Alleged Racist Chanting - BBC Radio Sheffield

[yorkshirecoast]

How could you possibly debate that an almost exclusively white crowd of people chanting something that highlights the racial demographic of another group (or the city they come from, in this instance) and intended to antagonise, wasn't racist?

Quite easily - but I can't be arsed to repeat it all again.

 

[Blade56]

IMO the lazy jurno's heard diddly squat. They just did what they usually do and reported what they read on footy boards! Shame a "Blade" had to start the rumour off when discretion would have been the sensible option. By the time the media and piggy rumour machine have finished with the ill placed comments we will be guilty of throwing homosexuals off the south stand roof for half time entertainment. FGS get a grip.

 

[Darthblade]

As this incident was reported by........

'Ramon Mohamed, aged 55, of Totley, who has supported The Blades for more than 40 years, said it reminded him of the ‘dark ages’

it suggests he is angry on his own behalf.

Read more: http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/local...at-bradford-city-game-1-7648694#ixzz3voOfmOBQ

Well I'm not being pedantic here but IF Mr Mohammed really does think that this reminds him of the "dark ages" then his memory is a little faded. I can CLEARLY remember what football crowds were like all over the Country in the 70's and 80's and this bears not even a slight resemblance to Mondays "minor issue".

I've just heard his "interview" on radio Piggy and he wasn't even sure what he heard and needed it to be clarified by Bradford's impartial Chairman who loves us like a brother !!

Bradford's Chairman who interpreted the "Cooouuts" chants as monkey chanting ....... this has been blown out of all reasonable proportion by political beliefs and mischievery by Bradford's chairman.

I would suggest that the Kick it Out team may be a little too busy at Millwall, Chelsea, Le**s, Pigs, Barnsley and 20 or 30 other venues before they scrutinise us lot too closely !! ( unless Trevor Brooking gets involved )

This was not racism at all if you examine the facts ....... it was stupid ( if the Paki word was used ) and humorous ( if the ISIS word was used ) winding up of opposing fans, very few of which were actually of Asian extraction.

Lets keep politics out of football and leave it to the soap-box ......

UTB & FTP

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

Is anyone else annoyed at the reporting of the alleged racist chanting at the Bradford game as reported by a fellow blade, who must have fantsatic hearing, sat in the South Stand.........according to BBC Radio Sheffield the Kop were chanting you're a Town full of 'Paki's' and also according to Brdford's Chairman Monkey chanting.
I sit on the Kop and heard a group of about 20-30 chanting 'you're a Town Full of ISIS' which is wrong and could be construed as racist.......however this chant was ended after a minute or two when older Blades at the back of the Kop pointed out that the chants were wrong.
The Club of course have been slated by the BBC and the blade who made the compalint for not responding to the complaint immediately.......I work in local government (obviously we're as PC as they come) but we have a set timesecale to respond to compalints like no doubt the BBC does and I bet its not within 24 hours of the complaint, we only do that for racist behaviour if its directed at the complainant not someone who has compalined thinkign he heard racist chanting - the blade compalinign wasn't sure what was chanted!
Isn't it time the Club got rid of BBC Radio Sheffield as they are behind the vast majority of news items that slate us as a Club..............perhaps Football Heaven and the news Editor at BBC Radio Sheffield should join this forum and join a number of other Blades knockers!

summat wrong with this thread?

http://www.s24su.com/forum/index.php?threads/racist-blades-fans-again.43816/

 

[Darthblade]

I'd say my own political views are relevant but I'd struggle to see any legitimate view that thought it was OK. My political views are pretty much anti-extremism. That's about it. I do worry about a groundswell of racial hatred given what's going on in the world but that doesn't detract from the abhorrence of the behaviour in question.

If, as you say, your " political views are pretty much anti-extremism ", then I'm sure that you will find the left wing as abhorrent as the right wing, since both are equally dangerous to a normal society ....

UTB & FTP

 

[Darthblade]

IMO the lazy jurno's heard diddly squat. They just did what they usually do and reported what they read on footy boards! Shame a "Blade" had to start the rumour off when discretion would have been the sensible option. By the time the media and piggy rumour machine have finished with the ill placed comments we will be guilty of throwing homosexuals off the south stand roof for half time entertainment. FGS get a grip.

Or, if said Blade was actually sure what they heard they could have contacted the Club and reported it to the Club which is what most people would do .......

UTB & FTP

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

go on, I'll be the one to ask.....why would it be?

Firstly cheers for asking, genuinely.

Something like:

Fred is the manager of a local shop. He doesn't hire Asians because he thinks they are unreliable. Fred is racist.

Ted's best mate from their time in the forces is Naz. Naz identifies as Asian. Naz is a Bradford fan. Ted's shouting is taking the piss out of himself, Naz, Fred, and probably a few other things as well. Ted is not a racist.

This is not perfect but at least it tries to illustrate that there may be complexity.

Whatever the specifics, I don't think you can establish racism without establishing intent.

Whoever was shouting whatever they were shouting I think it's a complex issue and blanket assertions of racism are simplistic and ultimately possibly damaging.

An almost identical debate played out recently with regard to sexism and Professor Sir Tim Hunt(?). I think the consequences there were extremely serious.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

As this incident was reported by........

'Ramon Mohamed, aged 55, of Totley, who has supported The Blades for more than 40 years, said it reminded him of the ‘dark ages’

it suggests he is angry on his own behalf.

Read more: http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/local...at-bradford-city-game-1-7648694#ixzz3voOfmOBQ

Heard him on RS this morning and he'd no fucking idea what he heard.

From his own lips, not those exact words above, they are mine but he admitted "it may have been the 'P' word or ISIS".

Hang 'em all on that evidence.

 

[sitwell]

The Sheffield Stir... ' a few hundred' , 90 % must have been miming then.

 

[wizadry]

How the fuck can a Blade who doesn't even know what was said be offended by anything? Fucking ludicrous! that's even if he is a Blade because surely you'd report it to the club first?

Edit: Just seen Darths' post and he's spot on.

 

[vorpal blade]

Bit of a side issue but I think referring to Bengalis/Sri Lankans/Pakistanis/Indians as 'Asians' is pretty stupid - because I would suggest, that reactions to labels like 'Paki' would be quite different depending who you spoke to from which particular group.....but for some reason it has become the 'politically correct' word to use. Considering how many asians are chinese/japanese/russian/mongolian, its risibly inaccurate too.

The word Paki, is, I know, racist now but a 'Paki-shop' was pretty much the lingua franca up until 15 years ago or so in London (though 'Paki' was still an insult; was it used on 'Only Fools and Horses' or am I misremembering?) .
As the name of the country is an acronym derived from the constituent parts of the newly formed Islamic nation, P - Punjab A- Afghania K- Kashmir S -Sindh STAN (or something) and 'Paki' is a convenient diminutive, its a shame it got purloined as a term of abuse so long ago.

The reason that India broke apart amid hideous bloodshed when the British pulled out was of course down to religiously fuelled racism in the first place.

This is a genuine question, when the sex-crimes of Rotherham taxi drivers were publicised last year, the one thing that the media didn't query was the near monopoly that Pakistani and Punjabi taxi drivers in South Yorkshire - does anyone know why this is? I accept it may not be down to recruitment that contravenes equal opportunities law, for instance are cabbies """self"""-employed?

p.s. (the crowd at Bramall Lane is NOT almost exclusively white anymore, IMO, that is a Flawed position)

 

[him behind you]

Thanks WHF - that makes perfect sense and, for what it's worth, I agree about the intent of the use of words. However (and I'm no lawyer) I think that "legally" the use of a word or phrase which could be racist / sexist, no matter what the context, which is taken as offensive is automatically deemed racist / sexist - if that makes sense?

The reason I asked is that I'm managing a grievance case at work where an employee has complained about a homo phobic remark made as a joke by a gay worker to another one which she overheard - and our HR team are running scared of her and look like punishing the guy who made the comment.

 

[Ecco1889]

It sounded like a town full of ice-picks to me tbh..did Leon Trotsky come from Bradford?

 

[Deleted member 1486]

Whatever the specifics, I don't think you can establish racism without establishing intent.

In DPP v McFarlane (2002) EWHC 485, Rose LJ found that once the "basic" offence was proved (in this case a public order offence) and that racist language was used that was hostile or threatening to the victim, it made no difference that the defendant may have had an additional reason for using the language. The test under section 28(1)(a) was satisfied.

In DPP v Woods (2002) EWHC 85, the defendant used racially abusive language to a doorman at a nightclub when expressing anger and frustration over being refused admission. It was held, as in McFarlane, that the fact that the primary reason for the offence was other than a racist motivation, the use of racist abuse during the commission of the basic offence made out the test for racial aggravation in section 28(1)(a). The point was made that, ordinarily, the use of racially (or religiously) insulting remarks would, in the normal course of events, be enough to establish a demonstration of hostility.

 

[sitwell]

Next time we play Bradford we should hurl coins at the Bradford directors box and sing you fat bastard ,as apparently this is more acceptable ,and to be fair ,he really is.

 

[Alfreton14Blade]

The Conservative government's Minister for Racism, Oliver Letwin, has apparently released a statement! Here it is, hot off the presses:

"I'd like to say, on behalf of her majesty's government, how delighted we are that a small number of Sheffield United fans are keeping the spirit of 1970s racism alive in our present era. Congratulations too to the slightly wider minority who are standing up on their behalf and defending their Right to be Racist. We want a Britain we can be proud of, a 1970s Racist Britain and you few are playing your part in this glorious cause.

If I might take a leaf out of my friend and colleague David Cameron's book in adopting the folk idioms of 'the people' (as when he famously quoted the line: 'You ain't no Muslim, bruv') may I just repeat that wonderful and poetic sentence that those brave Sheffield United few chanted on Monday: 'Bradford, you're just a town full of ISIS'.

Respect bruvs. Racism rools. Tories4eva."

 

[him behind you]

The Sheffield Stir... ' a few hundred' , 90 % must have been miming then.

You can't have expected anything else from that set of gobshites. I've neither bought the rag nor visited the website ever since the editorial carried the piece about us singing praise for Ched Evans at the stevenage game after he'd been sentenced - which was just a lie. I challenged the editor and was simply told that it came from a female friend who had been to the match so he had no reason to doubt it - outstanding evidence!

 

[Boxer Blade]

Nathan Blake well remembered drops, good player, thanks for that been thinking on and off all bloody afternoon

 

[Pollingtonblade]

More leftist propoganda

 

[HeCanDoMagic]

http://www.sufc.co.uk//news/article/sheffield-united-bradford-city-2876026.aspx

 

[Deleted member 1486]

More leftist propoganda

 

[yorkshirecoast]

http://www.sufc.co.uk//news/article/sheffield-united-bradford-city-2876026.aspx

Well done to those who have helped blow this out of all proportion. Hopefully SUFC will show more common sense and stand by our fans. And also tell the fat xxxx of a BCFC chairman that he has shown total disrespect for our club one too many times and is no longer welcome at our club....I am sure the 500 or so fans whose view he restricted will welcome that.

 

[Deleted member 1486]

Well done to those who have helped blow this out of all proportion.

The thing is, it isn't out of proportion. I don't know if it was done with racist intent, maybe it wasn't, maybe those who started it did so intending it as "banter" (I'm not sure that makes it any better to be honest, but I'll roll with it). In this day and age, with the media crawling over anything to do with race, this would have been stupid in the extreme at any large event. But at football? This was never going to end well, and the only people who should be blamed for the reaction, are those who were chanting!

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

In DPP v McFarlane (2002) EWHC 485, Rose LJ found that once the "basic" offence was proved (in this case a public order offence) and that racist language was used that was hostile or threatening to the victim, it made no difference that the defendant may have had an additional reason for using the language. The test under section 28(1)(a) was satisfied.

In DPP v Woods (2002) EWHC 85, the defendant used racially abusive language to a doorman at a nightclub when expressing anger and frustration over being refused admission. It was held, as in McFarlane, that the fact that the primary reason for the offence was other than a racist motivation, the use of racist abuse during the commission of the basic offence made out the test for racial aggravation in section 28(1)(a). The point was made that, ordinarily, the use of racially (or religiously) insulting remarks would, in the normal course of events, be enough to establish a demonstration of hostility.

Disappointing but not surprising. (If I understand it correctly.)

Ultimately thus, in part, is a debate about what constitutes banter isn't it?

Words can be used and understood by one or both parties to be either hate speech or banter.

There are at least four possible scenarios:

Both understand it to be hate speech.
Intended to be hate speech. Understood as banter.
Intended to be banter. Understood as hate speech.
Intended as banter. Understood as banter.

The ruling above seems simplistic to me. Though I may misunderstand it.

 

[wizadry]

The thing is, it isn't out of proportion. I don't know if it was done with racist intent, maybe it wasn't, maybe those who started it did so intending it as "banter" (I'm not sure that makes it any better to be honest, but I'll roll with it). In this day and age, with the media crawling over anything to do with race, this would have been stupid in the extreme at any large event. But at football? This was never going to end well, and the only people who should be blamed for that, is those who were chanting!

There has been no mention of the great number of our fans who supposedly told these people in no uncertain terms to shut the fuck up, that's great from our fans if you ask me, but no, lets concentrate on the handful of fans instead. There has to be some perspective from the media and club but the media especially love to spoil the facts.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

The thing is, it isn't out of proportion. I don't know if it was done with racist intent, maybe it wasn't, maybe those who started it did so intending it as "banter" (I'm not sure that makes it any better to be honest, but I'll roll with it). In this day and age, with the media crawling over anything to do with race, this would have been stupid in the extreme at any large event. But at football? This was never going to end well, and the only people who should be blamed for the reaction, are those who were chanting!

This is close to how I see it.

But if those people in that situation are required to modify their banter then where does that stop?

There are a couple of posters on here who put up some "extreme" stuff, but generally the intent and context are understood.

Otoh some posts I think are genuinely nasty, and almost certainly criminal.

It wouldn't take much to trawl through posts here and start all sorts of mudslinging accusations.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

If, as you say, your " political views are pretty much anti-extremism ", then I'm sure that you will find the left wing as abhorrent as the right wing, since both are equally dangerous to a normal society ....

UTB & FTP

I agree extreme left wing is also dangerous. Extremism isn’t helpful to society.


I believe in balance whatever the subject. Capitalism or communism? Somewhere in between for me. Clapper or Slasher? Somewhere in between for me. Adkins the hero or a clown? Somewhere in between for me. Degrading or victimizing people based on skin colour, nationality, sexuality, gender or any other state that one is born to? Abhorrent. No in-betweens on that front.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Or, if said Blade was actually sure what they heard they could have contacted the Club and reported it to the Club which is what most people would do .......

UTB & FTP

Said Blade contacted the club, FURD, Kick it out etc. I can’t believe said Blade is being made the scapegoat here. The chanting was abhorrent and deserves to be reported. Well done Ramon Mohamed.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Heard him on RS this morning and he'd no fucking idea what he heard.

From his own lips, not those exact words above, they are mine but he admitted "it may have been the 'P' word or ISIS".

Hang 'em all on that evidence.

Enough heard the chants to make it pretty clear what happened and that it was unacceptable. Why are so many so desperate to scapegoat someone who had the courage to take a stand against such vile behavior?

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Thanks WHF - that makes perfect sense and, for what it's worth, I agree about the intent of the use of words. However (and I'm no lawyer) I think that "legally" the use of a word or phrase which could be racist / sexist, no matter what the context, which is taken as offensive is automatically deemed racist / sexist - if that makes sense?

The reason I asked is that I'm managing a grievance case at work where an employee has complained about a homo phobic remark made as a joke by a gay worker to another one which she overheard - and our HR team are running scared of her and look like punishing the guy who made the comment.

And I think that illustrates clearly that simplistic approaches to complex issues can have severe, and I would say unjust, personal consequences.

No idea how you navigate that one.