a racist gesture because it was accompanied with racist remarks that were also heard by the intended victim, that also happened to be black. We know that it was a racist gesture because others also witnessed all of this actions. We know that it was racist because he pleaded guilty).

The photo doesn't show/demonstrate/prove any of those things on it's own.

 

[Tottenham Sean]

Would you say it's wrong to judge that guy who was doing a monkey gesture based purely of that photograph?
To me I don't think it's wrong at all.

In this instance probably not.However, i work with CCTV and some of the stills we have seen through pausing a piece of film says something totally different to what it says when you watch the video .One that springs to mind a harmless peck on the check between 2 work colleagues ,made to look like a couple that were having an affair.

 

[MVP]

But throwing a banana skin can mean nothing at all. A child can throw a banana skin at his sister.

Chelsea fans hissing is about the gas chamber. They could say anything they want which is why they are never arrested for it.

Because hissing isn’t a crime.
It doesn’t change its meaning though.

Hissing would come under racial abuse. I just found an interesting story, this guy was cleared of any wrong doing.
'Hissing fan' cleared
Do you give him the benefit of the doubt?

 

[sammyspurs]

Hissing would come under racial abuse. I just found an interesting story, this guy was cleared of any wrong doing.
'Hissing fan' cleared
Do you give him the benefit of the doubt?

No because I don’t think several witnesses would make up the other verbal abuse he was shouting about gassing the Jews.

I think there was a distinct lack of evidence.

If several spurs fans said the guy who threw the banana skin also shouted racial abuse, I wouldn’t give him the benefit of the doubt either.

 

[MVP]

Completely wrong, how do you know that is a monkey gesture? It's a picture of a man with his hands under his arms.

(we know it was a monkey gesture because he was moving his arms up and down in that motion. We know it was a monkey gesture because he was going Ooo-Ooo. We know it was a racist gesture because it was accompanied with racist remarks that were also heard by the intended victim, that also happened to be black. We know that it was a racist gesture because others also witnessed all of this actions. We know that it was racist because he pleaded guilty).

The photo doesn't show/demonstrate/prove any of those things.

Or it could be a monkey gesture, he's doing the action, the picture captures that as a possibility so why is it wrong if some people think that based purely on that pose? We all judge people on what they say and do.

 

[MVP]

No because I don’t think several witnesses would make up the other verbal abuse he was shouting about gassing the Jews.

I think there was a distinct lack of evidence.

If several spurs fans said the guy who threw the banana skin also shouted racial abuse, I wouldn’t give him the benefit of the doubt either.

That's interesting, so you are saying that jury got it wrong. But yet part of your argument is that I should accept that fellows explanation because he got cleared by the police.