Talksport

Mancityus said:
Durham right on and noticed that folks pick black players to call that out in examples given. Could Harry Kane make lazy list - no cannot call him that even when he walks around on the field because he has a reason, he is tired.
Click to expand...
Maybe in Journo world Kane isn't called out for many ineffectual performances, but he certainly is in here.
But great piece by Durham. Certainly long overdue someone in the media said something so strongly on this issue.
 
Last edited:
Plays By Sense Of Smell said:
And I believe that for you (and I) this is ok - as (/as long as, and I believe that we are,) we're doing it from a place of, for want of a better term, non-prejudicial neutrality - i.e. we interpret and label any player behaving in the same way as lazy too.

This in itself is tricky, as we each have our own individual ways of viewing the world which are composed of our made up stories - which by their nature are highly subjective as they are dependent on our individual views of the world which have been shaped and influenced by our individual experiences and surroundings.

I think what Durham is advocating is perhaps a degree of reflection - a pause to consider whether or not we are being 'fair' in the way we describe one person over another, or whether we are perhaps being unduly influenced in our judgement by irrelevant factors and pre-existing beliefs. To a degree, this unfairness could be seen as similar to the way we view our 'Agenda'. Unwarranted in a balanced and fair world, but excruciatingly frustrating for any who feel they are subject to it.

And therein lies the rub. Some people are so self-unaware that they simply do not see, consider or believe that they are being unfair in the way they differentiate between players. Some haven't even realised that there are different points of view outside the bubble of their own existence.
Some do, and continue to pursue their agenda regardless. And when in groups or communities, it is all too easy for many otherwise objective people to be carried along by social norms, with a lax hand on objective thinking especially arising in times of high emotional stimulation.

I do think for the most part, people are capable of being self-aware enough to make such considerations (i.e. "am I really being objective here?") - when they are in emotionally balanced states. But this must come from awareness - education, normalisation, etc.
With awareness and social promotion comes practice (utilising the same community effect to support and encourage desired behaviour/thinking) - which then becomes a more frequent state of being. And while we will continue to be influenced by irrelevant factors, if we can recognise when it is about to happen, we stand a chance of reducing the frequency or degree to which it drives our subsequent actions.

There you go, my relatively unstructured ramblings at 5.45 in a morning. Not necessarily fact, just my opinion.
Hope they are useful food for thought.
Click to expand...

That was a hard read -)

What you say is reasoned and balanced, and very insightful. Good post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dom
I can scarcely believe that I am agreeing with Durham but he is right.

Black players are portrayed as feckless, immoral, lazy, stupid, cheats, who rely on their physicality rather than skill. So Sterling is lightning quick but not skilful, dives, hard to train, and wastes his money. Pogba is lazy, greedy, immoral and vain.

White players are skilled, intelligent, hardworking, role models. Kane is a good old family man who works hard, loyal, not greedy, learns, and is very skilful. Even the despicable John Terry is portrayed as someone to look up to.

And when things go wrong it's the black player fault. I speak as a Spurs fan. When Spurs don't score it is not Kane's fault despite missing chance after change. The media blame the the lazy and inconsistent Alli, Moura and Sissoko. It is never Kane's fault. Or Eriksen, Or Winks. Or Son.

It goes on and on. Rose is the stupid trouble maker. Davies is the model professional. Walker is a greedy, error prone, speedster. Trippier is the hard working, loyal, skilful example to us all.

That is Spurs but it is the same in all the big clubs. Who is responsible? The media doesn't help but the reality is that football is inherently racist, homophobic and misogynistic.
 
JPBB said:
I can scarcely believe that I am agreeing with Durham but he is right.

Black players are portrayed as feckless, immoral, lazy, stupid, cheats, who rely on their physicality rather than skill. So Sterling is lightning quick but not skilful, dives, hard to train, and wastes his money. Pogba is lazy, greedy, immoral and vain.

White players are skilled, intelligent, hardworking, role models. Kane is a good old family man who works hard, loyal, not greedy, learns, and is very skilful. Even the despicable John Terry is portrayed as someone to look up to.

And when things go wrong it's the black player fault. I speak as a Spurs fan. When Spurs don't score it is not Kane's fault despite missing chance after change. The media blame the the lazy and inconsistent Alli, Moura and Sissoko. It is never Kane's fault. Or Eriksen, Or Winks. Or Son.

It goes on and on. Rose is the stupid trouble maker. Davies is the model professional. Walker is a greedy, error prone, speedster. Trippier is the hard working, loyal, skilful example to us all.

That is Spurs but it is the same in all the big clubs. Who is responsible? The media doesn't help but the reality is that football is inherently racist, homophobic and misogynistic.
Click to expand...

Where does Eric Dier fit into your thinking....?
 
If Dier was black he would be reckless, error prone, cocky and physical player. But he is white so he is an example of a hard working, potential club (and England) captain, flexible, unselfish and intelligent. All that is good about English players.
 
He pulled the dippers and their media mates. Is it me, or has The Sun cut back on its Raheem attacks?
 
Plays By Sense Of Smell said:
And I believe that for you (and I) this is ok - as (/as long as, and I believe that we are,) we're doing it from a place of, for want of a better term, non-prejudicial neutrality - i.e. we interpret and label any player behaving in the same way as lazy too.

This in itself is tricky, as we each have our own individual ways of viewing the world which are composed of our made up stories - which by their nature are highly subjective as they are dependent on our individual views of the world which have been shaped and influenced by our individual experiences and surroundings.

I think what Durham is advocating is perhaps a degree of reflection - a pause to consider whether or not we are being 'fair' in the way we describe one person over another, or whether we are perhaps being unduly influenced in our judgement by irrelevant factors and pre-existing beliefs. To a degree, this unfairness could be seen as similar to the way we view our 'Agenda'. Unwarranted in a balanced and fair world, but excruciatingly frustrating for any who feel they are subject to it.

And therein lies the rub. Some people are so self-unaware that they simply do not see, consider or believe that they are being unfair in the way they differentiate between players. Some haven't even realised that there are different points of view outside the bubble of their own existence.
Some do, and continue to pursue their agenda regardless. And when in groups or communities, it is all too easy for many otherwise objective people to be carried along by social norms, with a lax hand on objective thinking especially arising in times of high emotional stimulation.

I do think for the most part, people are capable of being self-aware enough to make such considerations (i.e. "am I really being objective here?") - when they are in emotionally balanced states. But this must come from awareness - education, normalisation, etc.
With awareness and social promotion comes practice (utilising the same community effect to support and encourage desired behaviour/thinking) - which then becomes a more frequent state of being. And while we will continue to be influenced by irrelevant factors, if we can recognise when it is about to happen, we stand a chance of reducing the frequency or degree to which it drives our subsequent actions.

There you go, my relatively unstructured ramblings at 5.45 in a morning. Not necessarily fact, just my opinion.
Hope they are useful food for thought.
Click to expand...


I agree with a lot of what Durham has said, but he's used two really bad examples with Lukaku & Pogba & indeed the contrast with Aguero, as plenty of people used to talk about Aguero not being arsed tracking back etc & how poor a combination of him & Dzeko would be in that respect, compared to Tevez. Indeed DeBoer said he'd told Ajax to target Aguero's side when Mancini once played him wide, as he knew Aguero wouldn't cover it, which he didn't.

It's the guys who call black players in general, lazy, he needs to target, not those often rightly criticising Lukaku & Pogba when they go missing at key moments in that respect.
 
A sensible debate about racism is going on right now.

This wouldn't be allowed during peak time.
 
Glendenning will be awaiting thsle obligatory death threats after saying on national radio he doesn't want Liverpool to win the league as their fans will be insufferable.


He's not wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dom
The Moose might be due a kicking today by Chavs fans. He's letting his fan side take over his professionality. Publicly announcing he's watching their fans for any potential homophobic chanting at Brighton.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top