John Motson
Comments
-
Is 'big, black and brave' a racist comment? Yes. The same as 'big, white and brave' would be. Both are using race to differentiate when that differentiation is not required. Therefore by definition they are racist.
Is John Motson a racist? I very much doubt it.
2 -
I'm sure Tom Elliott has bigger things to worry about.LenGlover said:I wonder what Tom Elliott thinks?
If it offended him then fair enough but otherwise just accept it as it was meant: a commentator painting a verbal picture of a football match for listeners on a radio station.0 -
I tentatively suggest that alliteration to add emphasis may have informed his comment rather than any sinister attempt to highlight racial differences.bobmunro said:Is 'big, black and brave' a racist comment? Yes. The same as 'big, white and brave' would be. Both are using race to differentiate and are therefore by definition racist.
Is John Motson a racist? I very much doubt it.
I think Motty used to sponsor Marshall when he was at Barnet and they have stayed in touch.
A sense of proportion is needed otherwise an important issue is trivialised.
EDIT: Got that wrong he sponsors his shirt at Charlton (or did).
3 -
I'm sure the words were just used for alliterative effect with no racial undertone but these days such a phrase is always going to be picked up on.3
-
thought I'd read that Motty had personally contacted Elliott to offer his apologies and that it had been accepted and the matter was closed.
don't let that stop the media though !
3 -
Courtesy of social media etc....Ashers said:I'm sure the words were just used for alliterative effect with no racial undertone but these days such a phrase is always going to be picked up on.0 -
I mean, it's an unnecessary comment, sure. We wouldn't hear a white player described as "white". It's a bit, erm, "ooh he's a different colour to the norm", I guess.
But literally no one is offended by this. It's Motty. He's old, and was obviously going for alliteration, and should have gone with "bold" (or any number of alternatives).
Should he have said it? No.
Is anyone actually offended? Not really - and if they are... Oh, come on. Get over it. Motty is demonstrably not racist.
This isn't an issue, even to lefty liberal snowflakes like me.13 -
Calling him old is ageist.PaddyP17 said:I mean, it's an unnecessary comment, sure. We wouldn't hear a white player described as "white". It's a bit, erm, "ooh he's a different colour to the norm", I guess.
But literally no one is offended by this. It's Motty. He's old, and was obviously going for alliteration, and should have gone with "bold" (or any number of alternatives).
Should he have said it? No.
Is anyone actually offended? Not really - and if they are... Oh, come on. Get over it. Motty is demonstrably not racist.
This isn't an issue, even to lefty liberal snowflakes like me.17 -
Ah, I see that he preemptively invested in the "but I've got black mates" defence... maybe this is worth looking into after all.LenGlover said:
I tentatively suggest that alliteration to add emphasis may have informed his comment rather than any sinister attempt to highlight racial differences.bobmunro said:Is 'big, black and brave' a racist comment? Yes. The same as 'big, white and brave' would be. Both are using race to differentiate and are therefore by definition racist.
Is John Motson a racist? I very much doubt it.
I think Motty used to sponsor Marshall when he was at Barnet and they have stayed in touch.
A sense of proportion is needed otherwise an important issue is trivialised.
EDIT: Got that wrong he sponsors his shirt at Charlton (or did).1 -
What if the spanner's had two Tom Elliotts?
0 - Sponsored links:
-
Silly comment by Motty but anyone who is genuinely offended by it, I would suggest, has bigger things to worry about!
2 -
Him?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
Calling him old is ageist.PaddyP17 said:I mean, it's an unnecessary comment, sure. We wouldn't hear a white player described as "white". It's a bit, erm, "ooh he's a different colour to the norm", I guess.
But literally no one is offended by this. It's Motty. He's old, and was obviously going for alliteration, and should have gone with "bold" (or any number of alternatives).
Should he have said it? No.
Is anyone actually offended? Not really - and if they are... Oh, come on. Get over it. Motty is demonstrably not racist.
This isn't an issue, even to lefty liberal snowflakes like me.
dId YoU jUsT aSsUmE tHeIr GeNdEr3 -
Listened to him on Desert island disk, as been mentioned, grew up in the Charlton area, first football memory, taken to the Valley with dad (the Vicar).
Chose 'when the red red Robin...' as first song.3 -
LenGlover said:
I tentatively suggest that alliteration to add emphasis may have informed his comment rather than any sinister attempt to highlight racial differences.bobmunro said:Is 'big, black and brave' a racist comment? Yes. The same as 'big, white and brave' would be. Both are using race to differentiate and are therefore by definition racist.
Is John Motson a racist? I very much doubt it.
I think Motty used to sponsor Marshall when he was at Barnet and they have stayed in touch.
A sense of proportion is needed otherwise an important issue is trivialised.
EDIT: Got that wrong he sponsors his shirt at Charlton (or did).I agree completely - I don't for a second believe Motty meant anything sinister by it at all. No intent whatsoever, just unfortunate wording.
Mountain out of a molehill, when there are far bigger racist mountains to climb. But it's the Daily Hate, yet again.
2 -
Why use red?LennyLowrent said:Listened to him on Desert island disk, as been mentioned, grew up in the Charlton area, first football memory, taken to the Valley with dad (the Vicar).
Chose 'when the red red Robin...' as first song.
2 -
hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
Isn't the story quoted from the left wing PC gone mad Daily Mail?addick05 said:Is the player big? Yes. Is he black? Yes. Is he brave? Undoubtedly. An unfortunate turn of phrase? Possibly. Was 'Motty' being racist? NO!
For Christ's sake, some people need to stop reading The Guardian and get a life.
LOL! First time I've seen the Mail labelled left wing! Always thought it was just to the right of Atilla the Hun!1 -
Looks like Motson's got carried away with over-describing the scene for his radio audience, with him obviously not being up there with the likes of other radio commentators like Jonathon Pearce for example (I remember well his "Kung fu style kick into the crowed" commentary when Cantona took out the Nigel). Also, I'm sure there are Italian / French / Spanish players often described as olive skinned etc. that, quite rightly, wouldn't garner the same attention as this. Would it have been the same if he'd have said "dark" instead of "black"?
Anyway, no point in defending the bloke as the "cant wait for the......." posts have already been put up, and what JM said was obviously full of malice and we should all condemn the bloke after being exposed as the true racist he is.
All said and done, one cannot defend the indefensible
0 -
Motty has history. He was heavily criticised some years ago about how commentating on football had changed over his career. To paraphrase he said something like "...and with all the black players in the game these days my job is more difficult as many of them look the same..." He's old and stuck in a past era but he's not a bloody racist.
Here is the full story - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/44811.stm1 -
I'm offended that people arnt offended by this neo nazi fascist
The issue as Dear Diane has said "the problem is with white men"0 -
Also, these days you can't describe someone as 'big', that could imply said individual is carrying a few pounds.
And what if Elliott doesn't want to be known as a 'brave' footballer?
Motson should have just stuck to 'man'...oh no, wait, what if Tom doesn't want to identify as a man?
4 - Sponsored links:
-
Motty should just stick to "Millwall scum"Macronate said:Also, these days you can't describe someone as 'big', that could imply said individual is carrying a few pounds.
And what if Elliott doesn't want to be known as a 'brave' footballer?
Motson should have just stuck to 'man'...oh no, wait, what if Tom doesn't want to identify as a man?
3 -
Because that would imply he was Scotch and that is offensiveMacronate said:Also, these days you can't describe someone as 'big', that could imply said individual is carrying a few pounds.
And what if Elliott doesn't want to be known as a 'brave' footballer?
Motson should have just stuck to 'man'...oh no, wait, what if Tom doesn't want to identify as a man?
0 -
I would be offended too if someone described me as an alcoholic liquid.i_b_b_o_r_g said:
Because that would imply he was Scotch and that is offensiveMacronate said:Also, these days you can't describe someone as 'big', that could imply said individual is carrying a few pounds.
And what if Elliott doesn't want to be known as a 'brave' footballer?
Motson should have just stuck to 'man'...oh no, wait, what if Tom doesn't want to identify as a man?
3 -
Yeah, don't forget that I also have a network of tubes carrying that stuff around.bobmunro said:
I would be offended too if someone described me as an alcoholic liquid.i_b_b_o_r_g said:
Because that would imply he was Scotch and that is offensiveMacronate said:Also, these days you can't describe someone as 'big', that could imply said individual is carrying a few pounds.
And what if Elliott doesn't want to be known as a 'brave' footballer?
Motson should have just stuck to 'man'...oh no, wait, what if Tom doesn't want to identify as a man?
0 -
No, Scotch is Charlton Life slang for Scottish, or one whom hails from north of the Watford Gapbobmunro said:
I would be offended too if someone described me as an alcoholic liquid.i_b_b_o_r_g said:
Because that would imply he was Scotch and that is offensiveMacronate said:Also, these days you can't describe someone as 'big', that could imply said individual is carrying a few pounds.
And what if Elliott doesn't want to be known as a 'brave' footballer?
Motson should have just stuck to 'man'...oh no, wait, what if Tom doesn't want to identify as a man?
0 -
Excellent comment. I'm not clear what gender Tom identifies as or even what species. A couple of Millwall players are rumoured to identify as rottweilers...Macronate said:Also, these days you can't describe someone as 'big', that could imply said individual is carrying a few pounds.
And what if Elliott doesn't want to be known as a 'brave' footballer?
Motson should have just stuck to 'man'...oh no, wait, what if Tom doesn't want to identify as a man?
0 -
The late John White of Tottenham Hotspur was often described as whitePaddyP17 said:I mean, it's an unnecessary comment, sure. We wouldn't hear a white player described as "white". It's a bit, erm, "ooh he's a different colour to the norm", I guess.
But literally no one is offended by this. It's Motty. He's old, and was obviously going for alliteration, and should have gone with "bold" (or any number of alternatives).
Should he have said it? No.
Is anyone actually offended? Not really - and if they are... Oh, come on. Get over it. Motty is demonstrably not racist.
This isn't an issue, even to lefty liberal snowflakes like me.
0 -
I really hope he never had to commentate on a game involving David Whyte and David White. There'd be no end of people getting offended.0
-
Oh good another witch trial. Burn him to be sure.0
-
It's not racist.
It's not racism.
It's outdated.
To call it out as racism or a hate crime is insanity.
At least we all on here seem to agree it's not intended to be racist.5
