The Euro2020 Thread

[hypochondriac]

6 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I doubt it has increased, it is just getting more attention from the media now. I think it has to be good that the issue is addressed, not just swept under the carpet with a kick-it-out T-shirt once a season.

Kneeling hasn't addressed the issue in any meaningful way. Some people have suggested that it's kept people talking about it but you only have to look on here to see that it hasn't succeeded in changing anyone's minds. Real racists aren't going to be swayed but kneeling players and imo racialising everything and focusing on our differences rather than what we have in common has had disastrous results in America and is seeing similar things here. The only feasible action that I have seen is what I suggested above. Removing Internet anonymity from social media worldwide is a moronic thing to call for. 

Edited 14 July, 2021 by hypochondriac

[supersonic]

5 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I doubt it has increased, it is just getting more attention from the media now. I think it has to be good that the issue is addressed, not just swept under the carpet with a kick-it-out T-shirt once a season.

It's not increasing, it's just getting exposed, which is only a good thing (unless you're a racist)

[East Kent Saint]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Really?

Hundreds descend on defaced Marcus Rashford mural to decry racist grafitti - Independent

Love in the face of hate: Mancunians leave hearts and messages on Rashford mural after it's defaced by racist - Manchester Evening news

Greater Manchester Police (GMP) said they were called at 2.50am on Monday to reports of the racially aggravated damage to the mural. - Sky.com

Protesters take the knee by Marcus Rashford mural after it was defaced with racist graffiti - Daily Mirror

There are plenty more but I think you get the point that your claim that it 'wasn't reported as racist abuse' is complete horseshit!

Well not the report I saw ! I accept that media companies , who apparently trawl all other media companies on the net , may have seen someone else reporting it and then made their own report but that is the modern way . Saves having all those reporter people.

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, supersonic said:

It's not increasing, it's just getting exposed, which is only a good thing (unless you're a racist)

Like I said above, I'm very supportive of racist comments getting dealt with properly. I do however question the tactic of widely publicising what is in reality a tiny minority of anonymous idiots online. Much better if the goal is to reduce the number to work behind the scenes to find identities and then publicise the cases at that point rather like how the police are wary about how they report murders for fear of copycat killers. 

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, East Kent Saint said:

Well not the report I saw ! I accept that media companies , who apparently trawl all other media companies on the net , may have seen someone else reporting it and then made their own report but that is the modern way . Saves having all those reporter people.

TBF I thought the graffiti was racist. I think that's the implication given that it's been reported alongside the racist abuse online. It's certainly been heavily implied that that was the case and I think the average person reading these articles would have come away with that impression. 

[East Kent Saint]

6 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Kneeling hasn't addressed the issue in any meaningful way. The only feasible action that I have seen is what I suggested above. Removing Internet anonymity from social media worldwide is a moronic thing to call for. 

It has bought worldwide attention to the problem so it has worked in that respect. Re social media , change the law so they are classified as publishers THEN they will be responsible for what appears on their media platform . They have shown that they can't control what appears on their platform so tough.

Internet anonymity has already started to disappear in China , Russia , India etc so ....

[Lighthouse]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

TBF I thought the graffiti was racist. I think that's the implication given that it's been reported alongside the racist abuse online. It's certainly been heavily implied that that was the case and I think the average person reading these articles would have come away with that impression. 

There’re a lot of deeply cynical, click bait headlines going around with the deliberate aim of making people jump to conclusions. It was the same with all the ‘BLM leader shot in the head’ stories and is unlikely to be the last time either. I also assumed the Rashford graffiti was racist, before I saw SKDs post a couple of pages back.

[Lord Duckhunter]

35 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Of course there is hypocrisy, what is your point?

 

17 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I doubt it has increased, it is just getting more attention from the media now. I think it has to be good that the issue is addressed, not just swept under the carpet with a kick-it-out T-shirt once a season.

I thought the point was pretty obvious. 
 

The issue is not being addressed, instead of wearing a tee shirt they’re now kneeling down. Hypercritical warriors still sweeping it under the carpet. Wouldn’t want it to interfering with their careers or money making would we?

Black lives matter, to some extent. 

 

[aintforever]

15 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Kneeling hasn't addressed the issue in any meaningful way. Some people have suggested that it's kept people talking about it but you only have to look on here to see that it hasn't succeeded in changing anyone's minds. Real racists aren't going to be swayed but kneeling players and imo racialising everything and focusing on our differences rather than what we have in common has had disastrous results in America and is seeing similar things here. The only feasible action that I have seen is what I suggested above. Removing Internet anonymity from social media worldwide is a moronic thing to call for. 

Putting a spotlight on the issue is more likely to effect change than just ignoring it though, online abuse is just part of the problem and there are obviously technical and legal ways of dealing with that. It will never get dealt with unless it is on the agenda tho.

[hypochondriac]

6 minutes ago, East Kent Saint said:

It has bought worldwide attention to the problem so it has worked in that respect. Re social media , change the law so they are classified as publishers THEN they will be responsible for what appears on their media platform . They have shown that they can't control what appears on their platform so tough.

Internet anonymity has already started to disappear in China , Russia , India etc so ....

Making them publishers would end social media overnight. Certain words and topics will be banned from discussion by bots and context will not be taken into account. It will be a ban first and ask questions later approach which will remove the free Internet. Its a sledgehammer to crack a nut and why would you want to remove that from the entire Internet? 

[East Kent Saint]

3 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

 

I thought the point was pretty obvious. 
 

The issue is not being addressed, instead of wearing a tee shirt they’re now kneeling down. Hypercritical warriors still sweeping it under the carpet. Wouldn’t want it to interfering with their careers or money making would we?

Black lives matter, to some extent. 

 

We shouldn't have to rely on footballers , of all people , to sort out our own society ! It's bad enough they feel the need to feed poor children and raise money for the NHS !!!!

[hypochondriac]

6 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

There’re a lot of deeply cynical, click bait headlines going around with the deliberate aim of making people jump to conclusions. It was the same with all the ‘BLM leader shot in the head’ stories and is unlikely to be the last time either. I also assumed the Rashford graffiti was racist, before I saw SKDs post a couple of pages back.

I do wonder what the agenda is of the people pushing this stuff. 

[East Kent Saint]

3 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I do wonder what the agenda is of the people pushing this stuff. 

More clicks more money !

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

Putting a spotlight on the issue is more likely to effect change than just ignoring it though, online abuse is just part of the problem and there are obviously technical and legal ways of dealing with that. It will never get dealt with unless it is on the agenda tho.

How would you like to see it dealt with? I personally think that focusing on the things that divide us rather than what we have in common and what unites us has made things much worse. 

[CB Fry]

39 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Of course there is hypocrisy, what is your point?

My favourite kind of hypocrisy are those who only ever comment on racism, homophobia or human rights as a way of having a pop at people they don't like. And by people they don't like, I mean people that do comment on racism or human rights on its own terms.

But, if you wank off to Guido Fawkes every day, that's your world view. 

For these people the issue will never be what Qatar actually do, but the fact that Gary Lineker will eventually have to present a TV programme from there so he's a hypocrite.

If that's the only level you need to engage with issues, then really it's incredibly easy.

[aintforever]

4 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

 

I thought the point was pretty obvious. 
 

The issue is not being addressed, instead of wearing a tee shirt they’re now kneeling down. Hypercritical warriors still sweeping it under the carpet. Wouldn’t want it to interfering with their careers or money making would we?

Black lives matter, to some extent. 

 

I would applaud them if they pulled out of the World Cup, doubt you Gammons would be that happy tho.

Taking the knee is just a gesture but it is way more visible than the Kick it out stuff that preceded it. What do you want them to do, set themselves on fire?

[sadoldgit]

20 hours ago, Turkish said:

It is a minority, a huge minority. We know how you like to scream everyone is racist but the reality is it would appear that it’s about 1 Twitter user for every 7 million accounts, still let’s pretend it’s not a minority shall we.

Yet again you don’t read what was sad and reply to what is going on in your own head! Provide evidence that I “scream everyone is racist”. You are so desperate to call out people who are against racism you constantly make a fool of yourself.

Yes, racists are in the minority, I have never, ever said otherwise. They are in the minority just as murderers and rapists are in the minority. It doesn’t mean that murders and rapes are not a serious problem does it?

Every single day people across this country are racially abused. Are you ok with that because the abusers are in the minority?

You spend a great deal of time and energy having a dig at those who are speaking out against racism. Why is that exactly? 

Despite Southgate, Rashford, Saka and Sancho all speaking out about the racial abuse that had been aimed at them, you demanded to see evidence. Their word not good enough for you? Why is that exactly?

What is encouraging us that more posters here are calling out people like you for what you are. The positive reaction to the defacing of Marcus Rashford’s mural has also been brilliant. Our PM, who is no stranger to making racist comments himself, has finally been pressured into doing more about it. Finally.
 

I agree with the post earlier that it is a shame that we are talking about this rather than the football, but when people boo players who are making their own stand against racism and whilst players still get racial abuse thrown at them, it needs to be fronted up. It would also help if people who swear blind they are not racist would stop attacking those speaking out against racism. It is not acceptable and defending the actions of those who do or trying to minimise the size of the problem by throwing the word minority around is not acceptable. The word minority does not mean it is less of a problem and does not make those on the end of the abuse feel any better about it. 
 

 

 

 

[hypochondriac]

Just now, East Kent Saint said:

More clicks more money !

I think it's more of a larger narrative. I believe that certain people want control and censorship of the Internet and are hyping this up in order to bring it in. The online harms bill for example is an appaling piece of legislation that is being brought in off the back of this under the pretence of protecting children. 

[Ex Lion Tamer]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I do wonder what the agenda is of the people pushing this stuff. 

It's what all the media do to whip people up and get clicks. It's not done as part of some woke agenda.

It was the same when they all said that Fawlty Towers was being banned, which got all the right wingers foaming and wasn't actually true

[East Kent Saint]

4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Making them publishers would end social media overnight. Certain words and topics will be banned from discussion by bots and context will not be taken into account. It will be a ban first and ask questions later approach which will remove the free Internet. Its a sledgehammer to crack a nut and why would you want to remove that from the entire Internet? 

Could we manage without social media ? Well I manage Ha Ha and alot of other people would do better under the " Better to let people think you are a fool than open your mouth and prove it" (me included !)

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, East Kent Saint said:

Could we manage without social media ? Well I manage Ha Ha and alot of other people would do better under the " Better to let people think you are a fool than open your mouth and prove it" (me included !)

That's a different topic then isn't it. A tiny minority on social media send horrible abuse to all manner of people online including racist abuse and the solution is to end social media? That doesn't seem like a proportional response to me. 

[Alanh]

6 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Making them publishers would end social media overnight. Certain words and topics will be banned from discussion by bots and context will not be taken into account. It will be a ban first and ask questions later approach which will remove the free Internet. Its a sledgehammer to crack a nut and why would you want to remove that from the entire Internet? 

I think what you mean is it would end social media as we know it overnight.  I'm not sure that's necessarily a bad thing, but the idea of verified accounts for everyone and unverified available but effectively consigned to second class status is worth pursuing if it is feasible.

[aintforever]

4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

How would you like to see it dealt with? I personally think that focusing on the things that divide us rather than what we have in common and what unites us has made things much worse. 

Think if you want to root out the idiots there will have to be some division. The majority of people understand the taking of the knee for what it is. The media, pundits, the FA, the players, the clubs and the vast majority of fans don’t have an issue with it.

[redkeith]

Aside from the whole racist text thing and Bojo and Patels role in it, when you consider the lazer incident. The booing of national anthems, the inability of Wembley to run a security cordon , there is absolutely no chance of England getting the 2030 world Cup. The only way they could have less chance is if Dido Harding was running it.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

6 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

How would you like to see it dealt with? I personally think that focusing on the things that divide us rather than what we have in common and what unites us has made things much worse. 

But if we don't talk about race then a problem like this won't get addressed

[Lighthouse]

3 minutes ago, East Kent Saint said:

Could we manage without social media ? Well I manage Ha Ha and alot of other people would do better under the " Better to let people think you are a fool than open your mouth and prove it" (me included !)

Twitter alone is worth $56 billion. I'm not sure your ancient proverbs are going to get it closed down. Also, your suggestion to 'change the law to make them a publisher' isn't in any way feasible either. You might as well say, 'lets change the law to make Portsmouth Football Club Ltd. illegal human traffickers and get them closed down' - you can't just do that because it's what you want to happen. First and foremost it's not true. They aren't publishers and will have an army of top lawyers to make sure it stays that way.

[hypochondriac]

7 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Think if you want to root out the idiots there will have to be some division. The majority of people understand the taking of the knee for what it is. The media, pundits, the FA, the players, the clubs and the vast majority of fans don’t have an issue with it.

I'm not sure that's true. I think a sizable number don't like the gesture and that virtually everyone would be on board if the gesture was different. 

[hypochondriac]

7 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

But if we don't talk about race then a problem like this won't get addressed

Taking the knee does more than just getting people talking about it. Imo it stokes racial tensions in society and doesn't lead to any greater harmony and actually makes racial tensions a lot worse. 

[East Kent Saint]

4 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

Twitter alone is worth $56 billion. I'm not sure your ancient proverbs are going to get it closed down. Also, your suggestion to 'change the law to make them a publisher' isn't in any way feasible either. You might as well say, 'lets change the law to make Portsmouth Football Club Ltd. illegal human traffickers and get them closed down' - you can't just do that because it's what you want to happen. First and foremost it's not true. They aren't publishers and will have an army of top lawyers to make sure it stays that way.

Well it could be done , see China for advice or https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52832800      Not sure now ..................

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, East Kent Saint said:

Well it could be done , see China for advice or https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52832800      Not sure now ..................

Do we really want to be taking advice for this from the likes of China? 

[Lord Duckhunter]

22 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I would applaud them if they pulled out of the World Cup, doubt you Gammons would be that happy tho.

From what I’ve seen, it’s you Woke warriors who are most desperate for them to go. Performing mental gymnastics to justify the double standards.  The ones who are against discrimination in all its forms, who think England is full of racists, you’re the ones defending professionals plying their trade in stadiums built by slaves.
 

Black Lives Matter, or at least some do.
 

 

[CB Fry]

3 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

From what I’ve seen, it’s you Woke warriors who are most desperate for them to go. Performing mental gymnastics to justify the double standards.  The ones who are against discrimination in all its forms, who think England is full of racists, you’re the ones defending professionals plying their trade in stadiums built by slaves.
 

Black Lives Matter, or at least some do.
 

 

I've not seen any woke warriors (whatever that is) "desperate" for players to play in Qatar and I've seen no-one "defending" them going.

You're just making this up for "you're all hypocrites" kicks. 

Absolute bullshitter.

 

Edited 14 July, 2021 by CB Fry

[Lord Duckhunter]

16 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Taking the knee does more than just getting people talking about it. Imo it stokes racial tensions in society and doesn't lead to any greater harmony and actually makes racial tensions a lot worse. 

Rubbish. It’s a great anti discrimination measure that’ll lead to real change.

Had sportsmen and musicians taken the knee in South Africa instead of boycotting that awful  regime, Mandala would of been out years earlier and the regime would have fallen far far sooner. Pointless gestures like boycotts don’t lead to change, showing everyone how much you really care, whilst calling others racist,  does. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

5 hours ago, SKD said:

if you have a chance to take a stand but still participate in an event hosted by a nation which isn’t fit to be in the 21st century, then you’re part of the problem. 

Spot on. 

[Lighthouse]

15 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Do we really want to be taking advice for this from the likes of China? 

 

17 minutes ago, East Kent Saint said:

Well it could be done , see China for advice or https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52832800      Not sure now ..................

Which is the problem, where are you drawing the line? You can’t just legislate for what’s on the table now.

Racist/monkey stuff is obvious but what about if a Christian says homosexuality is a sin? Is that homophobic or is it true, to the letter of the law as written in the bible? This has already come up with the gay pride/cake incident a few years ago. What if somebody tweets that trans women aren’t real women, can you use the same anti hate crime legislation to persecute them? What if someone like Trump tries to claim that ‘traitors’ are a threat to National security (I say if, he’s already said it) and tries to do what China are doing, using similar legislature.

 

 

[Ex Lion Tamer]

28 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Taking the knee does more than just getting people talking about it. Imo it stokes racial tensions in society and doesn't lead to any greater harmony and actually makes racial tensions a lot worse. 

It makes some numpties upset but it also makes reasonable people think about the issue and how they and society could improve

[Ex Lion Tamer]

4 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

 

Which is the problem, where are you drawing the line? You can’t just legislate for what’s on the table now.

Racist/monkey stuff is obvious but what about if a Christian says homosexuality is a sin? Is that homophobic or is it true, to the letter of the law as written in the bible? This has already come up with the gay pride/cake incident a few years ago. What if somebody tweets that trans women aren’t real women, can you use the same anti hate crime legislation to persecute them? What if someone like Trump tries to claim that ‘traitors’ are a threat to National security (I say if, he’s already said it) and tries to do what China are doing, using similar legislature.

 

 

Whataboutery of the highest order. Stopping racism doesn't have any disbenefits to other people like these examples (arguably) do. Being outright offensive to people isn't tolerated in society; it's not a freedom of speech issue. We already have laws against inciting racial hatred and racial hate crimes

[S-Clarke]

10 hours ago, sydney_saint said:

The thing is, it isn't just social media. I mentioned on another post. But when watching the England Denmark, a group of drunk lads next to us called my friend a gorilla, made noises at her, and then tried to pass the buck by just saying it was banter, because she dared to get upset. This was devastating to see. This is real life and real people. And sure, it was a small minority in a pub. Does that mean we should just ignore it?

No, not at all. Shouldn't ignore it and I don't think people are.

That guy at Savills today - fine example of what this attention is doing, it's weeding the more naive types away. The sad thing is that there are still people out there, I don't particularly think it's all to do with education, I just think some people are born as absolute knobs and that's how they get a kick out of life. If they're not throwing vile racist abuse to get a kick, they're calling out disabled people or taking the micky out of anyone who could be seen as vulnerable.

Social media does fan the flames though, it's a horrible place and it's why I don't bother with it (bar these forums). I think one method that could be put in place to help is to make it less easy to register, maybe a little bit more verification and validation upon sign up - but these are very tricky and challenging things to do, but something like that needs to be looked at as you can easily spin up another account tomorrow without any identity verification. It shouldn't be so easy to hide behind a blank alias with no picture in my opinion.

[Weston Super Saint]

55 minutes ago, East Kent Saint said:

Could we manage without social media ? Well I manage Ha Ha and alot of other people would do better under the " Better to let people think you are a fool than open your mouth and prove it" (me included !)

I assume you've either missed or blatantly ignored the irony of posting that you manage without social media on a football forum which is, essentially a social media platform.

[hypochondriac]

24 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

It makes some numpties upset but it also makes reasonable people think about the issue and how they and society could improve

All reasonable people who don't send racist abuse to others aren't the problem. The unreasonable racists won't be swayed by taking the knee. 

[East Kent Saint]

52 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Do we really want to be taking advice for this from the likes of China? 

No

[Weston Super Saint]

30 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

It makes some numpties upset but it also makes reasonable people think about the issue and how they and society could improve

Surely 'reasonable people' aren't the ones who need to improve, otherwise they probably wouldn't sit in that category?

[Lighthouse]

27 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

Whataboutery of the highest order. Stopping racism doesn't have any disbenefits to other people like these examples (arguably) do. Being outright offensive to people isn't tolerated in society; it's not a freedom of speech issue. We already have laws against inciting racial hatred and racial hate crimes

It's not whataboutery, you're missing the point. You're talking about introducing a law, which you only want to use for yourself, for what YOU think is right and wrong. People like Trump and the regime in China WILL use exactly the same arguments about 'terrorists' and 'traitors'. They will use these laws against anyone who opposes them.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

4 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Surely 'reasonable people' aren't the ones who need to improve, otherwise they probably wouldn't sit in that category?

Reasonable people can be complicit in turning a blind eye to abuse. If they realise the extent of the problem and demand action then the government feels obliged to do something.

Johnson has already said he wants to ban racists from football stadiums, doesn't that vindicate the campaigners?

[hypochondriac]

7 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Surely 'reasonable people' aren't the ones who need to improve, otherwise they probably wouldn't sit in that category?

I expect his answer will be something about society having to change to be fairer or something like that. It's not an argument I would agree with and everything I have seen is that the taking of the knee doesn't bring reasonable people on board with "the cause." Far better imo to choose an expression that 99.999% would agree with and that everyone can unite fully behind. 

[Ex Lion Tamer]

1 minute ago, Lighthouse said:

It's not whataboutery, you're missing the point. You're talking about introducing a law, which you only want to use for yourself, for what YOU think is right and wrong. People like Trump and the regime in China WILL use exactly the same arguments about 'terrorists' and 'traitors'. They will use these laws against anyone who opposes them.

All laws are based on what a portion of voters think. You never have absolute consensus

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

All laws are based on what a portion of voters think. You never have absolute consensus

But the problem with this proposed law is that it can be selectively ebforced based on the politics of the people holding the levers of power. We have enough of it already online but this would be ten times worse because it would be decided at a governmental level. It would be disastrous in many countries with dodgy human rights records who would just use it as a green light to clamp down harder on their citizens. 

[Weston Super Saint]

3 minutes ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

Reasonable people can be complicit in turning a blind eye to abuse. If they realise the extent of the problem and demand action then the government feels obliged to do something.

Johnson has already said he wants to ban racists from football stadiums, doesn't that vindicate the campaigners?

Aren't racists already banned from football stadiums?

What is the 'extent' of the problem - I've no idea if I'm being brutality honest, although it looks like a tiny minority of idiots posting shit on social media because they can and because it gets a reaction / over reaction.  How is Johnson going to ban the racists posting from anonymous accounts hiding behind IP maskers?  Sounds more like soundbite platitudes rather than vindication of the campaigners....

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Aren't racists already banned from football stadiums?

What is the 'extent' of the problem - I've no idea if I'm being brutality honest, although it looks like a tiny minority of idiots posting shit on social media because they can and because it gets a reaction / over reaction.  How is Johnson going to ban the racists posting from anonymous accounts hiding behind IP maskers?  Sounds more like soundbite platitudes rather than vindication of the campaigners....

Hard to disagree with that. Its not just racist abuse either, there's been all sorts of death threats and vile abuse against all manner of individuals including some people that it's fashionable to hate like Nigel Farage. I find all that equally objectionable to be honest but I accept that at the moment as the price to pay for a free Internet. I still think what I said earlier about allowing people to only see replies from verified accounts if they want to. That way people have a choice whether they want to run the risk of abuse or not. 

[hypochondriac]

The Centre for Identifying Digital Hate identified 105 instagram accounts that directed racial abuse against Rashford, Saka, and Sancho.

BBC Newsnight analysed the location of these accounts. Of those they could identify 59 outside the UK, and just 5 within the UK.

 

Hard to think this hasn't been massively overblown. We don't live in a "racist" society. Like every society we have a tiny percentage of idiots and racism is socially unacceptable already. The UK is one of the most tolerant places to live on Earth.