Racism incident in PSG v Istanbul match

[Posh Red]

I guess it varies from country to country but “black” is a perfectly acceptable word to use as a descriptor in lots of countries. Provided there is a reasonable context for using it. Obviously, using it unnecessarily is a dick move. African-American only gets used in America (and always seemed a weird one to me, as though being black means you’re automatically American!) so what other words could he have used?

Or do we seriously think he should have gone through the mental gymnastics to find a way to quickly describe a black man on a bench full of white men, wearing face masks and matching tracksuits, without mentioning his race. How does he even do that? The tall man? The man with the kind eyes?

Could he not have walked over and gestured?

 

[RoyH1]

I wouldn't give them too much credit for the racism fight, if anything I'd be shocked if they had training on this tbh. Their slogans are nothing but hollow and usually aren't backed up by their actions apart from a fine and a game behind closed doors here and there.

Their slogans are hollow. They care nothing for racism or human rights as such. They care about outcry.

 

[RoyH1]

Could he not have walked over and gestured?

Yes, that's what they will have to be trained to do when they don't know names and its impossible to identify by verbal means (no numbers or initials on clothing).

 

[Ramos]

I think Martinez says it pretty well here. He's a referee, he should know how to talk about players or staff.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Posh Red]

I wouldn't give them too much credit for the racism fight, if anything I'd be shocked if they had training on this tbh. Their slogans are nothing but hollow and usually aren't backed up by their actions apart from a fine and a game behind closed doors here and there.

I get that to a degree. But I’ve worked in various organisations in a regulated environment. The levels of training have varied, but at the very least a slide show and a statement of confirmation of understanding was included. Just seems crazy for an organisation of the stature of UEFA not to have something.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

Honestly i still don't get what you mean by wrong. It's obviously wrong to the offended so i think you're trying to say just because someone is offended you shouldn't face consequences?

Agreed but that's not the end of the matter, consequences or not you'd take stock of whether you want to cause offence in the future and if it's right you define what's offensive. That's what i meant by it's all that matters.

Whether it's racist, intolerant, inappropriate whatever term the key thing is UEFA listen and respond so unnecessary offence isn't caused.

I’m taking generally, and not just yesterday. Of course he’s got a right to be offended, and if racist language is used, then it should be dealt with.

perhaps it was inappropriate to post here, but speaking generally, just because someone is offended, that doesn’t mean that the person accused of offending has done anything wrong.

 

[slyadams]

It's not so much that the NBA thing isn't some sort of racism (though, I'd disagree with that, just like I disagree with calling a player black automatically means the person is racist), it's looking for examples in other sports to take away the focus from what happened today (I didn't read through the whole thread so apologies if you didn't start this comparison). It's classic whataboutism that's often prevalent when people are trying to defend or excuse moments like this. Context does matter, and this was not the setting for an official, not a player competing with another player (like in the comparison with Luka), but an actual official put in place to keep the integrity of the game among other things, this wasn't the setting for him to use someone's skin color to describe them. You can point, you can walk over to the person, there's a myriad of ways you can go about it without resorting to using their skin color.

And the NBA thing is far worse in the language, but it's par for the course in the NBA. The thing that a lot of ignorant people (usually on the white side) seem to forget is that there is a double-standard in place. They might not like it, but it's far less egregious for a black man to call a white man white boy/man than a white man calling a black man black/boy. You have to accept that historical context have created this double-standard. To try to constantly go back to some of the discrepancies as if the world has always been equal and so therefore every racial moments should be judged exactly the same way whether the target was black or white is ignorant at best, and sadly it's not a very original or sound argument. If you have a problem with this double-standard, then you should have an even bigger problem with the systematic racism some black people are put through whether it's in their living conditions, education, social injustices, etc....but often times the people making the kind of argument you did see only the double-standard that affects them on such a minor, insignificant scale (like being called a white boy or not being able to say the word 'nigga') and sweep under the carpet the overwhelming impact the double-standard has the other way and how it affects black people on far more than just a sports venue, where their very lives can be in danger.

Good post, this is something I was trying to explain last night. There are things called Protected Classes that are given increased protection because of the reasons you say. Does it throw up some situations that 'feel' unfair to some? Yes. Should we get rid of them? Nope.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

I disagree with your statement around offence. It cannot be the fact that because someone is offended by what you say, it’s wrong.

if you are offended by something I say, thats not my problem.

If however, I’ve said something that is racist, then that’s an issue, and that should be dealt with.

It may be semantics, but in life we can’t tiptoe around for fear of offending someone.

Completely agree with you here. Just because someone is offended by someone doesn’t make the thing you’ve said offensive. That’s unfortunately the way people are thinking more and more though.

 

[slyadams]

Completely agree with you here. Just because someone is offended by someone doesn’t make the thing you’ve said offensive. That’s unfortunately the way people are thinking more and more though.

The trouble comes when people think that just because they don't think what they've said is offensive it means it wasn't.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

I’m sorry but calling someone black to describe them isn’t in any way racist and to say “an official should know better” is pure shite. It’s quite literally not racist to call someone black unless you are meaning it in a demeaning or discriminating manor which in this context the guy clearly wasn’t.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

The trouble comes when people think that just because they don't think what they've said is offensive it means it wasn't.

Sure but it works both ways, someone is offended by almost everything, so do we have to censor the whole of society? It’s an incredibly slippery slope and personally I think it causes way more harm than good.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Could he not have walked over and gestured?

There was a ruck of very agitated people all milling round at the time. It’s a big ask to expect him to not at least try to identify the culprit to the referee verbally, before wading into the scrum and trying to physically single one of them out. And the simple fact remains, why should he go to such lengths to avoid causing offence when he could reasonably assume he wasn’t going to offend anyone?

Is the B in BLM in any way offensive? Of course not. So we’ve established that there are contexts where we can use the word “black” to identify people without causing offence. He obviously assumed that using the word in a descriptive manner, to help the referee quickly identify who to punish was also an appropriate context.

To me it keeps coming back to the similarity between the Romanian word for black and other, far more offensive, words (hence the guy replied, in English, “why did you say negro”?) Which is unfortunate but almost certainly didn’t occur to him at the time. Had he spoken in English I don’t think it would have escalated like that. Nor should it.

 

[hasanejaz88]

I’m sorry but calling someone black to describe them isn’t in any way racist and to say “an official should know better” is pure shite. It’s quite literally not racist to call someone black unless you are meaning it in a demeaning or discriminating manor which in this context the guy clearly wasn’t.

The issue is that, which Demba Ba very rightfully addressed, is that the match referee would not use 'that white guy' when trying to address a white official but addressed Webo as 'that black guy'.

I think that's very true and while not a racist slur, it does point to a bias of addressing black people by their color, while white people are not.

One can say that is generally the case for any minority in a country. If you're in a black majority country as a white person then you will be addressed as 'that white guy' because you stand out more. But 1) that was in a football stadium between psg and a Turkish team so Webo should not have stood out that much, there would be many other black people there and 2) this sort of labeling is what people are trying to take out of society when they talk about discrimination.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

The issue is that, which Demba Ba very rightfully addressed, is that the match referee would not use 'that white guy' when trying to address a white official but addressed Webo as 'that black guy'.

I think that's very true and while not a racist slur, it does point to a bias of addressing black people by their color, while white people are not.

One can say that is generally the case for any minority in a country. If you're in a black majority country as a white person then you will be addressed as 'that white guy' because you stand out more. But 1) that was in a football stadium between psg and a Turkish team so Webo should not have stood out that much, there would be many other black people there and 2) this sort of labeling is what people are trying to take out of society when they talk about discrimination.

I just don’t think that’s a good point considering we don’t know if he would have said “the white guy”. Personally I believe that if there was a singular white guy in a group of black people then most people would say “the white guy”. That’s not racist that’s common sense and basic description skills.

 

[Ramos]

I guess it varies from country to country but “black” is a perfectly acceptable word to use as a descriptor in lots of countries. Provided there is a reasonable context for using it. Obviously, using it unnecessarily is a dick move. African-American only gets used in America (and always seemed a weird one to me, as though being black means you’re automatically American!) so what other words could he have used?

Or do we seriously think he should have gone through the mental gymnastics to find a way to quickly describe a black man on a bench full of white men, wearing face masks and matching tracksuits, without mentioning his race. How does he even do that? The tall man? The man with the kind eyes?

1) His name (he's not an unknown)
2) 3rd man on the right, 2nd on the left (whatever)
3) Pointing him out
4) If you have to use his skin color to describe him, the black assistant coach

This all easily beats "the black one" or "that black one over there".

He's officiating in the Champions League, not talking to his mates on a night out.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

There was a ruck of very agitated people all milling round at the time. It’s a big ask to expect him to not at least try to identify the culprit to the referee verbally, before wading into the scrum and trying to physically single one of them out. And the simple fact remains, why should he go to such lengths to avoid causing offence when he could reasonably assume he wasn’t going to offend anyone?

Is the B in BLM in any way offensive? Of course not. So we’ve established that there are contexts where we can use the word “black” to identify people without causing offence. He obviously assumed that using the word in a descriptive manner, to help the referee quickly identify who to punish was also an appropriate context.

To me it keeps coming back to the similarity between the Romanian word for black and other, far more offensive, words (hence the guy replied, in English, “why did you say negro”?) Which is unfortunate but almost certainly didn’t occur to him at the time. Had he spoken in English I don’t think it would have escalated like that. Nor should it.

Yeh this is bang on. Everyone will say he should have known better but the reality is in the current climate any ‘wrong’ word could easily blow up in your face at any moment.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

1) His name (he's not an unknown)
2) 3rd man on the right, 2nd on the left (whatever)
3) Pointing him out
4) If you have to use his skin color to describe him, the black assistant coach

This all easily beats "the black one" or "that black one over there".

He's officiating in the Champions League, not talking to his mates on a night out.

1) he may not know his name or the ref may not especially in a fast paced situation.
2) again the situation is escalating you can hardly go into a long description, you use the most clear describing words you can.
3)again it’s escalating, it’s much harder to point at someone than to give basic descriptive instructions.
4)Thats fair enough, but it’s pretty minor. Saying “the black guy” isn’t racist in the slightest and neither is it between mates, it’s basic description. Just as it would be to say “the white guy” in a group of black people, or “ the tall guy” in a group of smaller people.

 

[Synco]

So when you need to single out one man from a bunch of men wearing masks and identical outfits, in a hurry, I don’t see how that’s possible without mentioning the colour of their skin.

What would he have done if the guy he wanted to report was one of the white men, then? Should be impossible according to this logic.

(Besides that there was more than one black man on the sidelines, so "the black guy" doesn't even clarify anything.)

 

[BlackShark_80]

Istanbul Basaksehir bench saying: "In my country, Romanians are gypsies".

 

[Siorac]

Why do people keep bringing up the 'anglosphere' trying to force their views on other countries?

Webo-Cameroon
Ba-Senegal
Buruk - Turkish
Entire Istanbul squad- only one player you could argue comes from an anglosphere country (a Nigerian)
Entire PSG squad - none

Mostly because you have a few people who go further than saying that the ref shouldn't have identified someone based on their skin colour. I think that is a reasonable opinion: it's best to avoid doing what he did. He should apologise, maybe go through a couple of hours of sensitivity training or something.

However, there are people like @calodo2003 who advocate for draconian punishments - he seriously suggested a lifetime ban! That is disproportionate and completely unreasonable. Life in prison for driving over the speed limit. This has nothing to do with the whole anglosphere thing, it just annoyed me.

And then there are people who say he should have been mindful how "negru" sounds and that he should avoid using the word at all because it might cause offence. The same thing was brought up in the Cavani thread. And to that I say feck THAT. That is completely and utterly unreasonable. If he wants to say black shirt (I know he didn't this time, of course), he should be allowed to do so in his own native language. And that's where the anglosphere thing comes from: RedCafe is, obviously, dominated by English speakers and there's a tendency to view everything through the lens of that particular language. Understandable but still wrong. As an example: the word "busy" sounds (and looks) very close to a derogatory term for gay people in Hungarian. It would be completely unreasonable if any Hungarian got offended by an English person using that word, just because it "sounds bad".

 

[slyadams]

To me it keeps coming back to the similarity between the Romanian word for black and other, far more offensive, words (hence the guy replied, in English, “why did you say negro”?) Which is unfortunate but almost certainly didn’t occur to him at the time. Had he spoken in English I don’t think it would have escalated like that. Nor should it.

I don't think it does, its likely the only reason Webu/Ba knew he used a word meaning black is because 'negro/negru/negra' is a common word for black for many languages. The offense was in using race as a primary identifier, not linguistic similarities to more offensive words.

I just don’t think that’s a good point considering we don’t know if he would have said “the white guy”. Personally I believe that if there was a singular white guy in a group of black people then most people would say “the white guy”. That’s not racist that’s common sense and basic description skills.

You should read one of the many posts explaining why this is different.

 

[slyadams]

Mostly because you have a few people who go further than saying that the ref shouldn't have identified someone based on their skin colour. I think that is a reasonable opinion: it's best to avoid doing what he did. He should apologise, maybe go through a couple of hours of sensitivity training or something.

However, there are people like @calodo2003 who advocate for draconian punishments - he seriously suggested a lifetime ban! That is disproportionate and completely unreasonable. Life in prison for driving over the speed limit. This has nothing to do with the whole anglosphere thing, it just annoyed me.

And then there are people who say he should have been mindful how "negru" sounds and that he should avoid using the word at all because it might cause offence. The same thing was brought up in the Cavani thread. And to that I say feck THAT. That is completely and utterly unreasonable. If he wants to say black shirt (I know he didn't this time, of course), he should be allowed to do so in his own native language. And that's where the anglosphere thing comes from: RedCafe is, obviously, dominated by English speakers and there's a tendency to view everything through the lens of that particular language. Understandable but still wrong. As an example: the word "busy" sounds (and looks) very close to a derogatory term for gay people in Hungarian. It would be completely unreasonable if any Hungarian got offended by an English person using that word, just because it "sounds bad".

You've completely missed the point. This has nothing to do with the fact "negru" sounds like a worse word. You can say "black shirt" all day long.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

The issue is that, which Demba Ba very rightfully addressed, is that the match referee would not use 'that white guy' when trying to address a white official but addressed Webo as 'that black guy'.

I think that's very true and while not a racist slur, it does point to a bias of addressing black people by their color, while white people are not.

One can say that is generally the case for any minority in a country. If you're in a black majority country as a white person then you will be addressed as 'that white guy' because you stand out more. But 1) that was in a football stadium between psg and a Turkish team so Webo should not have stood out that much, there would be many other black people there and 2) this sort of labeling is what people are trying to take out of society when they talk about discrimination.

Weren’t the Istanbul coaching staff predominantly white?

 

[Inigo Montoya]

Yep, would be a bit much. I reckon if he tried to explain it clearly yesterday and apologised for the misinterpretation it would all be fine.

Until Troy Deeny wades in demanding him to be stoned to death

 

[Sayros]

Sure but it works both ways, someone is offended by almost everything, so do we have to censor the whole of society? It’s an incredibly slippery slope and personally I think it causes way more harm than good.

There is a lot of that going on, where the cause for offense is followed immediately with pitchforks, cancel culture, etc. This is bad as well, and it actually has a counter effect to its intentions of making the world better. It isolates people who aren't racist to begin with, maybe not as educated on people's sensitivity and struggles with racism, and some times it pushes them further away from trying to understand. It's the rubber-band effect of society trying to evolve and become more global.

There has been a huge slant towards some white people being able to be as racist and ignorant as they've wanted without knowing any better, because black people and people of color did not have the influence they have now on culture, media, etc. You can look at old cartoons our parents (and even some of us) were watching from a huge company like Disney, and it's riddled with racism. Some of us don't even know that we've participated in this in some way to this day. It doesn't mean anybody is guilty of anything because they're white, this is just the world we've come into. We're all learning here to become better global citizens, and moments like this, discussions like this, are baby steps towards learning, regardless whether you immediately reject it as ridiculous or not (like some here are doing). So, in moments like that, you're going to have a lot of people (young people mostly) who are going to pull the rubber-band the other way, 'woke' people, safe spaces, etc...that goes overboard the other way, which I suspect is irritating to some who think it's going too far, and would use this incident as another example. In a perfect world, I'd say they might be right, but this is far from one and I think it's worthy of this discussion.

I don't think this ref should be banned for life, or fired, but just educated and move on. This is how things will progress, but this brigade of cancel culture has to stop because it's only going to make things worse and it's not going to convince anybody to change their views, but rather push them towards people who hold even more extreme opinions.

 

[Siorac]

You've completely missed the point. This has nothing to do with the fact "negru" sounds like a worse word. You can say "black shirt" all day long.

Please read the entire post before commenting and try to understand it. You missed my point, and quite spectacularly at that.

 

[WeePat]

It depends, doesn't it? Obviously, no one wants to be constantly referred to as "the <insert descriptor>", but in a situation where someone is being pointed out, names aren't known, wearing similar clothes, people usually use the easiest description, either it's a haircut, clothing, whatnot. If it's one white person in a group, then for me it's fairly obvious that most people will use white guy as the description, in one way or another, same as for black etc etc. There doesn't have to be much thought behind it, just whatever comes first.

I don't think it's inherently racist to refer to someone by their skin colour. It could be, but I don't think it is by definition. It's still rude though, at the very least. If someone I didn't know referred to me as that black guy, the first thing out of my mouth would be "excuse me but I have a name". Cultural differences will continue to bring up these issues, and I'm willing to believe there was no racist intent (until proven otherwise) but I don't think the reaction was over the top or anything.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

I don't think it's inherently racist to refer to someone by their skin colour. It could be, but I don't think it is by definition. It's still rude though, at the very least. If someone I didn't know referred to me as that black guy, the first thing out of my mouth would be "excuse me but I have a name". Cultural differences will continue to bring up these issues, and I'm willing to believe there was no racist intent (until proven otherwise) but I don't think the reaction was over the top or anything.

Thing is even if it’s only being rude you don’t stop a game of football for that nor should the guy be vilified.

 

[UncleBob]

1) he may not know his name or the ref may not especially in a fast paced situation.
2) again the situation is escalating you can hardly go into a long description, you use the most clear describing words you can.
3)again it’s escalating, it’s much harder to point at someone than to give basic descriptive instructions.
4)Thats fair enough, but it’s pretty minor. Saying “the black guy” isn’t racist in the slightest and neither is it between mates, it’s basic description. Just as it would be to say “the white guy” in a group of black people, or “ the tall guy” in a group of smaller people.

Unless he actually recognizes him as an assistant coach, there's a big risk he isn't...

 

[Synco]

I don't think it does, its likely the only reason Webu/Ba knew he used a word meaning black is because 'negro/negru/negra' is a common word for black for many languages. The offense was in using race as a primary identifier, not linguistic similarities to more offensive words.

That's the point, and Demba Ba was very explicit about it:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[slyadams]

Please read the entire post before commenting and try to understand it. You missed my point, and quite spectacularly at that.

I did, I havn't.

And then there are people who say he should have been mindful how "negru" sounds and that he should avoid using the word at all because it might cause offence.

No-one has said he cannot use the word "negru" at all. He shouldn't use the word as a primary descriptor of a human. And this is nothing to do with the fact it 'sounds' like a worse word.

The same thing was brought up in the Cavani thread. And to that I say feck THAT. That is completely and utterly unreasonable. If he wants to say black shirt (I know he didn't this time, of course), he should be allowed to do so in his own native language.

He's allowed to say black shirt in his own language. No-one has said he can't anywhere in this thread, if you can quote someone who has said this, please go ahead. A bit of google translation shows 'black shirt' in Romanian is 'cămașă neagră'. If Webu was wearing a black shirt and the official said "the guy in the black shirt", there's nothing wrong with that.

And that's where the anglosphere thing comes from: RedCafe is, obviously, dominated by English speakers and there's a tendency to view everything through the lens of that particular language. Understandable but still wrong.

Again, this has nothing to do with how 'negru' sounds like another word.

As an example: the word "busy" sounds (and looks) very close to a derogatory term for gay people in Hungarian. It would be completely unreasonable if any Hungarian got offended by an English person using that word, just because it "sounds bad".

Again, no-one is saying you wouldn't be able to do that.

The reason you've missed the point by such a distance is you're labouring under the misconception this is about the actual physical 'sound' of the word and how it is similar to other more offensive words, it isn't.

 

[Zlatan 7]

I did, I havn't.

No-one has said he cannot use the word "negru" at all. He shouldn't use the word as a primary descriptor of a human. And this is nothing to do with the fact it 'sounds' like a worse word.

He's allowed to say black shirt in his own language. No-one has said he can't anywhere in this thread, if you can quote someone who has said this, please go ahead. A bit of google translation shows 'black shirt' in Romanian is 'cămașă neagră'. If Webu was wearing a black shirt and the official said "the guy in the black shirt", there's nothing wrong with that.

Again, this has nothing to do with how 'negru' sounds like another word.

Again, no-one is saying you wouldn't be able to do that.

The reason you've missed the point by such a distance is you're labouring under the misconception this is about the actual physical 'sound' of the word and how it is similar to other more offensive words, it isn't.

I think they have. I also think I seen a member of caf staff say the official should have considered his language around English speaking. Can’t be arsed to go and look tbh

 

[OutlawGER]

Context. Player explains, a white player is never called "That white one." That's the point; You had club, coat, number, NAME you could have used and you reach for at best
"That black one"

Well, if there are mostly white players out there, then there is no point to refer to someone as "the white one".

But if the white player is standing next to 5 black players, most people would refer to him as "the white player" if asked to point him out for some reason.

The same goes for the blonde girl, standing next to 10 non-blonde girls.

 

[slyadams]

I think they have. I also think I seen a member of caf staff say the official should have considered his language around English speaking. Can’t be arsed to go and look tbh

In this context yes, not when referring to the colour of a shirt or football boots etc., and if they have I agree that's wrong.

 

[UncleBob]

I don't think it does, its likely the only reason Webu/Ba knew he used a word meaning black is because 'negro/negru/negra' is a common word for black for many languages. The offense was in using race as a primary identifier, not linguistic similarities to more offensive words.

You should read one of the many posts explaining why this is different.

It's a common word but with different interpretations, depending on language one of them sounds worse than the other.

If all this is simply about Ba being unhappy with race, any race, being used as a primary identifier, no matter the context, then the whole thing is so over the top it's just bizarre

 

[WeePat]

Thing is even if it’s only being rude you don’t stop a game of football for that nor should the guy be vilified.

It could possibly have been racist, we don't actually know why he referred to him using that descriptor. I said it was rude at the very least.

 

[Marat]

A fake case labelled as "racist incident" Very sad for the next real case. People will say "Arrrrh, this fake drama again...."

 

[Moonwalker]

The most ludicrous outtake from this thread is the notion that one should refrain from using words in their own language if they happen to be synophones with pejorative words in another language, cause 'they should know better'.

Again, no-one is saying you wouldn't be able to do that.

Do yourself a favor and read the thread.

But even apart from that: it looks like he didn't say 'the black guy' (with those English words), but something including the Romanian word 'negru'. I have no idea about the connotations in Romanian, but certainly the close relatives I know (English 'negro', French 'nègre', Dutch 'neger') are not used anymore and would all be seen as condescending, if not insulting. Certainly a ref should know better than speaking like this, whatever language he uses.

 

[africanspur]

Mostly because you have a few people who go further than saying that the ref shouldn't have identified someone based on their skin colour. I think that is a reasonable opinion: it's best to avoid doing what he did. He should apologise, maybe go through a couple of hours of sensitivity training or something.

However, there are people like @calodo2003 who advocate for draconian punishments - he seriously suggested a lifetime ban! That is disproportionate and completely unreasonable. Life in prison for driving over the speed limit. This has nothing to do with the whole anglosphere thing, it just annoyed me.

And then there are people who say he should have been mindful how "negru" sounds and that he should avoid using the word at all because it might cause offence. The same thing was brought up in the Cavani thread. And to that I say feck THAT. That is completely and utterly unreasonable. If he wants to say black shirt (I know he didn't this time, of course), he should be allowed to do so in his own native language. And that's where the anglosphere thing comes from: RedCafe is, obviously, dominated by English speakers and there's a tendency to view everything through the lens of that particular language. Understandable but still wrong. As an example: the word "busy" sounds (and looks) very close to a derogatory term for gay people in Hungarian. It would be completely unreasonable if any Hungarian got offended by an English person using that word, just because it "sounds bad".

How is it unreasonable? Demba Ba for example seems to either be totally aware of what the official said or has been told.

Redcafe and its mostly English speaking posters had nothing to do with the incidents of yesterday. The comment was directed at a French speaking Cameroonian, working for a Turkish club. He was defended by a French speaking Senegalese, working for a Turkish club. And a Turkish manager. And was supported in walking off the pitch by a multi national team, only one of whom could be said to come from an English speaking country. He was accompanied by the players and coaches of a French team, none of whom could be said to be from an anglophone country.

The thoughts of Irish, Americans or Brits had nothing to do with what happened yesterday and its a bit of a cop out to suggest that as a defence.

And I don't think what that assistant did yesterday was racist.

 

[mancan92]

I’m sorry but calling someone black to describe them isn’t in any way racist and to say “an official should know better” is pure shite. It’s quite literally not racist to call someone black unless you are meaning it in a demeaning or discriminating manor which in this context the guy clearly wasn’t.

You are getting confused. Remember historical context and you will find your way to understanding.