Premier League 20/21

[BennyCake]

Not sure where to post but here will do.

The incident in last night's PSG game, racist or non racist? I'm going for non racist, a mis-interpretation... But I look forward to possibly being told I am a dinosaur...

I agree with you. It was a descriptive term to locate which player needed to be booked, amongst presumably a group of white players. Obviously the linesman shouldve used his name or number instead, but its not racism.

And, if the roles were reversed and it was "the white guy" in a group of black players. It wouldnt be deemed to be racist. The double standards are shocking as well.

I think it was almost certainly a misunderstanding involving clumsy and poorly chosen language exacerbated by a language barrier but at the same time I would not blame Demba Ba and assistant Pierre Webo for reacting the way they did, given that they both almost certainly have extensive lived experience of racism

I think it probably highlights that it would be better if they were some sort of formalised language around player identification

That's not the lineman's fault though.

I don't think there is any need for that. As I said, the person should've been identified by his name, but if his name wasn't known, saying the black guy in a group of white people is not racism.

A manager came out in the wake of this incident and said he was referred to as the white guy when working in Africa. That wasn't (and isn't) deemed to be racist. It's all false outrage and double standards though when there is a black person involved.

Rather than dismissing it all as "false outrage" I think you'd be better placed to look at why black players are generally so on guard about potential racist incidents - it's because football has produced a litany of them and because the black players or staff themselves almost certainly have long experience of suffering from racial prejudice

I think it's quite understandable they reacted that way when they believed that a racist slur had been made

But I think the actual incident the other night was largely a misunderstanding

There is a problem with people on the internet jumping to conclusions and sticking to them at all costs which generally makes any sort of discussion around such incidents turn into a shitshow

It is absolutely false outrage, because if the roles were reversed, not an eyelid would be bat. It's similar to when James McClean gets his yearly dose, nothing is ever done about it, but when there is a black person involved people are out with their pitchforks to be seen to be being progressive and acting against discrimination when it is anything but. It's selective, and that in itself in detrimental to the whole issue surrounding stamping out racism etc.

You mentioned a formalised language regarding identification needing to be brought in, yet this is what the snowflake generation are already doing. "It's not a snowman it's a snowperson" and the BBC now not allowed to say that a black player has plenty of pace, this type of thing. That is when you know things are turning into a shitshow.
This has lead us to the point now where calling this coach a black man, even though he is a black man, is now "racist" and the linesman faces a 10 game ban, but fans being caught calling the likes of McClean all the Irish fenian c***ts of the day is par for the course.

You're right on the McClean thing. Nine years now, and nothing has ever been done about the abuse that he gets. The FA's silence has been deafening for 9 years. F**kin' disgusting.

Its why I have no time for this taking the knee bullshit in football. You can't call a black man a 'black man' but McClean is anything you want to call him. You can f**k right off.

Exactly my point. Selective double standards that is doing more harm than good.
Agree on taking the knee as well, it's an empty gesture at this stage and is being forced on teams now, like their poppies every year too. Both of which shouldn't be in or be part of football.

If it was an empty gesture, there wouldn't be such opposition to it from racists, like at Millwall last weekend

There you go. You label those who don't wish to conform to the way the fake hysteria busybodies do things, like the Millwall fans. Are we now going to do a kneel before every sporting event for the rest of time? Why aren't we kneeling in solidarity for the racial abuse McClean suffers. Like the poppies, this gesture is now being forced upon football before any game. It has lost its credibility.

Exactly.

[thewobbler]

Any chance of a mod deleting the last 3 pages?

[GiveItToTheShooters]

Exactly my point. Selective double standards that is doing more harm than good.
Agree on taking the knee as well, it's an empty gesture at this stage and is being forced on teams now, like their poppies every year too. Both of which shouldn't be in or be part of football.

If it was an empty gesture, there wouldn't be such opposition to it from racists, like at Millwall last weekend

There you go. You label those who don't wish to conform to the way the fake hysteria busybodies do things, like the Millwall fans. Are we now going to do a kneel before every sporting event for the rest of time? Why aren't we kneeling in solidarity for the racial abuse McClean suffers. Like the poppies, this gesture is now being forced upon football before any game. It has lost its credibility.

So why did Millwall supporters boo the taking of the knee?

And why did the Millwall team then not take the knee for their next match?

You're now portraying Millwall supporters as victims in this

How are they victims?

Again, deliberately inflammatory language and whataboutery permeates your post - that is not good faith engagement

The millwall team didn't do it in their next match because the manager said they wanted to make a stand in their own way.
Many people have an issue with the BLM movement, that it actually creates division instead of promoting unity. Im no millwall supprter but they obviously felt the same way, or dont like having an empty gesture forced upon the sport without any real action being done.
But god help anyone who refuses to be forced to take the knee or the double standard pitchfork wielding busybodies will be onto them.

The taking of the knee is not connected to the Black Lives Matter movement - it may have been at the start but it no longer is - it is a gesture by players - which was started at the behest of players, in support of racial equality

Why was that booed?

How is the taking of the knee "divisive"?

And to take up your talking point, how is the Black Lives Matter movement "divisive", or why should it deemed to be divisive?

I actually don't disagree that it is divisive - you can divide reactions to the BLM movement into those of anti-racists and those of racists

So it's quite instructive in setting out that divide

The Millwall team obviously didn't take a knee at the QPR game because the taking of the knee had been booed in a racist manner by their supporters, the club hierarchy were embarrassed, they didn't want a repeat and so caved in to the racists who booed it

It's an episode of shame for Millwall

Yes it is, it originates from Kaepernick and was the symbol of BLM. The taking of the knee is the players way of showing their solidarity to the BLM movement AND to racial equality.

I wasn't amongst the Millwall fans in the stadium so i don't know their reasoning behind it. I agree it doesn't look good and id be raging if my teams supporters did it, but blindly calling it racist is wrong. This is the fake hysteria and double standard im on about.
If you don't disagree that its divisive then there you go.

[sid waddell]

You used the term "people of colour". That is now deemed to be racist. They're black. Just like the Istanbul coach. Maybe you should check your own language, and ask your fellow members of the snowflake generation what are the correct terms to use before you start preaching to others.

The term "people of colour" is not deemed to be racist

I have no idea why you claim it is when presumably you know full well that it isn't

Again, "snowflake", "preaching", these are not good faith engagements, they are the calling cards of somebody with a wilfully closed mind who gets defensive when they can't defend their arguments

Yes it is. It is offensive to black people, that's widely known.
I'm defending my arguments, but i don't get my knickers in a twist over the words you use do I? Address the point i'm making or log off, you don't get to decide what words are "good faith engagements", and get off your high horse when you're at it.

Read your post back

In the same you post in which you claim you're not getting your knickers in a twist over words I use, you then do exactly that

"That's widely known", lolz

The term people of colour is a widely used and accepted term - and it does not preclude the use of the term "black people"

In a thread where you have consistently used the word "snowflake", you are now objecting to the use of a widely used and accepted term because you have run out of any other ideas -  the irony is spectacular

James McClean doesn't suffer racial abuse

Do you not see the irony in what you are saying - you are claiming that McClean suffers racial abuse - he doesn't - the abuse he takes is not for the colour of his skin or even because he is Irish (and I'm certainly not defending the abuse he takes, it's horrible) - but when Millwall fans boo the taking of the knee and I call it racist - because it is - there's literally no other way to interpret it - you then claim Millwall fans are victims

These Millwall fans who booed the taking of the knee are the same people who boo McClean for not wearing a poppy by the way

How can they be racists when they boo McClean, yet fearless warriors for free speech when they boo the taking of the knee?

You don't get to decide whether I'm logged on or logged off just because you can't deal with my points

I think any reasonable person can see that your engagements are not in good faith - and the angry tone of your posts is a giveaway that you yourself realise this on some level

Not quite Sid.
"People of colour" is an offensive term to black people. They're not "coloured",  they're black. The fact you act like a know-it-all but don't know something so basic as this is hilarious.

You can't engage or offer a credible debate so you resort to getting offended at the words I use, make your mind up.
As you have done before on this board, you seem to pick out the word snowflake quite a lot when people break down your argument, and target that word instead of the point they make. That is snowflake behaviour.

McClean does suffer racial abuse, but because he's not black then people like you get all fake outraged.
Booing the take of the knee is not in itself racist either.

The term "people of colour" is a widely used and accepted term - and it does not preclude the use of the term "black people"

You really need to get onto Channel 4 News, BBC, the Guardian, Amensty International etc. and indeed all the people of colour who use the term

You do understand that the term "people of colour" and the term "coloured" are NOT the same thing? Right? I only say it because from that post it appears you don't understand that

It's actually hilarious seeing somebody whose central point is to deny or downplay racism then turning around and branding things which are not racist as racist, purely because they've run out of ideas

The irony is spectacular

i) Again, the abuse McClean takes for not wearing a poppy is not racist because the abuse is not because of the colour of his skin, nor is it even because he is Irish - it is because of him not wearing a poppy and because of public utterances which lead to him being perceived as a supporter of Irish Republicanism including the IRA - I agree that the abuse he takes is vile and certainly some of those who abuse him are racists and generally horrible people, but the fact remains that booing somebody for not wearing a poppy is not in itself racist

ii) The taking of the knee is a gesture which is explicitly in support of racial equality

You can't claim with a straight face, or expect to be taken seriously, if you claim, as you do that i) is racist, but booing ii) is not racist

It's utterly ludicrous

[sid waddell]

Exactly my point. Selective double standards that is doing more harm than good.
Agree on taking the knee as well, it's an empty gesture at this stage and is being forced on teams now, like their poppies every year too. Both of which shouldn't be in or be part of football.

If it was an empty gesture, there wouldn't be such opposition to it from racists, like at Millwall last weekend

There you go. You label those who don't wish to conform to the way the fake hysteria busybodies do things, like the Millwall fans. Are we now going to do a kneel before every sporting event for the rest of time? Why aren't we kneeling in solidarity for the racial abuse McClean suffers. Like the poppies, this gesture is now being forced upon football before any game. It has lost its credibility.

So why did Millwall supporters boo the taking of the knee?

And why did the Millwall team then not take the knee for their next match?

You're now portraying Millwall supporters as victims in this

How are they victims?

Again, deliberately inflammatory language and whataboutery permeates your post - that is not good faith engagement

The millwall team didn't do it in their next match because the manager said they wanted to make a stand in their own way.
Many people have an issue with the BLM movement, that it actually creates division instead of promoting unity. Im no millwall supprter but they obviously felt the same way, or dont like having an empty gesture forced upon the sport without any real action being done.
But god help anyone who refuses to be forced to take the knee or the double standard pitchfork wielding busybodies will be onto them.

The taking of the knee is not connected to the Black Lives Matter movement - it may have been at the start but it no longer is - it is a gesture by players - which was started at the behest of players, in support of racial equality

Why was that booed?

How is the taking of the knee "divisive"?

And to take up your talking point, how is the Black Lives Matter movement "divisive", or why should it deemed to be divisive?

I actually don't disagree that it is divisive - you can divide reactions to the BLM movement into those of anti-racists and those of racists

So it's quite instructive in setting out that divide

The Millwall team obviously didn't take a knee at the QPR game because the taking of the knee had been booed in a racist manner by their supporters, the club hierarchy were embarrassed, they didn't want a repeat and so caved in to the racists who booed it

It's an episode of shame for Millwall

Yes it is, it originates from Kaepernick and was the symbol of BLM. The taking of the knee is the players way of showing their solidarity to the BLM movement AND to racial equality.

I wasn't amongst the Millwall fans in the stadium so i don't know their reasoning behind it. I agree it doesn't look good and id be raging if my teams supporters did it, but blindly calling it racist is wrong. This is the fake hysteria and double standard im on about.
If you don't disagree that its divisive then there you go.

But there is no longer a link between BLM and football, the BLM slogans disappeared at the end of the season in July/August

The taking of the knee continued

Also Colin Kaepernick is not Black Lives Matter

There is no other interpretation of the booing of it other than that it was racist - it is a gesture in solidarity with the idea of racial equality

There is no reason to boo it except disagreement with the idea of racial equality

[sid waddell]

Also Give It To Shooters, you are explicitly calling all those who boo James McClean racist, while simultaneously claiming that it is wrong to say that those who booed the taking of the knee (which is a gesture in support of racial equality) are doing so because of racist motivations

That is an unsquareable circle

And again it's very ironic, considering you were talking about "double standards"

I'd say it's more a case of you getting things upside down, inside out

[GiveItToTheShooters]

You used the term "people of colour". That is now deemed to be racist. They're black. Just like the Istanbul coach. Maybe you should check your own language, and ask your fellow members of the snowflake generation what are the correct terms to use before you start preaching to others.

The term "people of colour" is not deemed to be racist

I have no idea why you claim it is when presumably you know full well that it isn't

Again, "snowflake", "preaching", these are not good faith engagements, they are the calling cards of somebody with a wilfully closed mind who gets defensive when they can't defend their arguments

Yes it is. It is offensive to black people, that's widely known.
I'm defending my arguments, but i don't get my knickers in a twist over the words you use do I? Address the point i'm making or log off, you don't get to decide what words are "good faith engagements", and get off your high horse when you're at it.

Read your post back

In the same you post in which you claim you're not getting your knickers in a twist over words I use, you then do exactly that

"That's widely known", lolz

The term people of colour is a widely used and accepted term - and it does not preclude the use of the term "black people"

In a thread where you have consistently used the word "snowflake", you are now objecting to the use of a widely used and accepted term because you have run out of any other ideas -  the irony is spectacular

James McClean doesn't suffer racial abuse

Do you not see the irony in what you are saying - you are claiming that McClean suffers racial abuse - he doesn't - the abuse he takes is not for the colour of his skin or even because he is Irish (and I'm certainly not defending the abuse he takes, it's horrible) - but when Millwall fans boo the taking of the knee and I call it racist - because it is - there's literally no other way to interpret it - you then claim Millwall fans are victims

These Millwall fans who booed the taking of the knee are the same people who boo McClean for not wearing a poppy by the way

How can they be racists when they boo McClean, yet fearless warriors for free speech when they boo the taking of the knee?

You don't get to decide whether I'm logged on or logged off just because you can't deal with my points

I think any reasonable person can see that your engagements are not in good faith - and the angry tone of your posts is a giveaway that you yourself realise this on some level

Not quite Sid.
"People of colour" is an offensive term to black people. They're not "coloured",  they're black. The fact you act like a know-it-all but don't know something so basic as this is hilarious.

You can't engage or offer a credible debate so you resort to getting offended at the words I use, make your mind up.
As you have done before on this board, you seem to pick out the word snowflake quite a lot when people break down your argument, and target that word instead of the point they make. That is snowflake behaviour.

McClean does suffer racial abuse, but because he's not black then people like you get all fake outraged.
Booing the take of the knee is not in itself racist either.

The term "people of colour" is a widely used and accepted term - and it does not preclude the use of the term "black people"

You really need to get onto Channel 4 News, BBC, the Guardian, Amensty International etc. and indeed all the people of colour who use the term

You do understand that the term "people of colour" and the term "coloured" are NOT the same thing? Right? I only say it because from that post it appears you don't understand that

It's actually hilarious seeing somebody whose central point is to deny or downplay racism then turning around and branding things which are not racist as racist, purely because they've run out of ideas

The irony is spectacular

i) Again, the abuse McClean takes for not wearing a poppy is not racist because the abuse is not because of the colour of his skin, nor is it even because he is Irish - it is because of him not wearing a poppy and because of public utterances which lead to him being perceived as a supporter of Irish Republicanism including the IRA - I agree that the abuse he takes is vile and certainly some of those who abuse him are racists and generally horrible people, but the fact remains that booing somebody for not wearing a poppy is not in itself racist

ii) The taking of the knee is a gesture which is explicitly in support of racial equality

You can't claim with a straight face, or expect to be taken seriously, if you claim, as you do that i) is racist and booing ii) is not racist

It's utterly ludicrous

No it isn't. The term is offensive to black people. The irony is that you use this offensive term while trying to portray yourself as some sort of racial progressive

I'm not talking about poppies. McClean has suffered racial abuse in the past, because he is Irish, but the double standard brigade that you are part of sees no issue, only because he isn't black.
Ill address poppies since you brought it up, you claim that it isnt racist to boo someone for not wearing a poppy, but it is racist to boo someone not taking the knee.
Now THAT is what's utterly ludicrous. Make your mind up
You pitchfork-wielding fake hysteria crowd don't get to adjudicate, and you only do it anyway to suit your own narrative. 

[sid waddell]

Any chance of a mod deleting the last 3 pages?

Which parts would you like deleted?

Some?

All?

Do please expand, and give reasons

[J70]

1. The fake outrage of the whole population, and how they're commenting on the matter, with their pitchforks out for the 4th official. You contradict yourself there also, for some reason you seem to think white people can't be offended for being called white, but black people can be offended for being called black. That is the double standard, and people like you play a part in this double standard snowflake culture because people like you think they can tell people what they can and cannot be offended by, but you don't have that right. It's either racist, or it isn't.

The "whole population" "with their pitchforks out for the 4th official"?

The whole population of where? The whole population of some Twitter thread?

I didn't tell anyone what they can or cannot be offended by. I said that white people do not have cause to be offended for being singled out as white based on the history of racism like black people would. Lots of people feel they are victims for bullshit reasons. Look at the Republican base in the US. Doesn't mean it is justified or that there is a real double standard at play.

2. I haven't a clue what you're on about here. I'm saying the snowflake generation are trying to turn non racist things out to be racist, and this is now the culture that they are forcing upon us. A commentator cannot now praise Sterling or Traore's speed after good play without the fear of the woke fake hysteria crowd getting their pitchforks out.

Pitchforks again.

The BBC's concerns about sensitivity are based on real historical facts. There WAS racist commentary and stereotyping of black players. As with any issue like this, the solutions are not always neat and cut and dried. Cultural evolution can be clumsy or over-cautious; there's no manual to refer to. Most people are happy to let it play out. Others wine about political correctness or, in the example of a former member here, not being allowed to use the "n" word when some black people use it themselves.

3. You're mistaken here. PSG walking off the pitch isn't the issue. It's the fake hysteria surrounding a nothing issue, a black man being called a black man. Again, I'm not talking about McClean and poppies, i'm talking about the abuse he gets for being Irish etc and the difference in the fake outrage of a black man being called a black man and McClean's racial abuse. But because he's not black and he's irish no one has the pitchforks out for those who abuse him. Double standards and fake outrage in a nutshell. It's only an issue when it suits them, and this does more harm than good.

We're going around in circles. The vast majority of people probably aren't even aware of McClean, his protest and the abuse he gets. Wider society just doesn't seem to care that much. Neither, according to him, do his Irish teammates. Most people in the south have, rightly or wrongly, moved on from the Troubles; so have most of the English. We're mostly all friends now. McClean is protesting something that mostly happened 30-50 years ago (in a clumsy, self-sabotaging manner, at times), whereas racism against black people is still a "here and now" problem. One person and his relatively parochial cause against a worldwide issue.

4. I'll use another example then.
"Chairman/woman" – Chair, chairperson, convenor, head. "Manpower" – Human resources, labour force, staff, personnel, workers, workforce. "Sportsmanship" – Fairness, good humour, sense of fair play.
These are some of the words the snowflake generation are trying to cancel, or else you face public victimisation if you use them. This is the culture that is creeping in, and as outlined in point 2, stems from fake outrage and double standards.

Again, on the words themselves, so what?

On the supposed pile-on for those who do use those words, any chance of examples of this victimization?

[GiveItToTheShooters]

Exactly my point. Selective double standards that is doing more harm than good.
Agree on taking the knee as well, it's an empty gesture at this stage and is being forced on teams now, like their poppies every year too. Both of which shouldn't be in or be part of football.

If it was an empty gesture, there wouldn't be such opposition to it from racists, like at Millwall last weekend

There you go. You label those who don't wish to conform to the way the fake hysteria busybodies do things, like the Millwall fans. Are we now going to do a kneel before every sporting event for the rest of time? Why aren't we kneeling in solidarity for the racial abuse McClean suffers. Like the poppies, this gesture is now being forced upon football before any game. It has lost its credibility.

So why did Millwall supporters boo the taking of the knee?

And why did the Millwall team then not take the knee for their next match?

You're now portraying Millwall supporters as victims in this

How are they victims?

Again, deliberately inflammatory language and whataboutery permeates your post - that is not good faith engagement

The millwall team didn't do it in their next match because the manager said they wanted to make a stand in their own way.
Many people have an issue with the BLM movement, that it actually creates division instead of promoting unity. Im no millwall supprter but they obviously felt the same way, or dont like having an empty gesture forced upon the sport without any real action being done.
But god help anyone who refuses to be forced to take the knee or the double standard pitchfork wielding busybodies will be onto them.

The taking of the knee is not connected to the Black Lives Matter movement - it may have been at the start but it no longer is - it is a gesture by players - which was started at the behest of players, in support of racial equality

Why was that booed?

How is the taking of the knee "divisive"?

And to take up your talking point, how is the Black Lives Matter movement "divisive", or why should it deemed to be divisive?

I actually don't disagree that it is divisive - you can divide reactions to the BLM movement into those of anti-racists and those of racists

So it's quite instructive in setting out that divide

The Millwall team obviously didn't take a knee at the QPR game because the taking of the knee had been booed in a racist manner by their supporters, the club hierarchy were embarrassed, they didn't want a repeat and so caved in to the racists who booed it

It's an episode of shame for Millwall

Yes it is, it originates from Kaepernick and was the symbol of BLM. The taking of the knee is the players way of showing their solidarity to the BLM movement AND to racial equality.

I wasn't amongst the Millwall fans in the stadium so i don't know their reasoning behind it. I agree it doesn't look good and id be raging if my teams supporters did it, but blindly calling it racist is wrong. This is the fake hysteria and double standard im on about.
If you don't disagree that its divisive then there you go.

But there is no longer a link between BLM and football, the BLM slogans disappeared at the end of the season in July/August

The taking of the knee continued

Also Colin Kaepernick is not Black Lives Matter

There is no other interpretation of the booing of it other than that it was racist - it is a gesture in solidarity with the idea of racial equality

There is no reason to boo it except disagreement with the idea of racial equality

I never said he was BLM. I said that's where it came from.
The taking of the knee is used in football to carry on BLM's message, and that is the now universal symbol for racial equality, and as this is done before every game, there most definitely is a link between BLM and football.
No other interpretation for it being racist just because you said so? People don't appreciate the divisiveness the BLM movement can be, and the fact an empty gesture is forced upon the game by the double standard brigade, when other issues are overlooked, maybe that's why.
However booing the not wearing the poppy is not racist, but booing not taking the knee is. You're some craic. The irony is fantastic

[GiveItToTheShooters]

Also Give It To Shooters, you are explicitly calling all those who boo James McClean racist, while simultaneously claiming that it is wrong to say that those who booed the taking of the knee (which is a gesture in support of racial equality) are doing so because of racist motivations

That is an unsquareable circle

And again it's very ironic, considering you were talking about "double standards"

I'd say it's more a case of you getting things upside down, inside out

Not all abuse he gets is racist, some of it is, some is sectarian.
You don't know their reasoning, it could be regarding the BLM movement and the empty gestures and the ignoring of other issues. But to blindly label it as racism would be wide of the mark
Hope that clarifies for you.

[sid waddell]

No it isn't. The term is offensive to black people. The irony is that you use this offensive term while trying to portray yourself as some sort of racial progressive

I'm not talking about poppies. McClean has suffered racial abuse in the past, because he is Irish, but the double standard brigade that you are part of sees no issue, only because he isn't black.
Ill address poppies since you brought it up, you claim that it isnt racist to boo someone for not wearing a poppy, but it is racist to boo someone not taking the knee.
Now THAT is what's utterly ludicrous. Make your mind up
You pitchfork-wielding fake hysteria crowd don't get to adjudicate, and you only do it anyway to suit your own narrative.

You're talking complete ráiméis

Again, the term "people of colour" is a widely used and accepted term

It is used throughout public discourse including by people of racial and ethnic minorities

In your previous post you displayed that you didn't understand the difference between the term "people of colour" and the term "coloured", which is no longer considered an acceptable term, except in relation to the South African "coloured" people, who self-identify as such

This is spectacular ignorance of such basic terminology

Your continual invocation of McClean is ludicrous

You're using him purely as a prop to try and deflect away from a deeply racist narrative that refuses point blank to engage with what real victims of racism are saying

Stunning ignorance

[sid waddell]

Also Give It To Shooters, you are explicitly calling all those who boo James McClean racist, while simultaneously claiming that it is wrong to say that those who booed the taking of the knee (which is a gesture in support of racial equality) are doing so because of racist motivations

That is an unsquareable circle

And again it's very ironic, considering you were talking about "double standards"

I'd say it's more a case of you getting things upside down, inside out

Not all abuse he gets is racist, some of it is, some is sectarian.
You don't know their reasoning, it could be regarding the BLM movement and the empty gestures and the ignoring of other issues. But to blindly label it as racism would be wide of the mark
Hope that clarifies for you.

The reasoning is self-evident

It is not an empty gesture, otherwise it would not meet such opposition

You still don't get it

McClean is not being abused because of the colour of his skin or his ethnicity or his religion

He is being abused because he took a stand which offends little Englanders, and because he is not shy about voicing political opinions which offend little Englanders

And you haven't dealt with your own double standards

You're all over the place and it is getting pitiful

[GiveItToTheShooters]

1. The fake outrage of the whole population, and how they're commenting on the matter, with their pitchforks out for the 4th official. You contradict yourself there also, for some reason you seem to think white people can't be offended for being called white, but black people can be offended for being called black. That is the double standard, and people like you play a part in this double standard snowflake culture because people like you think they can tell people what they can and cannot be offended by, but you don't have that right. It's either racist, or it isn't.

The "whole population" "with their pitchforks out for the 4th official"?

The whole population of where? The whole population of some Twitter thread?

I didn't tell anyone what they can or cannot be offended by. I said that white people do not have cause to be offended for being singled out as white based on the history of racism like black people would. Lots of people feel they are victims for bullshit reasons. Look at the Republican base in the US. Doesn't mean it is justified or that there is a real double standard at play.

2. I haven't a clue what you're on about here. I'm saying the snowflake generation are trying to turn non racist things out to be racist, and this is now the culture that they are forcing upon us. A commentator cannot now praise Sterling or Traore's speed after good play without the fear of the woke fake hysteria crowd getting their pitchforks out.

Pitchforks again.

The BBC's concerns about sensitivity are based on real historical facts. There WAS racist commentary and stereotyping of black players. As with any issue like this, the solutions are not always neat and cut and dried. Cultural evolution can be clumsy or over-cautious; there's no manual to refer to. Most people are happy to let it play out. Others wine about political correctness or, in the example of a former member here, not being allowed to use the "n" word when some black people use it themselves.

3. You're mistaken here. PSG walking off the pitch isn't the issue. It's the fake hysteria surrounding a nothing issue, a black man being called a black man. Again, I'm not talking about McClean and poppies, i'm talking about the abuse he gets for being Irish etc and the difference in the fake outrage of a black man being called a black man and McClean's racial abuse. But because he's not black and he's irish no one has the pitchforks out for those who abuse him. Double standards and fake outrage in a nutshell. It's only an issue when it suits them, and this does more harm than good.

We're going around in circles. The vast majority of people probably aren't even aware of McClean, his protest and the abuse he gets. Wider society just doesn't seem to care that much. Neither, according to him, do his Irish teammates. Most people in the south have, rightly or wrongly, moved on from the Troubles; so have most of the English. We're mostly all friends now. McClean is protesting something that mostly happened 30-50 years ago (in a clumsy, self-sabotaging manner, at times), whereas racism against black people is still a "here and now" problem. One person and his relatively parochial cause against a worldwide issue.

4. I'll use another example then.
"Chairman/woman" – Chair, chairperson, convenor, head. "Manpower" – Human resources, labour force, staff, personnel, workers, workforce. "Sportsmanship" – Fairness, good humour, sense of fair play.
These are some of the words the snowflake generation are trying to cancel, or else you face public victimisation if you use them. This is the culture that is creeping in, and as outlined in point 2, stems from fake outrage and double standards.

Again, on the words themselves, so what?

On the supposed pile-on for those who do use those words, any chance of examples of this victimization?

1. You claim again that you dont get to decide what people get offended by, then proceed to say white people have no reason to be offended. Make your mind up. That is double standards.
2. I'm talking about the phrases they have banned. This is the work of snowflakes getting fake outraged.
3. That's irrelevant. Doesn't make the abuse he gets ok. Calling a black man a black man is deemed racist but mcclean being called an Irish (insert whatever slur you want) is not deemed racist or discriminatory. And therein lies the fake outrage.
4. Yes, the snowflake generation publicly victimising and attacking people who dont use this new "progressive" vocabulary. Therefore doing more harm to the issue than good.

[J70]

1. The fake outrage of the whole population, and how they're commenting on the matter, with their pitchforks out for the 4th official. You contradict yourself there also, for some reason you seem to think white people can't be offended for being called white, but black people can be offended for being called black. That is the double standard, and people like you play a part in this double standard snowflake culture because people like you think they can tell people what they can and cannot be offended by, but you don't have that right. It's either racist, or it isn't.

The "whole population" "with their pitchforks out for the 4th official"?

The whole population of where? The whole population of some Twitter thread?

I didn't tell anyone what they can or cannot be offended by. I said that white people do not have cause to be offended for being singled out as white based on the history of racism like black people would. Lots of people feel they are victims for bullshit reasons. Look at the Republican base in the US. Doesn't mean it is justified or that there is a real double standard at play.

2. I haven't a clue what you're on about here. I'm saying the snowflake generation are trying to turn non racist things out to be racist, and this is now the culture that they are forcing upon us. A commentator cannot now praise Sterling or Traore's speed after good play without the fear of the woke fake hysteria crowd getting their pitchforks out.

Pitchforks again.

The BBC's concerns about sensitivity are based on real historical facts. There WAS racist commentary and stereotyping of black players. As with any issue like this, the solutions are not always neat and cut and dried. Cultural evolution can be clumsy or over-cautious; there's no manual to refer to. Most people are happy to let it play out. Others wine about political correctness or, in the example of a former member here, not being allowed to use the "n" word when some black people use it themselves.

3. You're mistaken here. PSG walking off the pitch isn't the issue. It's the fake hysteria surrounding a nothing issue, a black man being called a black man. Again, I'm not talking about McClean and poppies, i'm talking about the abuse he gets for being Irish etc and the difference in the fake outrage of a black man being called a black man and McClean's racial abuse. But because he's not black and he's irish no one has the pitchforks out for those who abuse him. Double standards and fake outrage in a nutshell. It's only an issue when it suits them, and this does more harm than good.

We're going around in circles. The vast majority of people probably aren't even aware of McClean, his protest and the abuse he gets. Wider society just doesn't seem to care that much. Neither, according to him, do his Irish teammates. Most people in the south have, rightly or wrongly, moved on from the Troubles; so have most of the English. We're mostly all friends now. McClean is protesting something that mostly happened 30-50 years ago (in a clumsy, self-sabotaging manner, at times), whereas racism against black people is still a "here and now" problem. One person and his relatively parochial cause against a worldwide issue.

4. I'll use another example then.
"Chairman/woman" – Chair, chairperson, convenor, head. "Manpower" – Human resources, labour force, staff, personnel, workers, workforce. "Sportsmanship" – Fairness, good humour, sense of fair play.
These are some of the words the snowflake generation are trying to cancel, or else you face public victimisation if you use them. This is the culture that is creeping in, and as outlined in point 2, stems from fake outrage and double standards.

Again, on the words themselves, so what?

On the supposed pile-on for those who do use those words, any chance of examples of this victimization?

1. You claim again that you dont get to decide what people get offended by, then proceed to say white people have no reason to be offended. Make your mind up. That is double standards.
2. I'm talking about the phrases they have banned. This is the work of snowflakes getting fake outraged.
3. That's irrelevant. Doesn't make the abuse he gets ok. Calling a black man a black man is deemed racist but mcclean being called an Irish (insert whatever slur you want) is not deemed racist or discriminatory. And therein lies the fake outrage.
4. Yes, the snowflake generation publicly victimising and attacking people who dont use this new "progressive" vocabulary. Therefore doing more harm to the issue than good.

1. I said no reason based on the history of racism. You even bolded it FFS.
2. You're the only one here getting outraged. Most people are happy to go along with it.
3. That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. You can give zero fucks about James McClean, probably because you don't even know about him, while still rejecting racism or even prematurely losing your shit over what that linesman said.
4. No examples then?