[Cricket] Mike O'Farrell comments.

[GT49er]

Yes, I added ALL to highlight his generalisations. I recognise he didn't say all or some or a few or one or two. He generalised and stereotyped the communities.

He generalised.
You (and TBF, not just you) branded that as stereotyping.
SSN made it a trope.

 

[Albion my Albion]

"The football and rugby world becomes much more attractive to the Afro-Caribbean community," O'Farrell said.

And in terms of the South Asian community, there is a moment where we're finding that they do not want necessarily to commit the same time that is necessary to go the next step because they prefer, not always saying they do it, they sometimes prefer to go into other educational fields and then cricket becomes secondary, and part of that is because it's a rather more time-consuming sport than some other"

These are not perceived generalisations. They are explicitly stated generalisations.

The football and rugby world becomes much more attractive to many non-afro-caribbeans, but not to ALL afro-caribbeans.
Many non-South Asians also do not want necessarily to commit the same time that is necessary. but not ALL South Asians feel that way.

It's interesting that many people in the States have said the same thing about the black community's involvement in the sport of basketball compared to baseball which to some people resembles the sport of cricket.

 

[cunning fergus]

The reason we have "problems" with racism is that too many people don't think things through properly and prefer a cheap soundbite.

Sorry, wait, that's casual racism.

The reason we have "problems" with race is that the white person has spent centuries selling the black person as a commodity, keeping them in a separate township or shooting them for no real reason.

The reason racism persists is also ignorance of the past, the black person has been oppressed for far longer by the brown person from the Middle East than the white person, and for even longer than that by other fellow black persons. African slaves revolted in Persia during the Zanj rebellion in 800AD……England didn’t even exist at that point.

Interestingly your point about black people being treated as a commodity is a good point of reference in the debate about African slavery. When African societies developed they did so without a coherent monentary system based on precious metals. Accordingly slaves were simply a tradable commodity both within Africa and then the other peoples they traded with. Like cows and women.

If African society had developed a monetary system along the same lines as Europe and the Middle East then to some extent the African slave trade to the Caribbean and US could have been economically unsustainable.

But it wasn’t, instead coloured glass beads, old guns and basically any old tatt that was cheap in Europe was traded. The best example of this were the Dutch who realised some tribes used cowrie shells as “money” ( as cowrie shells were relatively rare in Africa); whereas in Java cowrie shells were 2 a penny. The Dutch simply sailed to Java and filled their ships up with sacks of cowrie shells, before heading over to Africa to exchange them for slaves.

The rest is history, and why the African slave trading equivalents of Coulston don’t have any statues to be pulled down.

 

[cunning fergus]

"The football and rugby world becomes much more attractive to the Afro-Caribbean community," O'Farrell said.

And in terms of the South Asian community, there is a moment where we're finding that they do not want necessarily to commit the same time that is necessary to go the next step because they prefer, not always saying they do it, they sometimes prefer to go into other educational fields and then cricket becomes secondary, and part of that is because it's a rather more time-consuming sport than some other"

These are not perceived generalisations. They are explicitly stated generalisations.

The football and rugby world becomes much more attractive to many non-afro-caribbeans, but not to ALL afro-caribbeans.
Many non-South Asians also do not want necessarily to commit the same time that is necessary. but not ALL South Asians feel that way.

You can do the same in the educational outcomes of school children.

Children of Indian and Chinese backgrounds out perform markedly children of Pakistani and Bangladeshi backgrounds, they are all “Asian”.

Children of African backgrounds outperform children of Afro Carribean backgrounds, they are all “black”.

Children of rich white British parents outperform children of poorer white British parents, they are all white and British.

All of the above are factually accurate and the generalisations are regularly discussed at political levels, applying a similar assessment to the same group of children and their preference for cricket is not offensive.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

I'm not sure he's said anything wrong.

He's described a trend he's noticed in his professional field. If it was based on nothing, just a lazy trope, based on prejudice which can't be backed up with facts then fine, he should probably go.

But is that the case here? There's obviously a problem attracting quality young athletes from different communities to a career in cricket. I don't think it's in dispute that professional cricket in England is disproportionately over represented by people who attended public schools or who were originally from another country (both groups I have nothing against to be clear).

Cricket is competing with other sports and other careers for diverse young talent and is increasingly losing out. Can we not identify this is a problem and talk about it like grown ups? If not, how will we ever find solutions?

 

[T.G]

Exactly - but if you can pick up on a perceived generalisation, reclassify it as stereoyping (ergo, prejudice), jump to labelling it as a trope and use it to bully an old man on TV who's been trying to increase BAME paticipation in his cricket club - well, I guess that makes the world a better place, eh?

Regardless of his intentions his comments were based on lazy stereotypes and not focused on what cricket needs to do to attract more diverse participation. Calling it bullying to challenge these views is a very unhelpful approach and closes down debate when it needs to be far more open.

 

[Creaky]

You can do the same in the educational outcomes of school children.

Children of Indian and Chinese backgrounds out perform markedly children of Pakistani and Bangladeshi backgrounds, they are all “Asian”.

Children of African backgrounds outperform children of Afro Carribean backgrounds, they are all “black”.

Children of rich white British parents outperform children of poorer white British parents, they are all white and British.

All of the above are factually accurate and the generalisations are regularly discussed at political levels, applying a similar assessment to the same group of children and their preference for cricket is not offensive.

The above statements are, once again, stereotypes.

Whether that is due to laziness, lack of understanding about the facts or some other reason, it is simply not true to state, "Children of Indian and Chinese backgrounds out perform markedly children of Pakistani and Bangladeshi backgrounds, they are all “Asian”.

What may be supported by statistics is that many children of Indian and Chinese backgrounds outperform many children of Pakistani and/or Bangladeshi backgrounds in the area of educational achievements.

 

[Guinness Boy]

The reason racism persists is also ignorance of the past, the black person has been oppressed for far longer by the brown person from the Middle East than the white person, and for even longer than that by other fellow black persons. African slaves revolted in Persia during the Zanj rebellion in 800AD……England didn’t even exist at that point.

Interestingly your point about black people being treated as a commodity is a good point of reference in the debate about African slavery. When African societies developed they did so without a coherent monentary system based on precious metals. Accordingly slaves were simply a tradable commodity both within Africa and then the other peoples they traded with. Like cows and women.

If African society had developed a monetary system along the same lines as Europe and the Middle East then to some extent the African slave trade to the Caribbean and US could have been economically unsustainable.

But it wasn’t, instead coloured glass beads, old guns and basically any old tatt that was cheap in Europe was traded. The best example of this were the Dutch who realised some tribes used cowrie shells as “money” ( as cowrie shells were relatively rare in Africa); whereas in Java cowrie shells were 2 a penny. The Dutch simply sailed to Java and filled their ships up with sacks of cowrie shells, before heading over to Africa to exchange them for slaves.

The rest is history, and why the African slave trading equivalents of Coulston don’t have any statues to be pulled down.

It's nice that you've moved on from copying and pasting Krept and Konan to copying and pasting cod GCSE History in order to introduce some whataboutery, but that's still what it is and all you are ever capable of.

It does make one wonder what the motivation of someone who expends so much effort into trying to muddy the waters of racism on a small football forum would be. I'm sure NSC can make their minds up.

Perhaps you should start the Bristol Anti-Hypocrisy Society. I bet your meetings would be a laugh a minute,

 

[cunning fergus]

It's nice that you've moved on from copying and pasting Krept and Konan to copying and pasting cod GCSE History in order to introduce some whataboutery, but that's still what it is and all you are ever capable of.

It does make one wonder what the motivation of someone who expends so much effort into trying to muddy the waters of racism on a small football forum would be. I'm sure NSC can make their minds up.

Perhaps you should start the Bristol Anti-Hypocrisy Society. I bet your meetings would be a laugh a minute,

Thanks a lot, you certainly provided me with food for thought during my exile from NSC. I definitely got the memo, and fully appreciate that the published racist and misogynistic tropes of acclaimed chart topping rap superstar artistes Krept and Konan are 100% censored on NSC. No biggie.

No excess effort expended either, merely picking over the bones of the cut and thrust of healthy debate on NSC. To be honest On this thread I thought I was reinforcing your very salient point about how black people in Africa were commoditised. Arguably had they been valued more by their vendors, this whole ghastly Atlantic slave trade may have been avoided.

I did read in “White Gold” by Giles Milton that in the Ottoman slave markets a disabled white European male slave was worth the same as an able bodied African black slave. I think within that equalised margin there may have been a perceived value involved in having a Christian as a slave, but it shows there were discrepancies (or bargains) to be had in that market.

Capitalism eh……what a game?

 

[cunning fergus]

The above statements are, once again, stereotypes.

Whether that is due to laziness, lack of understanding about the facts or some other reason, it is simply not true to state, "Children of Indian and Chinese backgrounds out perform markedly children of Pakistani and Bangladeshi backgrounds, they are all “Asian”.

What may be supported by statistics is that many children of Indian and Chinese backgrounds outperform many children of Pakistani and/or Bangladeshi backgrounds in the area of educational achievements.

I would agree they are generalisations, I don’t think they represent “stereotypes”?

The Government statistics very much support the statements, and so it would appear the nub of the concern here is that so long as individuals express trends and/or data which reference difference in ethnic groups behaviour with the term “many” then they would not be called out as a racist?

Phew, glad we got that sorted.

 

[Creaky]

I would agree they are generalisations, I don’t think they represent “stereotypes”?

The Government statistics very much support the statements, and so it would appear the nub of the concern here is that so long as individuals express trends and/or data which reference difference in ethnic groups behaviour with the term “many” then they would not be called out as a racist?

Phew, glad we got that sorted.

A statement that this group is better or worse than that group in some way is a generalisation - to use such a statement to support an objective is stereotyping.

Do you not see the difference between stating that Group A is better than Group B and saying most members of Group A are better than most members of Group B. First off very rarely will the former be true and more importantly suggests a fatalistic approach that that is just the way it is. The latter leaves open the possibility that action can be taken for change.

 

[cunning fergus]

A statement that this group is better or worse than that group in some way is a generalisation - to use such a statement to support an objective is stereotyping.

Do you not see the difference between stating that Group A is better than Group B and saying most members of Group A are better than most members of Group B. First off very rarely will the former be true and more importantly suggests a fatalistic approach that that is just the way it is. The latter leaves open the possibility that action can be taken for change.

If the “objective” is to raise academic standards for groups of school children that consistently underperform in comparison to another group, then referencing that a difference exists is essential. If the articulation and/or conveyance of that difference becomes so sensitive that we lose focus on the objective, then we won’t be able to deliver on the objective.

Generalisations are not stereotypes, and we deal with generalisations all the time. Not all football fans are hooligans, not all football fans are concerned about non lactose milk, etc. However in order to improve or resolve problems generalisations are necessary.

I think the genuine intentions of Mr O Farrell are to improve diversity in Middlesex CCC, and in articulating his experience in this regard he has tripped up on the complex protocols (required by some) when explaining data/trends on the generalised behaviour of ethnic groups.

He is being condemned for that failure, I think we are losing sight on the objective.

 

[Fritz the Cat]

All Irish are stupid, all Scots are stingy, all Welsh are sheepshaggers etc. etc.

Saying that someone prefers academia to cricket is hardly on a par with calling them stupid or a 'sheep shagger'. We are fast getting to the point where even to discuss race issues at all is itself racist - as has happened with the whole 'trans' issue. Just raising it as a topic is seemingly hate speech. We need to be very wary of those who constantly call for embargos on speech - lest we find our right to free speech disappears completely.

 

[Seagull58]

Saying that someone prefers academia to cricket is hardly on a par with calling them stupid or a 'sheep shagger'. We are fast getting to the point where even to discuss race issues at all is itself racist - as has happened with the whole 'trans' issue. Just raising it as a topic is seemingly hate speech. We need to be very wary of those who constantly call for embargos on speech - lest we find our right to free speech disappears completely.

He didn't say someone prefers academia. He said the South Asian community prefers academia, without any numerical or factual evidence to back it up. a massive generalisation.

 

[HalfaSeatOn]

Surely leaders know by now you need to have genuine intent with evidence backed insights if you’re going to come out with this stuff.

 

[Seagull58]

If the “objective” is to raise academic standards for groups of school children that consistently underperform in comparison to another group, then referencing that a difference exists is essential. If the articulation and/or conveyance of that difference becomes so sensitive that we lose focus on the objective, then we won’t be able to deliver on the objective.

Generalisations are not stereotypes, and we deal with generalisations all the time. Not all football fans are hooligans, not all football fans are concerned about non lactose milk, etc. However in order to improve or resolve problems generalisations are necessary.

I think the genuine intentions of Mr O Farrell are to improve diversity in Middlesex CCC, and in articulating his experience in this regard he has tripped up on the complex protocols (required by some) when explaining data/trends on the generalised behaviour of ethnic groups.

He is being condemned for that failure, I think we are losing sight on the objective.

Would you say the football community prefers non-lactose milk? Would you say the football community likes hooliganism? Would you say the afro-caribbean community prefers football to cricket?

 

[cunning fergus]

Would you say the football community prefers non-lactose milk? Would you say the football community likes hooliganism? Would you say the afro-caribbean community prefers football to cricket?

If there is irrefutable data to support any of these statements, then any of these generalisations could be accurate. The 3rd question is interesting though, and I think (I don’t know) that as the generations pass so football will be the preference.

Whilst England Cricket and Football continue to include overseas eligible players I reckon
If it’s not done so already, Football will win against cricket.

https://www.voice-online.co.uk/spor...maicas-radar-following-michael-antonio-debut/