Poyet on Talksport

[Sour Mash]

Thats a good example of the misunderstanding and double standards. Spanish for black is 'negro'. You can say 'black' in England but you cant say 'negro' . What is Spanish speaker supposed to make of that?

But you can't call someone a "black XYZ" in this country. That's the same as the John Terry (alleged) thing.

[swannymere]

Fergie has called him 'silly', can't wait for the first esteemed member of the press to ask him his views on homophobia.

[stevegrant]

I have a feeling that Gus is going to get dogs tomorrow.

Racists shouldn't be allowed to own dogs

[1976_Child]

Fergie has called him 'silly', can't wait for the first esteemed member of the press to ask him his views on homophobia.

 

Poyet believes that you can't be gay to just one person, you have to be gay to the whole world in order to be truly gay. And in Uruguay it is ok to be gay but it is not ok to be gay here so he has changed his ways and is now straight. He says we should all drive on the right because driving on the left is gay. But he also believes that he is too ugly to be gay. And there aren't any gay chimpanzees anyway and he will defend any chimp that is gay in court 100%.

 

Uruguay = Uuu R Gay.

[Lighthouse]

To the tune of 'glory glory Man Utd'

 

You're not gay but Gus is racist

You're not gay but Gus is racist

You're not gay but Gus is racist

And the Saints go marchin in in in!

[Give it to Ron]

Racists shouldn't be allowed to own dogs

 

I agree you can't even see white dog **** now we have gone so far with all this PC stuff. ;-)

[saintbletch]

Saintbletch as usual you make some fair points but if the reports are true on Luis, he said "You f*cking n*gger" 10 times to Evra, considering also that Luis has lived in western Europe for over 5 years now - it would be extremely difficult to defend his actions other than to call them racist. Only a bigot (Gus) would not see this as racist.

 

Fair comment notnowcato. It would be very difficult to defend such actions - if that was what happened between Suarez and Evra. And as you say he's played in Holland for a number of years.

 

My comments were limited to trying to interpret Poyet's words.

 

But in the same way that I know that your user name is not peddling some sort of racial stereotype of the subservient, slightly stupid, good with martial arts, man servant Chinese from the Pink Panther films; sometimes these words are used for the effect they can elicit and not with any strong conviction for the meaning behind the words.

 

If I wanted to hurt someone using words on a football pitch and I spent my formative years in a country where racist terms where widely used, I might use the 'n*gger' term for the effect it would have rather than through any fundamental racist beliefs.

 

Again, for the avoidance of doubt I believe that anyone that uses language like that on a football pitch should suffer some sort of sanction. But it still might be possible to use those words and not be racist.

[Gingeletiss]

I think the point Poyet is trying to make is subtle and that language has stopped him expressing it as well as perhaps he could have.

 

He's not talking about the rights and wrongs of racism per se. He makes it clear that he's not a racist and would fight in a war alongside people of different colour. Yet before he came to the UK he would routinely refer to his good friend Fernando Cáceres as negro Cáceres. He's cites that newspapers and TV in other parts of the world also refer to him by that name. He said that in coming to the UK it took him some time to adjust to our country's attitude to racist terminology. Once he understood what was and wasn't acceptable, he adjusted the way he talked.

 

He says Suarez is not a racist even though he used the term negro to refer to Evra.

 

He is saying that you shouldn't accuse someone of BEING a racist just because they used a racist term. Especially if he comes from a culture where those terms are not seen as politically incorrect as they are here.

 

I can see his point.

 

I've met many older people who would tell you that they are not racist but refer to black people using language that by today's standards is toe-curlingly cringeworthy.

 

People from my father's generation would happily share a pint with a black man but think nothing of referring to him as coloured or darkie or perhaps worse. It's wrong, but only from the perspective of 2011 UK.

 

There is a real difference between someone BEING a racist and 'just' using terms that might be taken as racist.

 

And just to be clear. I personally believe that we should do all we can to stamp out language that minorities legitimately find insulting or demeaning. I abhor racism and I like to think that I would confront anyone I hear using racist language as a tool of hate. But, as unenlightened as it appears from our post-politically correct perspective, it is possible to say certain words in certain situations and not be a racist.

 

saintbletch gets it, good post, and it's how I see it. I served with Black/Asian we even had a mixed Chinese/white nicknamed Chink. We all got on fine, but we were what we were, now society tells me that we're not what we thought we were, but we're all the same. But we are not all the same, spend some time overseas, then you will see real racism, go to Saudi or India. What you may term as racist, is mild to what I've been subjected to in other country's.

[Guan 2.0]

Thats a good example of the misunderstanding and double standards. Spanish for black is 'negro'. You can say 'black' in England but you cant say 'negro' . What is Spanish speaker supposed to make of that?

 

But he knows that in this country people do say black, not just the man in the street, but politicians, and broadcast, print and internet based media. Whereas in America (and Britain to a far smaller degree) Negro was oft times used to describe a whole section of perceived 'lower' society in a derogatory manner. Unless you think he wasn't aware of that?

 

And whatever he says, asking him to own up to realising that is not the same as enforcing a worldwide ‘drive on the right campaign’ (p.s. why would we want that?).

 

Not cool Gus. You’re like the opposite of Batman.

[trousers]

I think the point Poyet is trying to make is subtle and that language has stopped him expressing it as well as perhaps he could have.

 

He's not talking about the rights and wrongs of racism per se. He makes it clear that he's not a racist and would fight in a war alongside people of different colour. Yet before he came to the UK he would routinely refer to his good friend Fernando Cáceres as negro Cáceres. He's cites that newspapers and TV in other parts of the world also refer to him by that name. He said that in coming to the UK it took him some time to adjust to our country's attitude to racist terminology. Once he understood what was and wasn't acceptable, he adjusted the way he talked.

 

He says Suarez is not a racist even though he used the term negro to refer to Evra.

 

He is saying that you shouldn't accuse someone of BEING a racist just because they used a racist term. Especially if he comes from a culture where those terms are not seen as politically incorrect as they are here.

 

I can see his point.

 

I've met many older people who would tell you that they are not racist but refer to black people using language that by today's standards is toe-curlingly cringeworthy.

 

People from my father's generation would happily share a pint with a black man but think nothing of referring to him as coloured or darkie or perhaps worse. It's wrong, but only from the perspective of 2011 UK.

 

There is a real difference between someone BEING a racist and 'just' using terms that might be taken as racist.

 

And just to be clear. I personally believe that we should do all we can to stamp out language that minorities legitimately find insulting or demeaning. I abhor racism and I like to think that I would confront anyone I hear using racist language as a tool of hate. But, as unenlightened as it appears from our post-politically correct perspective, it is possible to say certain words in certain situations and not be a racist.

 

Top post. Agree 100%

[Gingeletiss]

If you think being called a baldie and a nig*er amount to the same thing son, you got bigger problems than poyet!

 

You do realise, that phrase was coined, by the very people you claim it offends!

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Poyet should be a 'gonner' after that. As someone mentions above, if this is his attitude to race, what is his attitude to homosexuals?

[The Kraken]

You do realise, that phrase was coined, by the very people you claim it offends!

 

No it wasn't. The term "n****r" originated hundreds of years ago as a slang/derogatory reference to black people. That the term has been "reclaimed" in the past 30 or 40 years has nothing at all to do with its original inception.

[Saintandy666]

You do realise, that phrase was coined, by the very people you claim it offends!

 

It's the connotation that matters. The latter word has hundreds of years of oppression in its meaning and is often shouted and used as a derogatory term that someone is better than the other because of their skin colour. Baldie has no such history or connotation.

[Saintandy666]

But some races are superior at different things. The Japanese and European Jews score highest on IQ tests. Nepalese have 15% greater lung capacity even at sea level. South American indian tribes can exist on much less protein than western europeans. There hasnt been a white winner of the 100m Olympics for 30 years, nor a black one of the swimming.

 

Its about how you treat people that matters, not trying to pretend that everyone from every country is identical.

 

In fairness, what you are saying is racialist, not racist... but there is a very thin line between the two. Between saying different races have inherent qualities... and then saying oh, that means they should be treated differently, and that leads to mass racism or worse, genocide.

[Micky]

Interesting thread, would like to add my ten penneth, but to he honest saintbletch has put it into words far more eloquently and succinctly than I ever could have. Agree with him entirely.

[Prince Jazzbo]

I saw an earlier post where someone mentioned that this had caused a media storm. Is that really the case?

Edited 18 November, 2011 by Prince Jazzbo

[The Kraken]

I saw an earlier post where someone mentioned that this had caused a media storm. Where is this storm apart from on here?

 

Feature talking point on TalkSport right now. BBC Sport feature. Football 365. Pretty much all major media outlets are covering it.

[Ken Tone]

I think the point Poyet is trying to make is subtle and that language has stopped him expressing it as well as perhaps he could have.

 

He's not talking about the rights and wrongs of racism per se. He makes it clear that he's not a racist and would fight in a war alongside people of different colour. Yet before he came to the UK he would routinely refer to his good friend Fernando Cáceres as negro Cáceres. He's cites that newspapers and TV in other parts of the world also refer to him by that name. He said that in coming to the UK it took him some time to adjust to our country's attitude to racist terminology. Once he understood what was and wasn't acceptable, he adjusted the way he talked.

 

He says Suarez is not a racist even though he used the term negro to refer to Evra.

 

He is saying that you shouldn't accuse someone of BEING a racist just because they used a racist term. Especially if he comes from a culture where those terms are not seen as politically incorrect as they are here.

 

I can see his point.

 

I've met many older people who would tell you that they are not racist but refer to black people using language that by today's standards is toe-curlingly cringeworthy.

 

People from my father's generation would happily share a pint with a black man but think nothing of referring to him as coloured or darkie or perhaps worse. It's wrong, but only from the perspective of 2011 UK.

 

There is a real difference between someone BEING a racist and 'just' using terms that might be taken as racist.

 

And just to be clear. I personally believe that we should do all we can to stamp out language that minorities legitimately find insulting or demeaning. I abhor racism and I like to think that I would confront anyone I hear using racist language as a tool of hate. But, as unenlightened as it appears from our post-politically correct perspective, it is possible to say certain words in certain situations and not be a racist.

 

Poyet seems to be excusing his friend by saying he has not adapted to our stricter interpretation of what is acceptable here. But as the post just before yours pointed out, Suarez spent years before coming to the UK in the Netherlands, where racism, and racist language, is definitely not tolerated. What is more I would imagine he almost certainly communicated mostly in English there.... since I very much doubt he learnt Dutch, and virtually every Dutch person speaks perfect English.

 

Besides which if Suarez did not think what he said was an insult, why he did use the term? He knew it was offensive and intended it to be...as Poyet well knows IMO.

[Alain Perrin]

POST OF THE WEEK.

Every thing you say is completely the case. My father would affectionately call people 'darkies' but I promise you he wasn't racist - it was the language of the day. I would say him "Dad, you can't use that word these days". Any of you under 30, see if you can find a playback of any episode of 1970s sitcom "Love Thy Neighbour". Yes, it was a comedy. They can't show it these days - OFCOM would be inundated. Times change, expressions change. I haven't heard the interview with Poyet yet - I will later from home - but Bletch has explained it well.

 

Also, in fairness to Suarez. Negro is Spanish for Black so really using that term hasn't got the same weight as when a native English speaker uses it.

 

Interestingly, Poyet is also Spanish for c*ck.

[Jimmy_D]

National newspapers and media have picked this up and are running with it.

 

I have to admit the picture the Daily Mail decided to use did make me laugh...

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2063168/Gus-Poyet-prepared-court-prove-Luis-Suarez-racist.html

[Mattio]

What a cock, wouldn't **** on him if he was on fire

[aintforever]

...

Edited 18 November, 2011 by aintforever

[aintforever]

Thats a good example of the misunderstanding and double standards. Spanish for black is 'negro'. You can say 'black' in England but you cant say 'negro' . What is Spanish speaker supposed to make of that?

 

That's a load of nonsense, Suarez was using his skin colour as an insult the wording makes little difference, neither does where Suarez is from.

 

Whatever wording they use in his home country Saurez knows full well that n!gger is offensive to Evra, that's why he used it.

[Sour Mash]

I saw an earlier post where someone mentioned that this had caused a media storm. Is that really the case?

Just seen a fairly big bit on him on BBC news.

[BallBoy]

I do not like the way Poyet presents his views. The fact is I just don't like him but that doesn't mean I can't give credence to some of his views.

 

There is another thread on this site where the majority of contributors say it is not homophobic to chant mild insults to Brighton fans just because they come from Brighton. It is just banter. I agree with this. Chanting a little bit of banter does not make all the participants homophobes.

 

Equally the use of a bit of colourful language towards a person of differing culture does not make someone a racist.

 

Being a racist or homophobe means that you hate or want to do harm to those people or believe that you are intrinsically superior to them.

 

It is the incorrect use of the terms racist or homophobe that are at the root of this problem.

[Frank's cousin]

I do not like the way Poyet presents his views. The fact is I just don't like him but that doesn't mean I can't give credence to some of his views.

 

There is another thread on this site where the majority of contributors say it is not homophobic to chant mild insults to Brighton fans just because they come from Brighton. It is just banter. I agree with this. Chanting a little bit of banter does not make all the participants homophobes.

 

 

Equally the use of a bit of colourful language towards a person of differing culture does not make someone a racist.

 

Being a racist or homophobe means that you hate or want to do harm to those people or believe that you are intrinsically superior to them.

 

It is the incorrect use of the terms racist or homophobe that are at the root of this problem.

 

Its also about respect though... I agree in part with what Saint bletch is saying, but not totally, 'banter' betwen a few folk who know 100% what sentiment and feeling is behind it is one thing, but I doubt the 'chinky' in the army would cause a stir about his nickname because of the need for a close working unit, but would he have chosen it given the choice? Its about the message this sends out to thsoe uneducated...

 

Also, there are plenty of folk who 'have black friends', and would 'happily share a pint with a black man', how often have these friends been round for dinner? (they tend to go quiet on that score) and many of teh same people would go ape if tehir daughter wanted to marry someone from another country let alone race - they also tend to use 'cultural differences' as an excuse rather than acknowledging their own prejudice. You DONT need to hate or cause harm to be a rascist, simple ignorance and disrespect based on colour, ethinicity is enough, and too often that is forgotten in the 'its only banter tag' - its why Poyet was so stupid to justify his views based on language or cultural difefrences, they mean feck all and just because some nations dont react or treat such disrespect in teh same way does not make it right...

[RobM]

If I moved to another country, learned a word or phrase that was offensive locally, I would make sure I didn't use it. If it was a word that was universally known but deemed offensive locally yet fine in my home country, I wouldn't use it. Why should it be any different to people coming into this country?

[harwellsaint]

very,very good, i hope we tear em apart tomorrow utsth

Gives us a nice chant at tomorrows game:

 

"Are you Blatter in disguise? Aaaaare you Bla-tter in disguise?"

[sydney_saint]

What a cock, wouldn't **** on him if he was on fire

 

I certainly would, don't get all that many opportunities to **** on a cock like him. I would also take pleasure in doing so with very decisive aim.

[lordswoodsaints]

Is saying 'good golly' still legal?

[alehouseboys]

Is saying 'good golly' still legal?

 

That's a compliment, surely.

[Dynamo Naive]

TBF, he is partially struggling to explain himself because he's not speaking in his native language. I hate the bloke and disagree with his point of view, but the language barrier hasn't helped him.

 

I can't stand him either but let's not forget that negro is the Spanish word for black.

[Faz]

So, is he saying; Suarez moved to a new Country and learned the native equivalent of his hispanic racist phrases so he could use them innocently in a football match?

[Griffo]

That's a compliment, surely.

 

[ericofarabia]

National newspapers and media have picked this up and are running with it.

 

I have to admit the picture the Daily Mail decided to use did make me laugh...

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2063168/Gus-Poyet-prepared-court-prove-Luis-Suarez-racist.html

 

 

LOL!!

 

I wonder what Paolo Di Canio's views are?

[Wade Garrett]

Suarez should have just called Evra a c*nt. Then everyone would be happy. It's a great and powerful word.

[mikee]

Suarez should have just called Evra a c*nt. Then everyone would be happy. It's a great and powerful word.

 

Totally agree with this, there is no need to use the word black to insult someone. It's the inclusion of that word that demonstrates you see the person differently due to their skin colour.

 

There is also an issue that some people are particularly sensitive to racism and can often mis-interpret harmless remarks. One of my best mates has clearly suffered a fair amount of racism in his life. The problem is he is now so senstive to the issue that he can see racism where it doesn't exist. I don't even see him as black but until he can see himself as anything other than black I fear that he will continue to be a victim of racism.

[jawillwill]

Isn't the C-word classed as sexist. I certainly wouldn't want to offend anyone about thier genitals.

[Saint]

The worst part is, Poyet isn't actually saying that Suarez isn't racist.

 

What he's really saying is that racism is ok. I suppose he thinks he can say this just because he was also a victim of it.

[Gingeletiss]

Suarez should have just called Evra a c*nt. Then everyone would be happy. It's a great and powerful word.

 

Is that not sexist?

[Gingeletiss]

Isn't the C-word classed as sexist. I certainly wouldn't want to offend anyone about thier genitals.

 

Damn...should of read on

[Jonnyboy]

Isn't the C-word classed as sexist. I certainly wouldn't want to offend anyone about thier genitals.

 

I never thought of it as sexist until watching curb your enthusiasm... for me its just a strong swear word

[Wade Garrett]

Is that not sexist?

 

How about ManC*nt to a man, and c*nt to a c*nt.

[Deano6]

Did he get any chants at the game?

[Saint Martini]

Poyet seems to be excusing his friend by saying he has not adapted to our stricter interpretation of what is acceptable here. But as the post just before yours pointed out, Suarez spent years before coming to the UK in the Netherlands, where racism, and racist language, is definitely not tolerated. What is more I would imagine he almost certainly communicated mostly in English there.... since I very much doubt he learnt Dutch, and virtually every Dutch person speaks perfect English.

 

Besides which if Suarez did not think what he said was an insult, why he did use the term? He knew it was offensive and intended it to be...as Poyet well knows IMO.

 

He did his TV interviews in Dutch. I'm not convinced at all he knew a lot of English before coming to England.

[Jeff Le Taxi]

Never really understood why "******" is considered to be a racist word! although i wouldnt use it, surely its a mish mash of negro and niger (river) how it came to be viewed as an insult i'll never know! same goes for "paki" surely a shortened version of Pakistan? I wouldnt be at all offended if someone called me a brit!

 

cue 10 pages of insults aimed at me!

[Jeff Le Taxi]

And why is the word deleted, surely not a swear word?

[Deano6]

Never really understood why "******" is considered to be a racist word! although i wouldnt use it, surely its a mish mash of negro and niger (river) how it came to be viewed as an insult i'll never know! same goes for "paki" surely a shortened version of Pakistan? I wouldnt be at all offended if someone called me a brit!

 

cue 10 pages of insults aimed at me!

 

Have you ever bothered to look into it? All words start off as some kind of description, it's not the original etymology that makes it offensive. In this case it was originally used as an ethnic slur towards black slaves in colonial America, coming to signify their lower status.

 

I'll help you out: http://bit.ly/vnH4b

[Junior Mullet]

Never really understood why "******" is considered to be a racist word! although i wouldnt use it, surely its a mish mash of negro and niger (river) how it came to be viewed as an insult i'll never know! same goes for "paki" surely a shortened version of Pakistan? I wouldnt be at all offended if someone called me a brit!

 

cue 10 pages of insults aimed at me!

 

If anyone ever wants to make themselves look like an idiot, follow this guy's lead.