Jump to content
IGNORED

Kiko Casilla


phantom

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, bearded_red said:

Please provide evidence that I’ve twisted anything. 
 

Please provide evidence that I’m a ‘snowflake’ remembering that you’re the one that’s angry on the internet while I’m just winding you up and have absolutely no interest in this ‘debate’.

So you’re just trolling on a thread debating race and trying to make a reasoned contributor appear racist......wow, a new low

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t understand why we’re having this debate, and all the indignation that goes with it, about the use of the world ‘black’. The reports I’ve read all suggest that what’s at issue is whether he used the (Spanish ) word ‘negro’, or whether he used the n-word. 

The FA hasn’t yet released its written statement giving reasons for the decision. I guess that might throw more light on it; for example, was the rest of the sentence said in Spanish or in English. 

In the meantime, let’s just be clear that there’s no suggestion that I’ve seen (other than on here) that using the word ‘black’ in English, is wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FA process for this seems really poor to me. If this happened on September 28th what has it taken 5 months to resolve? And why haven’t they released the full findings of the panel at the same time. It just creates and environment of people supposing what did or didn’t happen that doesn’t help at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, City oz said:

Well done that team. Why should they have to change their motto. 

How do you think it would go if some one told the KIWI rugby team that you have to change your name from the old blacks. 

 

I think the prim and proper ones on these threads tonight need to look at reality

 

Racist and ageist.  :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Badger08 said:

So you assumed that he knew his name. Everything in football happens at such slow speeds doesn't it. So if a corner was about to fly in, loads of players have scattered about and you want him to have a complete check to make sure that its Mr Leko before shouting anything. 

Let's flip this. If every player in the box was black, and there was one white guy in the box and someone shouted "mark the white guy" do you think there would be an 8 game ban and a £60,000 fine?

*Edited fine amount 

My comment referred to Phantom and not Casilla. 

Although, if I know the majority of players in the football leagues name (Blame football manager for that) then you'd expect a professional goalkeeper to know the name of the opposition striker. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, spudski said:

How do you appeal against a law in place. According to the law you can't mention colour.

'Mark the black man' in Spanish is...'


marca al hombre negro

if he spoke in his native tongue you can see why it sounds 'offensive' to somene.

Either way...the law states that you can't mention colour.

This was the excuse used by Suarez..

It was bollocks then and it's even more bollocks now because that experience will have been used to educate all Spanish speaking players who've come to play here since..

Couple that with the prevalence of racism in Spain.

Ignorance is no excuse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Badger08 said:

I want to be able to call someone black with being called a racist. 

Maybe I'm naive because I'm white, but sometimes, just sometimes, being white doesn't mean you have an agenda or a care in the world whether someone else is black, white, Asian, pink, purple, green. 

Why do you want to be able to call someone black? How many people do you regularly need to describe as white? 

I mean I get that it is a harmless description, but why does an incident between a Leeds and Charlton player precipitate this sort of indignation and concern about freedom to use largely unnecessary words. Not aimed at you specifically, although you seem to be most vocal, but I'm just struggling to understand the indignation that seems to come with every issue nowadays. Kids want to protest climate, and all of a sudden everyone is angry about grass. And weirdly it's always the same people with the same objections. 

My assumption is that you and others that get wound up, feel like this is an erosion of your freedoms, but since none of these incidents affect you personally, why does it need such an outrage? What is it you are really worried about not being able to say? There must be more to it than the Leeds goalkeeper.

What I will say is that I assume the vast majority of OTIB are not people who would be described by ethnicity, so won't have even the basic idea what it is like to routinely suffer prejudice based solely on appearance, even in the most mundane circumstances. For those people identifying by "colour" really matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Badger08 said:

If he has said the "n" word, then of course he needs banning andbthe penalty he's got isn't enough. In fact, if you are clearly racist (and it's proven) you should be banned from the game. 

If he has used the Spanish word for black, and it isn't even possible to confirm, you're almost calling someone a racist in without any proof. I feel pretty uncomfortable about that. The knock in effects can't could be huge. Imagine if you're cast as a racist for the rest of your life when you genuinely didn't have the intention. 

Yep, and given how similar those two words are, you’d have thought even a lip reader might struggle. 

Which is why the context (the rest of the sentence) could be significant. You’d expect the FA took that into account? I believe the written reasons are being published on Monday. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Olé said:

I will tell you with plenty of knowledge that Spain isn't historically somewhere that has eliminated racism even from casual chat, so it isn't like the accusation is outlandish. 

Good post. I've spent a lot of time in Spain over the years and you're right. Obviously it's a minority, like in this country, but wording we'd see as having racist undertones is very common there. Especially in places like Madrid where I see Casilla spent much of his career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Badger08 said:

But this is it, we don't know. I'm pretty much playing devils advocate here, I'm not spoiling for a fight. What I'm saying is, by the football league giving this guy this ban its making him guilty of something he might not be guilty of. That's where I find this whole thing uncomfortable. It's a pretty strong thing to accuse someone of. 

Well no because he's been banned for referencing race. He hadn't been accused of that being racially motivated. 

I presume this law was brought into play after Suarez and Terry. They made it an offence to refer to race. Fair enough, thems the rules and he broke them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Good post. I've spent a lot of time in Spain over the years and you're right. Obviously it's a minority, like in this country, but wording we'd see as having racist undertones is very common there. Especially in places like Madrid where I see Casilla spent much of his career.

My other half is Afro Caribbean and will no longer holiday to Spain for holidays/weekend breaks due to the overt racism; outside of Barcelona.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, J-mat said:

This was the excuse used by Suarez..

It was bollocks then and it's even more bollocks now because that experience will have been used to educate all Spanish speaking players who've come to play here since..

Couple that with the prevalence of racism in Spain.

Ignorance is no excuse. 

I'm not saying it is an excuse...purely pointing the FA laws he broke.

Very sweeping statement about the Spanish as well.

Do you honestly think Nketiah would come forward as a character witness also, especially as he has no dealings with Leeds anymore?

He broke the FA rules by describing someone by their colour.

That does not make someone a racist.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using the word black isn't racist - at least not in the UK, in the US there seems to be some particular sensitivity to this.

People arguing about the word black have fallen for one of the classic strategies used when defending racism - the straw man.

The defence that Casilla was speaking spanish is laughable.  Who was it aimed at?  His spanish teammates perhaps?

Or maybe it's Leko who is at fault for not hearing it in spanish?

Come off it.

If he didn't know that the word negro was not OK in English then he must be remarkably slow on the uptake and probably needs an 8 game break to learn the handful of words he's not allowed to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Olé said:

Why do you want to be able to call someone black? How many people do you regularly need to describe as white? 

I mean I get that it is a harmless description, but why does an incident between a Leeds and Charlton player precipitate this sort of indignation and concern about freedom to use largely unnecessary words. Not aimed at you specifically, although you seem to be most vocal, but I'm just struggling to understand the indignation that seems to come with every issue nowadays. Kids want to protest climate, and all of a sudden everyone is angry about grass. And weirdly it's always the same people with the same objections. 

My assumption is that you and others that get wound up, feel like this is an erosion of your freedoms, but since none of these incidents affect you personally, why does it need such an outrage? What is it you are really worried about not being able to say? There must be more to it than the Leeds goalkeeper.

What I will say is that I assume the vast majority of OTIB are not people who would be described by ethnicity, so won't have even the basic idea what it is like to routinely suffer prejudice based solely on appearance, even in the most mundane circumstances. For those people identifying by "colour" really matters.

It’s still not a racist remark Rob. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Badger08 said:

That's crazy! Being banned for referencing someones race is madness. 

So I'm getting this right, you can get banned for referencing someones race in any context

 

Anyway, great debate. This is why I love OTIB. 

No, in the context of bringing the game into disrepute doing it with reference to race is an aggravating feature that increases the punishment.

Quote

GENERAL BEHAVIOUR
3 (1) A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not
act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any
one, or a combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive,
indecent or insulting words or behaviour.
(2) A breach of Rule E3(1) is an “Aggravated Breach” where it includes a reference,
whether express or implied, to any one or more of the following :- ethnic origin,
colour, race, nationality, religion or belief, gender, gender reassignment, sexual
orientation or disability.

Saying "Mark the black guy at the back" would not breach a rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, City oz said:

I think the ban is a bit harsh. The comment made ‘mark the black one” ok it could of been worded better and  more likely should be a 2 match ban. 

What about the other side of the coin. My daughter in Darwin was the only “white girl “ in her class when she was six years old and the rest called her “white girl”

lets put things in to some perspective 

I think we should also appreciate that the word for ‘ black ‘ in Spanish is ‘ negro ‘  , purely and simply the name of the  colour without any malice or judgement on the part of the person using the word .

In English however there are obviously connotations of racism , only Rappers use the word , ironically and openly today . 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Badger08 said:

Sorry to hear that mate, that's shocking.

Thanks, very kind. Barcelona is amazing, read some really good stuff about the Spanish civil war, and the treatment of Catalonians.  Referring to the rest of Spain,  this is a country that was occupied by the moors for hundreds of years they probably have more African heritage than any other European country. The ignorance is comical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Nibor said:

No, in the context of bringing the game into disrepute doing it with reference to race is an aggravating feature that increases the punishment.

Saying "Mark the black guy at the back" would not breach a rule.

Yes it does... you've even just quoted the rule.

You cannot mention colour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Olé said:

Why do you want to be able to call someone black? How many people do you regularly need to describe as white? 

I mean I get that it is a harmless description, but why does an incident between a Leeds and Charlton player precipitate this sort of indignation and concern about freedom to use largely unnecessary words. Not aimed at you specifically, although you seem to be most vocal, but I'm just struggling to understand the indignation that seems to come with every issue nowadays. Kids want to protest climate, and all of a sudden everyone is angry about grass. And weirdly it's always the same people with the same objections. 

My assumption is that you and others that get wound up, feel like this is an erosion of your freedoms, but since none of these incidents affect you personally, why does it need such an outrage? What is it you are really worried about not being able to say? There must be more to it than the Leeds goalkeeper.

What I will say is that I assume the vast majority of OTIB are not people who would be described by ethnicity, so won't have even the basic idea what it is like to routinely suffer prejudice based solely on appearance, even in the most mundane circumstances. For those people identifying by "colour" really matters.

The “white” guy, the “black” guy, the “mixed race” guy, the “Asian” guy, the “Portuguese” guy, the “filthy gas scum” guy........all terms that may be generally used by any of us to innocently  reference a person in a certain scenario.....there are no racist intentions or connotations.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Badger08 said:

That's crazy! Being banned for referencing someones race is madness. 

So I'm getting this right, you can get banned for referencing someones race in any context? 

 

Anyway, great debate. This is why I love OTIB. 

That's how I've read it, and I agree with the sentiment. 

They struggled to prove Saurez was guilty of racism, likewise Terry even though they'd used the term black (Negrito) before an insult. 

By outlawing references to race, you take away the excuses. 

Players are aware of the rules, and if they're not then that's on them. 

Same way being booked for taking off you shirt is bullshit, but it's the rules and you take the punishment if you break them.

I can see the FA's logic, I can also see why it's difficult to comprehend. 

My stance is, he knew or should have known it was against the rules, he knew or should have known that negro has a very different meaning in English than Spanish and therefore he's in the wrong. 

As others have said, doesn't make him a racist necessarily. But being ignorant is not an excuse, if anything he's been educated by this harsh ban to the seriousness of the word and won't make the same mistake. Good news. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Nibor said:

No, in the context of bringing the game into disrepute doing it with reference to race is an aggravating feature that increases the punishment.

Saying "Mark the black guy at the back" would not breach a rule.

Wrong Nibor. 

Any reference to religion, race or colour is rightly seen as racist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, spudski said:

Yes it does... you've even just quoted the rule.

You cannot mention colour.

You have misunderstood.

The second paragraph only applies where you have already breached the rule in the first one.

If you bring the game into disrepute, doing so whilst referencing race will lead to a harsher punishment.

If you do not bring the game into disrepute, paragraph 2 is irrelevant.

2 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Wrong Nibor. 

Any reference to religion, race or colour is rightly seen as racist.

Try actually reading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...