Gary Neville

[Onholiday(somemightsay)]

you wouldn’t say that if you had a mixed race friend who been spat at by racists three times since the election and told to fuck off now Brexit is getting done.

'kin hell - where was that mate?

 

[HelloCity]

There are people who think Tommy Robinson isn’t racist.

Seriously.

 

[billymumphrey]

There you go using bullet marks trying to prove something that doesn't exist, ignoring the facts and trying to spin a false narrative out of what has happened not just over a few days but what is the conclusion of rants by Neville since before the election. You still haven't proved

• That there is an epidemic of racism that needs immediate attention
• That Neville was talking out of his tree
• That he wasn't just hurt because his side lost
• That insinuating that Johnson fuelled racism is true considering there is no epidemic

If Neville wanted to go into politics he should go into politics instead of using his platform to spout nonsense, it's one of the reasons Labour lost the election what with millionaires speaking out of turn and getting it wrong. What I find hilarious here is the hyperbole and false horror over what in reality is a tiny tiny incident base of offences, this is as political as it gets it's almost Islington bubble-worthy.

I, at no stage have said in this thread that there is an epidemic of racism. That is something that you introduced when replying to me. I've not stated anywhere that there is a racism epidemic, these are your words, again constructing another strawman. As I stated above I think arguing about an epidemic of racism is semantic. For the record, I will state that I believe that any racism is too much. Therefore whether it be the smallest amount or an "epidemic" it is too much. Why does the fact that you feel it is not an epidemic matter at all unless you believe that there is somehow a tolerable level of racism that is acceptable?

With regards to your bullet points

You still haven't proved

• That there is an epidemic of racism that needs immediate attention

I'm sorry but the burden of proof is not on me to prove this as I never stated this to begin with. You introduced the "racism epidemic" to the discussion. You're arguing with yourself.

You still haven't proved

• That Neville was talking out of his tree

Why would I need to prove this? I don't think he was talking out of his tree. I have stated that what he said was balanced and reasonable. He didn't take sides, it said it was a problem with both sides of politics, and sadly with the example set at the top it therefore filtered down to society in general.

You still haven't proved

• That he wasn't just hurt because his side lost

This is your insinuation, and not based on anything that he has directly said. This is an example, which I have shown, of you inserting your world view into the narrative. An act which you admonish others doing.

You still haven't proved

• That insinuating that Johnson fuelled racism is true considering there is no epidemic

Read back what Neville said. He didn't single out Johnson. He was balanced in his criticism of both sides of politics. As I've said above, why does the crux of whether you don't think there is an epidemic matter - when any level of racism is not acceptable?

If Neville wanted to go into politics he should go into politics instead of using his platform to spout nonsense, it's one of the reasons Labour lost the election what with millionaires speaking out of turn and getting it wrong. What I find hilarious here is the hyperbole and false horror over what in reality is a tiny tiny incident base of offences, this is as political as it gets it's almost Islington bubble-worthy.

Are you a politician? Have you gone into politics yourself? If the answer is no to both questions, why are you commenting on this as clearly, like Neville, you shouldn't be "spouting nonsense"? Neville was commenting on a racist incident in a game he was a paid pundit for. Why shouldn't he comment on it? As racism is a complex and societal wide issue why shouldn't he be able to comment on the wider scope of its impact or causes? Whether you like it or not, political issues are not divorced from football. Look at Ozils stance on China, the stick we get as a club based on our owners, Gundogans photo ops with Erdogan, and Sterling speaking out on racism.

You state you find it "hilarious" that there is a "false horror" over a "tiny tiny incident base of offences". Enlighten me - what level of racist offences do you find acceptable?

 

[nmc]

Has Andy Hinchcliffe been on Sky yet to voice his outrage and to tell us all how deeply offended he is?

 

[Ric]

Football isn't nor should it be seen as a vessel to try and fix all of society's ill's because it simply cant.

On any given Saturday a ground will have all sorts of individuals responsible for things society deems illegal, morally wrong etc yet we dont hear calls for football to sort it all out for good reason....it cant.

We have laws against racism and its good that incidents are reported, its good that clubs are dealing with them as a priority and its even better those found guilty are being dealt with.

My issue is the calls for football to do more.

What more can it do?

What more do the other 60,000 in the ground yesterday do?

Yeah, I agree with this. When it's individuals, such as at the derby and yesterday at White Hart Lane, all the clubs can really do is ban the offender for life. The FA can't really threaten fines or ground closures in this scenario and, as someone else mentioned previously, I'm not sure the players walking off is the solution either. It's disturbing that we're getting more incidents like this, but it's a societal problem rather than something specific to football.

 

[blueinsa]

PFA now calling for a government inquiry but to what end?

We have laws in this country that deals with racism and it is not for the government to hold an inquiry that will not give any answers or solve anything because we deal with the individuals as and when they break the law.

It is absolutely imperative that whilst condemning these vie acts we keep an eye on the bigger picture, one that tells us nearly 29 Millions fans attended games last year in England and Wales and that 422 incidents of racism where reported which whilst disgusting and shameful doesnt in any way suggest its a widespread issue plaguing the game because the vast majority, the 99.99% of fans deplore it, would never apologise for it and support the clubs, the police and the players in stamping it out.

The law deals with these idiots because they are committing crimes against society.

It isn't something football can fix alone and nor should it try because it will fail.

Hear it and see it, report it and let the police and clubs act!

 

[denislawsbackheel]

I, at no stage have said in this thread that there is an epidemic of racism. That is something that you introduced when replying to me. I've not stated anywhere that there is a racism epidemic, these are your words, again constructing another strawman. As I stated above I think arguing about an epidemic of racism is semantic. For the record, I will state that I believe that any racism is too much. Therefore whether it be the smallest amount or an "epidemic" it is too much. Why does the fact that you feel it is not an epidemic matter at all unless you believe that there is somehow a tolerable level of racism that is acceptable?

With regards to your bullet points


I'm sorry but the burden of proof is not on me to prove this as I never stated this to begin with. You introduced the "racism epidemic" to the discussion. You're arguing with yourself.


Why would I need to prove this? I don't think he was talking out of his tree. I have stated that what he said was balanced and reasonable. He didn't take sides, it said it was a problem with both sides of politics, and sadly with the example set at the top it therefore filtered down to society in general.


This is your insinuation, and not based on anything that he has directly said. This is an example, which I have shown, of you inserting your world view into the narrative. An act which you admonish others doing.


Read back what Neville said. He didn't single out Johnson. He was balanced in his criticism of both sides of politics. As I've said above, why does the crux of whether you don't think there is an epidemic matter - when any level of racism is not acceptable?



Are you a politician? Have you gone into politics yourself? If the answer is no to both questions, why are you commenting on this as clearly, like Neville, you shouldn't be "spouting nonsense"? Neville was commenting on a racist incident in a game he was a paid pundit for. Why shouldn't he comment on it? As racism is a complex and societal wide issue why shouldn't he be able to comment on the wider scope of its impact or causes? Whether you like it or not, political issues are not divorced from football. Look at Ozils stance on China, the stick we get as a club based on our owners, Gundogans photo ops with Erdogan, and Sterling speaking out on racism.

You state you find it "hilarious" that there is a "false horror" over a "tiny tiny incident base of offences". Enlighten me - what level of racist offences do you find acceptable?

Chapeau.
A work of art.

 

[nmc]

PFA now calling for a government inquiry but to what end?

We have laws in this country that deals with racism and it is not for the government to hold an inquiry that will not give any answers or solve anything because we deal with the individuals as and when they break the law.

It is absolutely imperative that whilst condemning these vie acts we keep an eye on the bigger picture, one that tells us nearly 29 Millions fans attended games last year in England and Wales and that 422 incidents of racism where reported which whilst disgusting and shameful doesnt in any way suggest its a widespread issue plaguing the game because the vast majority, the 99.99% of fans deplore it, would never apologise for it and support the clubs, the police and the players in stamping it out.

The law deals with these idiots because they are committing crimes against society.

It isn't something football can fix alone and nor should it try because it will fail.

Hear it and see it, report it and let the police and clubs act!

Would that be the government led by a man who calls gay people ‘bum boys’, refers to Muslim women as bank robbers and letterboxes and thinks investigating historical sex crimes is ‘spiffing money up the wall’ - I wouldn’t be hopeful.

 

[blueinsa]

Would that be the government led by a man who calls gay people ‘bum boys’, refers to Muslim women as bank robbers and letterboxes and thinks investigating historical sex crimes is ‘spiffing money up the wall’ - I wouldn’t be hopeful.

What are you going on about?

It is impossible to have any reasonable or sensible debate on here anymore.

 

[nmc]

What are you going on about?

It is impossible to have any reasonable or sensible debate on here anymore.

If our government doesn’t have any standards- how can wider society ?