I would love it if they called their bluff and did something like a hand on the heart gesture. For me (and I don't need a lecture about the origins), taking the knee is submissive, and submission is negative.
A hand on the heart is a positive gesture, and can not be seen in any other way.
But it doesn’t have anything to do with you. Ask the footballers if they think it’s submissive maybe? They’re the ones that matter, not you, with all due respect.
Again, endless excuses for disliking what is simply an anti racist gesture.
Fair enough. Not saying it should happen, I don't think anyone here was genuinely suggesting it should be changed...
I support taking the knee, but I would never do it, because it is submissive (in my mind), and as much as that might upset some people, I am entitled to my opinion.
It's not like I'm some moron booing it, sometimes on here it feels like the same sad bastards sniffing around for blood.
Ok fair enough. The test for you would be if you made it to the England team at the World Cup….
I would love it if they called their bluff and did something like a hand on the heart gesture. For me (and I don't need a lecture about the origins), taking the knee is submissive, and submission is negative.
A hand on the heart is a positive gesture, and can not be seen in any other way.
But it doesn’t have anything to do with you. Ask the footballers if they think it’s submissive maybe? They’re the ones that matter, not you, with all due respect.
Again, endless excuses for disliking what is simply an anti racist gesture.
Fair enough. Not saying it should happen, I don't think anyone here was genuinely suggesting it should be changed...
I support taking the knee, but I would never do it, because it is submissive (in my mind), and as much as that might upset some people, I am entitled to my opinion.
It's not like I'm some moron booing it, sometimes on here it feels like the same sad bastards sniffing around for blood.
Ok fair enough. The test for you would be if you made it to the England team at the World Cup….
;-)
I'd do a lot more than take the knee to make it into the England squad.
And if the racists have any sense they would do a lot more than take the knee to stop me getting into it
I would love it if they called their bluff and did something like a hand on the heart gesture. For me (and I don't need a lecture about the origins), taking the knee is submissive, and submission is negative.
A hand on the heart is a positive gesture, and can not be seen in any other way.
But it doesn’t have anything to do with you. Ask the footballers if they think it’s submissive maybe? They’re the ones that matter, not you, with all due respect.
Again, endless excuses for disliking what is simply an anti racist gesture.
Fair enough. Not saying it should happen, I don't think anyone here was genuinely suggesting it should be changed...
I support taking the knee, but I would never do it, because it is submissive (in my mind), and as much as that might upset some people, I am entitled to my opinion.
It's not like I'm some moron booing it, sometimes on here it feels like the same sad bastards sniffing around for blood.
Exactly. You are entitled to your opinion which can not be criticised at all because within it, there is respect for the players. The crux of this argument is specifically about the booing, not the agreement or disagreement that the gesture is right or wrong in terms of conveying the message.
Is there broad agreement that whoever scrawled racist graffiti aimed at Rashford, Sancho and Saka should be (among other punishments) banned from all football grounds in the UK, indefinitely?
Is there broad agreement that whoever scrawled racist graffiti aimed at Rashford, Sancho and Saka should be (among other punishments) banned from all football grounds in the UK, indefinitely?
I intend to boo if I see any players taking the knee at the Valley next season.
I believe that I am simply expressing my rights under the freedom of speech laws. But I am sure some other fans will call me a racist.
Therefore I will delay signing this petition until I see what the reaction is to my booing.
I hope for your sake you are sitting nowhere near me . Idiot
Oh I am really afraid. Please explain. What do you intend to do when I start booing?
Why are you so proud of wanting to boo these players? It’s pathetic.
What would you say to one of our players if they came over to you after the booing and asked why you did it?
He would curl up in a ball. Most racists are cowards and i suspect he's no different.
Bedsaddick you are a complete prick.
If one of the players came over to me, I would tell him not to preach politics to me and concentrate on playing football.
And as for curling up in a ball I can assure you that would be the last thing I would ever do.
Why is protesting against racism political?
It is very political. It is not necessarily party politics, but it is politics. You might sincerely believe in a certain principle, other people may sincerely disagree on a point of principle.
It’s nonsense for people to say that all Tories are racist, for example Baroness Warsi is definitely not a racist, surely there must be at least a couple of others too?
Bringing the thread back up, as there were a lot of claims that the racist tweets, came from abroad, seems that's not the case, twitter ran the numbers, and 99% of the racist tweets, came from accounts located in the UK
Bringing the thread back up, as there were a lot of claims that the racist tweets, came from abroad, seems that's not the case, twitter ran the numbers, and 99% of the racist tweets, came from accounts located in the UK
Bringing the thread back up, as there were a lot of claims that the racist tweets, came from abroad, seems that's not the case, twitter ran the numbers, and 99% of the racist tweets, came from accounts located in the UK
"Twitter has said that "the UK was - by far - the largest country of origin" for racist abuse sent to England footballers following the team's loss in the Euro 2020 finals on 11 July."
How many is "by far"? How many were based in the UK and how many overseas? 60%/40% split, or 95%/5% split?
"The social media company added that 99% of the accounts which it suspended over the abuse were not anonymous."
How many accounts did Twitter suspend? The UK Football Policing Unit said there were 207 tweets that were deemed to be criminal. If Twitter has only suspended 20 accounts as a consequence, then saying that 99% of those accounts were not anonymous is a bit of a meaningless statistic.
"Twitter said that it removed 1,961 abusive tweets during the final and in the days that followed using automated tools, with just 126 removed following reports from users."
So, going back to my previous question, how many accounts did Twitter suspend? Did they suspend the account of everyone who posted one of those 1961 abusive tweets? Were all of those abusive tweets of a racist nature? Calling a player a "useless c*%t" is abusive, but not racist, and probably not criminal either. How many of the accounts relating to the 207 criminal tweets identified by the police were suspended?
Naturally, absolutely nothing to suggest that they've done anything to assist the police. It's Twitter's software, they can run any report they want down to the finest detail, so a bit sinister (but entirely unsurprising) that they've tried to hide behind some very vague statistics in an attempt to give the impression that they actually give a toss about dealing with the poisonous forum that they facilitate.
Bringing the thread back up, as there were a lot of claims that the racist tweets, came from abroad, seems that's not the case, twitter ran the numbers, and 99% of the racist tweets, came from accounts located in the UK
Even 1% is bad but your post is wrong - Twitter has definitively not stated that 99% came from accounts in the UK.
'Of the permanently suspended accounts from the Tournament, 99% of account owners were identifiable.'
'Racist behaviour does not reflect the vast majority of people who use Twitter to participate in vibrant conversations about football in the UK. Critically, the word “proud” was used more often on the day following the Final than on any other day this year, as people expressed their support for the England team.'
'Given the international nature of the Euro 2020 Final, it was no surprise to see that the Tweets we removed came from all over the world. However, while many have quite rightly highlighted the global nature of the conversation, it is also important to acknowledge that the UK was - by far - the largest country of origin for the abusive Tweets we removed on the night of the Final and in the days that followed.'
Bringing the thread back up, as there were a lot of claims that the racist tweets, came from abroad, seems that's not the case, twitter ran the numbers, and 99% of the racist tweets, came from accounts located in the UK
Bringing the thread back up, as there were a lot of claims that the racist tweets, came from abroad, seems that's not the case, twitter ran the numbers, and 99% of the racist tweets, came from accounts located in the UK
It was clearly UK accounts doing the majority of the posting.
Anyone that believes otherwise is just trying to whitewash away the problem of racism in the UK.
The UK Football Policing Unit's analysis of 200 tweets, or whatever it was, is clearly useless because they wouldn't be analysing the posts that twitter had already removed at the time which is a far higher majority (judging from the 2000+ posts twitter mentions).
Bringing the thread back up, as there were a lot of claims that the racist tweets, came from abroad, seems that's not the case, twitter ran the numbers, and 99% of the racist tweets, came from accounts located in the UK
It was clearly UK accounts doing the majority of the posting.
Anyone that believes otherwise is just trying to whitewash away the problem of racism in the UK.
The UK Football Policing Unit's analysis of 200 tweets, or whatever it was, is clearly useless because they wouldn't be analysing the posts that twitter had already removed at the time which is a far higher majority (judging from the 2000+ posts twitter mentions).
That was the thing, it was clear no matter the dubious stats trotted out, that it was a home grown problem, but ya know, play on a mistake, and not address the problem Twitter identified
Devil is in the details. Acoording to some here, those opposed to or booing kneeling players are racists and need to be banned. So essentially one would be banned for NOT agreeing with protests or "booing" people on a knee, both of which seem frightening to me. I take "free speech" seriously and don't believe we should give away the rights to expression, even against popular speech. To have real free speech it must protect those saying unpopular things. While chanting clearly racist things is necessarily NOT protected speech, banning people for booing others for taking a knee clearly would be.
Good statement from out pitch announcer tonight. Such a crying shame that it was necessary.
For those who were forced by ambivalence to miss the game tonight, can you report what was said?
I'm under the same force of ambivalence as you, but listening to the commentary. I can't give it word for word, but it was basically please respect the players and their right to take the knee whether they choose to take it or not followed by a plea for harmony.
Here is a perfect example. At a Colorado baseball game a few days ago someone started calling out what appeared to be "n*****" to an opposing player as he came to bat. The internet went into an uproar. Turns out he was calling out to get the attention of the Colorado mascot "Dinger" (a word used to represent a home run.) You can see he is calling out away from the player in the video. No fans present were upset because they all saw the event. The INTERNET and OTHER people went crazy. Many calls and even a petition and even the legal authorities became involved. And... it turns out it was over... nothing. However this has not been good enough for some on the Left, who feel he should be banned "just in case."
This is what such a petition could wreak unless very careful attention is paid to what is covered and what is not cause for banning. Given the petition uses phrases such as "our heroic players" it seems clear that such rules should not be left solely in the hands of fans. Sometimes tough changes require tough analysis and protections. Under such an open-ended plan I see lots of room for "Dinger" moments. And this does nothing to actually solve the issue at hand in your country. Seems like a papering over of a problem that goes to the bone, rather than making real changes that solve the actual problem. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlBAf697HGg
Comments
And if the racists have any sense they would do a lot more than take the knee to stop me getting into it
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rashford-sancho-saka-racist-mural-darlington-b1886087.html
It’s a yes from me.
he was Scottish!
https://news.sky.com/story/majority-of-euro-2020-racist-abuse-came-from-uk-accounts-and-99-were-not-anonymous-says-twitter-12377977
"Twitter has said that "the UK was - by far - the largest country of origin" for racist abuse sent to England footballers following the team's loss in the Euro 2020 finals on 11 July."
How many is "by far"? How many were based in the UK and how many overseas? 60%/40% split, or 95%/5% split?
"The social media company added that 99% of the accounts which it suspended over the abuse were not anonymous."
How many accounts did Twitter suspend? The UK Football Policing Unit said there were 207 tweets that were deemed to be criminal. If Twitter has only suspended 20 accounts as a consequence, then saying that 99% of those accounts were not anonymous is a bit of a meaningless statistic.
"Twitter said that it removed 1,961 abusive tweets during the final and in the days that followed using automated tools, with just 126 removed following reports from users."
So, going back to my previous question, how many accounts did Twitter suspend? Did they suspend the account of everyone who posted one of those 1961 abusive tweets? Were all of those abusive tweets of a racist nature? Calling a player a "useless c*%t" is abusive, but not racist, and probably not criminal either. How many of the accounts relating to the 207 criminal tweets identified by the police were suspended?
Naturally, absolutely nothing to suggest that they've done anything to assist the police. It's Twitter's software, they can run any report they want down to the finest detail, so a bit sinister (but entirely unsurprising) that they've tried to hide behind some very vague statistics in an attempt to give the impression that they actually give a toss about dealing with the poisonous forum that they facilitate.
'Of the permanently suspended accounts from the Tournament, 99% of account owners were identifiable.'
'Racist behaviour does not reflect the vast majority of people who use Twitter to participate in vibrant conversations about football in the UK. Critically, the word “proud” was used more often on the day following the Final than on any other day this year, as people expressed their support for the England team.'
'Given the international nature of the Euro 2020 Final, it was no surprise to see that the Tweets we removed came from all over the world. However, while many have quite rightly highlighted the global nature of the conversation, it is also important to acknowledge that the UK was - by far - the largest country of origin for the abusive Tweets we removed on the night of the Final and in the days that followed.'
...and I bet you get into morally righteous rage about Boris throwing his porkies around with gay abandon.
Anyone that believes otherwise is just trying to whitewash away the problem of racism in the UK.
The UK Football Policing Unit's analysis of 200 tweets, or whatever it was, is clearly useless because they wouldn't be analysing the posts that twitter had already removed at the time which is a far higher majority (judging from the 2000+ posts twitter mentions).
This is what such a petition could wreak unless very careful attention is paid to what is covered and what is not cause for banning. Given the petition uses phrases such as "our heroic players" it seems clear that such rules should not be left solely in the hands of fans. Sometimes tough changes require tough analysis and protections. Under such an open-ended plan I see lots of room for "Dinger" moments. And this does nothing to actually solve the issue at hand in your country. Seems like a papering over of a problem that goes to the bone, rather than making real changes that solve the actual problem.