I agree with you, but I’m just looking at it through their narrow minded view.Just because a foreign word sounds like an English word doesn't mean anything
So are the FA going to go through ever foreign language and ban anything that sounds like a rude word?
Christian Fuch's better not play anymore as his name sounds like f*ck!
Context is the important thing here, any sensible person can see that. IF Cavani had used it in a racially abusive way then fine throw the book at him, but he's just replying to his friend who congratulated him - the FA have no right to say this is a racial issue.
Cavani gets 3 match ban from FA for his social media post
- Thread starter VP89
- Start date
Nothing surprises me in the UK
utter mess
very sad
utter mess
very sad
That’s isn’t what he did though...
This is the problem I think. A lot of people are discussing whether or not it's racist or whether the FA are policing other cultures and languages but as the rules are written it's a breach as far as I can see.
When you play in England you're subject to the FA's regulations.
Apparently that means all the words in your native language are judged on how sensitive they are to the English public?
Apparently that means all the words in your native language are judged on how sensitive they are to the English public?
The league is knee deep in pre-game kneeling for a fight against racism and injustice. Any sense of logic, linguistic analysis and cultural context was always going to be immediately thrown out the window.
This is so out of order from the FA. It's dumb and counterproductive.
I just find it interesting that things like this precedence over systematic racism.
Edit: he'll be like a new signing in January
Edit: he'll be like a new signing in January
Great reporting by the guardian on the issue who claimed he had to be charged by the 7th Dec.
Then when I went back to check the article I see this:
This article was amended on 30 November 2020. An earlier version of this story suggested Suárez used the word “negrito” when addressing Patrice Evra. He later admitted he said “negro”.
They haven't clue what they are at.
Then when I went back to check the article I see this:
This article was amended on 30 November 2020. An earlier version of this story suggested Suárez used the word “negrito” when addressing Patrice Evra. He later admitted he said “negro”.
They haven't clue what they are at.
The word simply does not exist in the English language, it just sounds like something in the English language. This sets a dangerous precedent, can you not see that?
Typical false outrage, showing that they are being tough on a problem while doing absolutely nothing to help.I just find it interesting that things like this precedence over systematic racism.
Edit: he'll be like a new signing in January
He would have quite rightly been banned if that's what he did, but it's not
Ridiculous. Banning him means he is guilty of using his native language.
It's not a veiled attempt at being semantics either when all spanish speaking person uses that words daily.
If an indonesian uses negrito and claims it's a terms of endearment in Spanish then throw the book at him. Not when a real spanish people talking to his spanish mate.
It's not a veiled attempt at being semantics either when all spanish speaking person uses that words daily.
If an indonesian uses negrito and claims it's a terms of endearment in Spanish then throw the book at him. Not when a real spanish people talking to his spanish mate.
The most important thing for the FA is to keep the sponsors happy. The sponsors pay huge amounts to associate their brands with a clean and issue-free sport and incidents like this simply jeopardize the sanitized brand environment the FA is supposed to deliver. Nike and LG don't pay millions and millions just to get a couple of shit-storms for their troubles.
Why doesn't it matter what Spanish speaking people regularly do? Should everyone have to change their customs to bow down to the FA?
I live and work in Spain and we have a Cuban fella who's regularly referred to as negrito. It's used as a sign of affection and in no way a racist slur. Just like they call me puto guiri which means f*cking foreigner. Should I put in a complaint or take it for the way it's supposed to be?
The FA are nothing more than self righteous bunch of pricks jumping on the PC bandwagon when common sense should prevail.
From the same people who blocked Di Stefano's loan after the Munich tragedy and banned Rio Ferdinand for 6 months for missing a drug test. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the FA in all of it's glory.
If we take the ban from the 4th January he'd only miss 2 league games plus 1 FA cup game. And if we progress in the league cup against Everton next week he'd only miss one league game in January. That game would be Liverpool away however so not ideal.
Is that a specific rule, written down somewhere? If so, no point appealing.
That's strawman that.
He's not walking around the UK calling people Negrito. He's speaking in Spanish with a Spanish speaker.
And tbh, when it comes to being offended, you can only speak for yourself.
I hope that it's not the same people, otherwise they are likely around 100 years old.
What if the offended have no voice?
Unsurprising outcome from an organisation full of hypocritical idiots. We should borrow City's legal team.
Good point.
FAO any Spanish speaking footballers coming into the UK: you mustn't use any of the phrases listed here outside of private communications: https://www.spanishdict.com/translate/negro
You must become proper English and use real proper language over here, OK?
This means that yes, if you're with a Spanish friend shopping for new dress, forget about going to the isle with the black clothes and saying something as racist as, ¿Prefieres el vestido rojo o el negro? Do you prefer the red dress or the black dress?
If you've been on holiday and got yourself a nice tan, forget about saying it in Spanish! Pasó dos días en la playa y volvió completamente negra. She spent two days at the seaside and was completely tanned on her return.
If you're impatient and angry, make sure you express it in English and not the racist Spanish! ¡Estoy negro de esperar! I'll have enough of waiting!
If your friend looks sad, don't you fecking dare be asking in Spanish! ¿Qué tal, negro? Pareces triste hoy. How are you, honey? You look sad today
Actually, it's better if you just stop talking Spanish full stop.
Yours sincerely,
The FA
You must become proper English and use real proper language over here, OK?
This means that yes, if you're with a Spanish friend shopping for new dress, forget about going to the isle with the black clothes and saying something as racist as, ¿Prefieres el vestido rojo o el negro? Do you prefer the red dress or the black dress?
If you've been on holiday and got yourself a nice tan, forget about saying it in Spanish! Pasó dos días en la playa y volvió completamente negra. She spent two days at the seaside and was completely tanned on her return.
If you're impatient and angry, make sure you express it in English and not the racist Spanish! ¡Estoy negro de esperar! I'll have enough of waiting!
If your friend looks sad, don't you fecking dare be asking in Spanish! ¿Qué tal, negro? Pareces triste hoy. How are you, honey? You look sad today
Actually, it's better if you just stop talking Spanish full stop.
Yours sincerely,
The FA
Is it fair to say that if it wasn’t for the Suarez incident (where he didn’t even use the word ‘negrito’ I believe?), this wouldn’t have even been noticed? I take it the words ‘negrito’ and ‘negro’ have been conflated?
Charged by the English FA for speaking Spanish, because a Spanish word sounds like a racist English word.
Utterly fecking ridiculous.
Utterly fecking ridiculous.
Why did it take them so long to bring the charges? If they had done it immediately he could have served his ban while out injured.
If anything this ban is racist.
The incident happened last week of November and he is going to miss games in January second week. FA could be more specific and just say we don't want him to play Liverpool away game. Could have skipped this racism drama.
The answer is in your post.
Obviously not the same people clearly, but I am long enough in the tooth that I can't help feeling there is some 'pay back' in some of these decisions, because its the old 'hurt and embarrassment ' the Football League/FA felt when Busby took United into the European Cup against the express wishes of the then League Sec. Alan Hardaker in 1957.
Conspiracy theories abounded around that time!
Would definitely have been noticed. But yeah, the "Suarez report" talks about context of the words used, can be affection in some circumstances and not in others. Obviously Suarez wasn't being affectionate, while Cavani was in context.
Nice of them to wait until he returned from injury to charge him, when the original deadline for a charge was supposed to be weeks ago.
Works in the UK in a profession with a UK based regulatory body that has regulation on what players can post on social media. End of.
It’s ridiculous, I thought they set deadlines in how long it can take to charge someone? I guess not.
Works in the UK in a profession with a UK based regulatory body that has regulation on what players can post on social media. End of.
Well that's a lot of whataboutery and I'm not sure how you being happy to be insulted by your co-workers has anything to do with it. You can allow people to call you anything you like but I'm not sure that's going to be acceptable for every immigrant in every workplace.
The rule, below, as it's written doesn't leave a lot of wiggle room.
It's on the link on the OP:
https://www.manutd.com/en/news/detail/man-utd-respond-to-edinson-cavani-fa-charge-on-17-december
The FA stated: “Edinson Cavani has been charged with misconduct for a breach of FA Rule E3, in relation to a social media post on Thursday 29 November 2020.
“It is alleged that, contrary to FA Rule E3.1, a comment posted on the Manchester United FC player's Instagram page was insulting and/or abusive and/or improper and/or brought the game into disrepute.
“It is further alleged that the comment constitutes an 'Aggravated Breach', which is defined in FA Rule E3.2, as it included a reference, whether express or implied, to colour and/or race and/or ethnic origin.
“The striker has until Monday 4 January 2021 to provide a response to the charge.”
I don't think we will appeal. We'll likely just try to manage the acceptance of the ban to minimise the impact.
They were always going to jump at the excuse to charge him in this ridiculously hypersensitive climate. And an excuse to hit United rolled into the bargain.
The Suarez verdict relied so heavily on the fact that his use of words was clearly intended to be insulting and aggravating. How can they possibly try and make the same charge stick having already set the precedent that with this particular language, the intention behind the words matter? Even allowing for the fact they're two different fecking words that already have different implications.
The Suarez verdict relied so heavily on the fact that his use of words was clearly intended to be insulting and aggravating. How can they possibly try and make the same charge stick having already set the precedent that with this particular language, the intention behind the words matter? Even allowing for the fact they're two different fecking words that already have different implications.
That's some George Orwellian opinion but doesn't surprise me in 2020.
I bet you’re real fun at parties...
Don't read the color description on black crayons that are posted in Spanish. I actually saw a post somewhere a few months back calling this out as racist. Primarily because they're dumber than an apple.
I'm just dumbfounded that this is is being twisted and turned into some malarkey that ends up hurting the actual cause. You need public will to make societal changes. Polarizing the debate and removing nuance is doing the exact opposite.
When Cavani is convicted of racism, which he will be since he's charged - He will A) Forever be in the FA's record as having used incencitive and racist language that can hurt people, and having been subsequently punished for it. B) Increase the likelihood that some people will view the next complaint with less stringent eyes.
A punishment is both a deterrent and a reaction to a breach of rules of conduct.
1) Is this going to be a deterrent? Cavani doesn't speak English, and hasn't had any reason to in his professional career. He doesn't have a reasonable expectation to know that friendly terminology locally, is deemed insensitive here.
Of course it won't be a deterrent. Racists are narrow minded bigots who get off on their own world view. But by punishing it, football sends a clear message that it has no room here.
Was Cavani being racist? Well no. Simply because someone perceives something as offensive, does not make it so. It may be that rule of the land applies, but nuance and reasonable sense needs to have a place in the discussion and hearing.
Did someone perceive Cavani as racist? I'm going to doubt this. Simply because I believe that people have the ability to know what is meant as offensive, and what is not.
Does someone want Cavani punished for using a bad word? Well yes definitely. Some people do faithfully believe that blanket bans and harsh reactions to anything and everything that can be perceived relating to skincolor is the only way forward.
Did Cavani have a reasonable expectation to KNOW that the wording could be perceived as racially insensitive? Considering by his own statement he was given a greeting of affection to a friend - This answer seem a very strong No.
I know that the "Ignoranec is not an excuse" argument is going to be thrown in as a way to dispute all claims to a discussion, but who exactly says that that argument is true here? The legal framework doesn't make a difference if you say, punch someone while black out drunk. You still punched someone even if you didn't know it. Or: You drive on the right side of the road as a visiting European, you can still be punished for endangering traffic even if you didnt know. There is also a term called mitigating circumstances that allows for interpretation of the incident and nuance to be applied to a case verdict. It is used in both criminal cases and civil law. The usage has a variety of applications, but mostly it draws from how severe a incident was, was there any victims, severity of damage, that sort of thing.
And that ties back to my comment of: Because someone IS offended. Doesn't mean it IS offensive.
It seems reasonably fair to expect Cavani not to repeat this particular affection after having been informed about pereception in the UK to people speaking Spanish and the "weight" of the word in relation to a persons skincolor. In Uruguay, "negrito" is just a affectionate nickname for people who have a darker skincolor than the rest. It doesn't translate to "negro" or the n word. And that really is the big difference. The words don't mean the same.
When Cavani is found guilty by the FA, nothing will have been accomplished except for alienating some people from the debate, while simultaneously firing up under the notion that there is no reasonable discussion to be had for nuance and language barriers.
This piece by John Cleese on political correctness is always a good read when people start looking for one too many excuses, not to not be offended, but to have CONSEQUENCES for having been offended:
"I'm offended every day. For example, the British newspapers every day offend me with their laziness, their nastiness, and their inaccuracy, but I'm not going to expect someone to stop that happening; I just simply speak out about it.
Sometimes when people are offended they want — you can just come in and say, "right, stop that" to whoever it is offending them. And, of course, as a former chairman of the BBC one said, "There are some people who I would wish to offend."
And I think there's truth in that too. So the idea that you have to be protected from any kind of uncomfortable emotion is what I absolutely do not subscribe to.
And a fellow who I helped write two books about psychology and psychiatry was a renowned psychiatrist in London called Robin Skynner said something very interesting to me. He said, "If people can't control their own emotions, then they have to start trying to control other people's behavior." And when you're around super-sensitive people, you cannot relax and be spontaneous because you have no idea what's going to upset them next.
And that's why I’ve been warned recently, don’t go to most university campuses because the political correctness has been taken from being a good idea — which is, let’s not be mean particularly to people who are not able to look after themselves very well, that’s a good idea — to the point where any kind of criticism of any individual or group can be labelled cruel.
And the whole point about humor, the whole point about comedy — and believe you me, I’ve thought about it — is that all comedy is critical. Even if you make a very inclusive joke — like, "How do you make God laugh? Tell him your plans" — that’s about the human condition, it’s not excluding anyone, it’s saying we all have all these plans that probably won’t come and isn’t it funny that we still believe they’re going to happen. So that’s a very inclusive joke, but it’s still critical.
All humor is critical. If we start saying, "oh, we mustn’t criticize or offend them," then humor is gone, and with humor goes a sense of proportion, and then, as far as I’m concerned, you’re living in 1984."