I imagine you mean an American black person. I doubt an Aborigine would know or care, nor a Fijiian or a Brazillian....black person.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Rio has a pop at Ashley Cole
- Thread starter El Presidente
- Start date
I imagine you mean an American black person. I doubt an Aborigine would know or care, nor a Fijiian or a Brazillian....black person.
Then I don't know what the differences between racist comment and non-racist are. The lines are blurred (for me), and these courts are intruducing grey areas I cannot fathom. If Terry was "questioning" when he made comments to Anton Ferdinand, I'd be surprised. "Are you a black C*NT?" is what that suggests, and I really don't believe he would be just geniunely curious to have his education expanded upon.
Suarez even looks less of a racially biased person compared to Terry - yet he was seen as guilty and Terry not.
Beats me
Ok. Sorry for being a twat about this, but I'm sure I do know the difference. Post some examples and I'll say whether they're racist or not.
I'd be very surprised too. But they couldn't prove he wasn't, so he got off.
No, his argument was that he thought Anton said 'F off you black ****' and he replied 'F off you black ****?, 'F off you black ****?' Therefore his argument is not asking whether Anton was one, simply saying(in short form) 'you're telling me to f off, and that I'm a black ****?'. I don't buy it, but that was his case, and they failed to prove against it.
Firstly, Suarez was not found guilty by a criminal court, so don't try to compare them that way. Suarez did say something racist (not at the extreme of Terry), and Suarez's excuse was that he didn't realise it was racist. Not a good enough excuse. Terry's excuse was that 'no, you've misunderstood, I wasn't being racist I was asking Anton why he called me that'.
Now the FA could still charge him, as they charged Suarez, but the FA are a law unto themselves anyway.
keaton
Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls
- Nov 18, 2004
- 9,972
Indeed.
After the Rooney thing they should charge them both for foul and abusive language and give them two match bans. Then give Rio an 8 match ban for his racist tweet.
I'm not posting examples of racism to see what YOU say in deciding whether they are racist! Your opinion is just that, don't get headswelling because you THINK you know what's going on with these racism trials!
Face it, these people are indeed working hard to 'blur the lines' so they can get off of charges against them!
If courts of law or courts of professional adjudication rubber stamp their findings, that still doesn't define what is racist and who is or who isn't a racist!
You appear to believe you are authority enough to interpret the findings - well I'll interpret the finding too, and call them 'smoke and mirrors' to create those grey areas I mentioned.
The FA are a law unto themselves because they are an organisation with members and can bring players up to face their rules! That's a given and not questionable.
That these cases are brought to any courts and argued in the way that they are, and the findings coming out the way they are - they aren't producing findings or judgments that clear anything up in my opinion.
Thanks for the offer to clear things up for me, but you really aren't going to interpret their findings, and I wouldn't trust you as any authority on it either.
TWO TRIBES
New member
Should have said...Rio has an ice pop at Ashley Cole..
That would have been `Fab`
That would have been `Fab`
too late, head's massive already. I'm not using the courts decisions as my definition. You think the fact that we have two different verdicts for Suarez and Terry means that the lines are blurred, I don't, but that doesn't mean I rely on their decisions to understand racism.
not quite, but I know what you mean. Annoying isn't it. Still, I did apologise in advance.Good for you, although you've already confessed to not understanding it all. Is it that objectionable that someone knows more about it than you?
Last edited:
Seagull58
In the Algarve
Totally agree. In South Africa the term coconut is used as an insult to black people who, in the eyes of their accusers, behave like white people. Insulting and racist, just like choc ice.
Seagull58
In the Algarve
Mixed race people invariably identify with the black part of their heritage more than the white part. They are visually "non-white" and perceived as black by other people.
Police are now involved 
Police investigate 'choc ice' tweet about Ashley Cole | Football | guardian.co.uk
Police investigate 'choc ice' tweet about Ashley Cole | Football | guardian.co.uk
You can't "know more about it more than" anyone. Can you not fathom that?
It's subjective, you say you don't rely on the courts, and who can? - so it remains in the opinion of the beholder to decide... and the courts are blurring. They have not got a line of definition about what is and isn't racism, there are people who have 'limbo'd under the bar', if they even think they have created one.
I at least have suggested that I do not know what their decisions are based on or how they make their decisions now that Terry has got away with....whatever it is now seen as but not racism
You're seriously trying to say that no one person can understand and know more about racism than another?
While there may be some examples of grey areas, we're not dealing with those here, and it's not subjective at all.
Er, what? I didn't say I don't rely on them to make a good decision, I said I don't rely on the verdicts to help me understand racism.
That's not the case.
You're just confused.I at least have suggested that I do not know what their decisions are based on or how they make their decisions now that Terry has got away with....whatever it is now seen as but not racism
Yes, I am saying that one person cannot understand racism more than another - that one person being you.
Subjectivity is how some people try to explain their accused racism. Finding a grey area is what they try hard to do. "it's how we express friendly regard for negritas in my racist culture" for instance.
Not confused - bemused maybe.
No more of your er, help required thanks.
Doc Lynam
I hate the Daily Mail
- Jun 19, 2011
- 7,346
Manchester United defender Rio Ferdinand has been charged by the Football Association with improper conduct in relation to comments posted on Twitter. More to follow
BBC Sport - Manchester Uniteds Rio Ferdinand charged by FA
BBC Sport - Manchester Uniteds Rio Ferdinand charged by FA
User removed 4
New member
I'd love to hear the FA's explanation as to why he has been charged with improper conduct in relation to comments posted on twitter ? If his conduct in relation to laughing/agreeing with the poster who claimed Ashley Cole is a "choc ice" then I'd like to know why , if it's not for racism then what's improper about "choc ice" ? If it is for racism then why hasn't he been charged with it ?
TheFA.com - Manchester United defender Rio Ferdinand charged over Twitter comments
The allegation is that the player acted in a way which was improper and/or bought the game into disrepute by making comments which included a reference to ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race.
User removed 4
New member
oooohhhh, thats a juicy can of worms opened.
pork pie
New member
Good, now Anton for the vile bilge he spewed at JT. How has he not been charged yet, or have I missed it?
mikeyjh
Well-known member
Calling someone a 'choc ice' is wrong on so many levels - It's contrary to what most decent people believe - That we're defined not by the colour of our skin, but what's on the 'inside'. I can't really describe how offensive I find it, used to have a lot of time for Rio but that's mostly gone..... Ashley Cole is a cock though
He didn't make any reference to JT's "ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race". Beyond that what did he say that was "vile bilge"? It's been a couple of weeks since it was in the news, so I've forgotten the precise details, all I can remember was the 'shagging your teammate's missus"