Greg Clarke has resigned as FA chairman after using some offensive language during a conference with MPs

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54894864

His performance in front of the DCMS this morning was abysmal - all the detail on the MMT thread including a link to the DCMS hearing playback so you can judge for yourself

I will say that he should have gone weeks ago for his role in Project Big Picture - though after taking Leicester into Administration (and getting them a very cheap stadium as a result) he should have never been able to work at the Football League or FA subsequently - the epitome of all that has been wrong with the games authorities for decades

Another dinosaur gone!

Really good news for English football after him lying about his part in PBP.

Regardless of my opinion of him. There are way too many snowflakes in the world today.

This thread might be considered both political and race related. Would not be surprised to see it locked soon. http://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboar ... ed96b4305e

thelaughingclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:28 pm

This thread might be considered both political and race related. Would not be surprised to see it locked soon. http://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboar ... ed96b4305e

Seems football related to me. Perhaps you are reading too much unto it.

thelaughingclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:28 pm

This thread might be considered both political and race related. Would not be surprised to see it locked soon. http://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboar ... ed96b4305e

Not intended to break any rules if this is deemed political or race related, just reporting chairman of the FA resigning.

And?.... Oh dear, how sad, never mind! Wish Southgate would do the same.

I can't work out exactly what he's done wrong in this instance though. He referred to them as 'coloured footballers '. What is the correct term nowadays?

He said nothing untoward or derogatory.

Maybe it was the way he said it, not politically correct enough for the snowflakes who are waiting to pounce, pathetic really

Top Claret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:48 pm

He said nothing untoward or derogatory.

Maybe it was the way he said it, not politically correct enough for the snowflakes who are waiting to pounce, pathetic really

You don’t think it’s derogatory to say that homosexuals are making a life choice?

Seems to me like the game will probably be in a better place without his dated views.

groove wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:43 pm

I can't work out exactly what he's done wrong in this instance though. He referred to them as 'coloured footballers '. What is the correct term nowadays?

Maybe educate yourself

groove wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:43 pm

I can't work out exactly what he's done wrong in this instance though. He referred to them as 'coloured footballers '. What is the correct term nowadays?

Is that a serious question?

Surely not

groove wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:43 pm

I can't work out exactly what he's done wrong in this instance though. He referred to them as 'coloured footballers '. What is the correct term nowadays?

Footballers .... nothing more nothing less

Exactly.

I know I’ll get pelted for this but I genuinely don’t understand, I’m sure someone will educate me. Why is it offensive saying a coloured person but not offensive to say a person of colour.

snapcrackleandpop wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:57 pm

I know I’ll get pelted for this but I genuinely don’t understand, I’m sure someone will educate me. Why is it offensive saying a coloured person but not offensive to say a person of colour.
Here go’s.

We're all coloured.

Would a black person calling me white, be considered racist?

Firthy wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:02 pm

Would a black person calling me white, be considered racist?

Why would it?

Firthy wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:02 pm

Would a black person calling me white, be considered racist?

If it makes you feel better, yes.

Top Claret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:48 pm

He said nothing untoward or derogatory.

Maybe it was the way he said it, not politically correct enough for the snowflakes who are waiting to pounce, pathetic really

Is not calling some people "Snowflakes" a racist term in some quarters

I wouldn't class myself as a snowflake by any means but surely people can see why the term "coloured" is offensive?

jrgbfc wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:09 pm

I wouldn't class myself as a snowflake by any means but surely people can see why the term "coloured" is offensive?

I wouldn't even describe it as offensive, it's just that it sounds bloody stupid in 2020.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:49 pm

You don’t think it’s derogatory to say that homosexuals are making a life choice?

Seems to me like the game will probably be in a better place without his dated views.

It isn't derogatory.
Its clearly wrong, and shows his ignorance, but derogatory!! Why are people so thin skinned. Why can't they just accept he's a muppet without creating a song and dance about it.

I'm glad he's gone, for many reasons, but todays performance would be bottom of the list.

Colburn_Claret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:12 pm

It isn't derogatory.
Its clearly wrong, and shows his ignorance, but derogatory!! Why are people so thin skinned. Why can't they just accept he's a muppet without creating a song and dance about it.

I'm glad he's gone, for many reasons, but todays performance would be bottom of the list.

It isn’t derogatory to say that homosexuals are making a life choice? Really? You can call people thin-skinned or snowflakes all you like but the fact is that is a highly derogatory comment, and I can’t believe anyone can think otherwise.

jrgbfc wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:09 pm

I wouldn't class myself as a snowflake by any means but surely people can see why the term "coloured" is offensive?

No I can’t, so why is a “person of colour” not offensive?

Just for the record I couldn’t give a toss what colour people are if they are nice to me I’m nice to them.

People are offended by everything nowadays. This generation wouldn’t have survived a world war. They would have been more bothered about what people said. Haviing said that there are too many dinosaurs running the game so not sure it’s any great loss. Gordon Taylor is the worst of the lot imo.

Boss Hogg wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:27 pm

People are offended by everything nowadays. This generation wouldn’t have survived a world war. They would have been more bothered about what people said. Haviing said that there are too many dinosaurs running the game so not sure it’s any great loss. Gordon Taylor is the worst of the lot imo.

Don't forget though that some people (the number seems to be rising all the time) pretend to be offended to draw more attention to themselves and feel more significant.

He is a plank and deserved to be sacked

He really didn’t know in which foot to shoot himself

There was likely a time when 'coloured' was considered PC, but when words are co-opted or repurposed to be used as a slur against a person or people, they assume a racist/sexist/homophobic etc meaning. 'Coloured' is one such word. Person of colour is more PC, and will no doubt outstay its welcome when more inclusive and less clumsy language becomes commonplace. Black or Asian would be better, depending on who you're talking about, obviously.

For what it's worth I find it a bit disappointing that given multiple chances to respond to groove (and some others who have asked similar questions), who has not shown malice or said anything which would remove the benefit of the doubt, nobody has taken the opportunity to actually answer him in earnest.

I love how anyone claiming "people are too easily offended" are always the ones who are most offended.

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:03 pm

Why would it?

Why would it not? Or why should it not be.

You are serious need of re-education. Applications to Mr Xi Jin Ping. Stalin isn't around now.

But hey have you and the other bloke not noticed there is a moratorium on poltical talk on this dite. So behave

Stayingup wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:42 pm

Why would it not? Or why should it not be.

You are serious need of re-education. Applications to Mr Xi Jin Ping. Stalin isn't around now.

But hey have you and the other bloke not noticed there is a moratorium on poltical talk on this dite. So behave

If by the other bloke you mean me, I was asking a genuine question.

jrgbfc wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:09 pm

I wouldn't class myself as a snowflake by any means but surely people can see why the term "coloured" is offensive?

It's probably mainly due to a mingling with the US phrasing. It was tied in with the Jim Crow laws and all the racist issues linked to those.

I'd think it was due to him being out of touch rather than seeking to be offensive but, put together with his other hopelessly outdated sentiments, it's no surprise that he finally got pushed out. He'd have probably got away with one but it was gaff after gaff.

The quote below is how it is reported by Sky, I haven’t got time to trawl through the complete Q&A. If that is correct he is highlighting that female players and non-caucasion players are the victims of social media abuse primarily for being female or non-caucasion.
HE IS NOT DEFENDING THAT.
The world is on it’s arse.

huw.Y.WattfromWare wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 8:31 pm

The quote below is how it is reported by Sky, I haven’t got time to trawl through the complete Q&A.

If that is correct he is highlighting that female players and non-caucasion players are the victims of social media abuse primarily for being female or non-caucasion.
HE IS NOT DEFENDING THAT.
The world is on it’s arse.

Bit more than that. I don't mean to be an arse by saying this but you'd have done yourself a favour by reading into the story a bit more before coming to that conclusion. He alluded to a few old stereotypes about South Asian people and women, and said something about homosexuality as a 'choice' (a claim widely rejected by academia). His heart is probably in the right place but this isn't the first time he's put his foot in his mouth, and he's been sacked for being useless in his capacity as chairman where a higher level of understanding, higher standard of communication, and lets face it, better public relation skills are demanded.

“Girls 6,7 and 8 don’t like having the ball kicked at them hard, they prefer to kick the ball”

FME that seems correct.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:15 pm

It isn’t derogatory to say that homosexuals are making a life choice? Really? You can call people thin-skinned or snowflakes all you like but the fact is that is a highly derogatory comment, and I can’t believe anyone can think otherwise.

You need to look up the meaning of derogatory.
He wasn't being critical or even disrespectful, he was just showing his ignorance.
For that he should be shown the error of his thinking, but the ott reaction of some is madness. If anyone can get upset by that statement, then I think they are the ones with deep issues.
Its a sad world where people are frightened to say anything, for fear of upsetting someone. Self confidence comes from accepting who you are, and liking yourself. If you do that you really couldn't give a damn what anyone else says about you.

Colburn_Claret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 9:23 pm

You need to look up the meaning of derogatory.
He wasn't being critical or even disrespectful, he was just showing his ignorance.
For that he should be shown the error of his thinking, but the ott reaction of some is madness. If anyone can get upset by that statement, then I think they are the ones with deep issues.
Its a sad world where people are frightened to say anything, for fear of upsetting someone. Self confidence comes from accepting who you are, and liking yourself. If you do that you really couldn't give a damn what anyone else says about you.

Yes he was showing his ignorance - and this is the kicker - while trying to explain (boasting actually) how enlightened the FA was under his leadership, how much more diverse they were than any other major UK Sports organisation, how the board was representative of British society and how they no longer needed to call organisations like Stonewall in to educate them on the right way to approach LGBT inclusion, it was absolutely farcical.

Chester Perry wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 9:29 pm

Yes he was showing his ignorance - and this is the kicker - while trying to explain (boasting actually) how enlightened the FA was under his leadership, how much more diverse they were than any other major UK Sports organisation, how the board was representative of British society and how they no longer needed to call organisations like Stonewall in to educate them on the right way to approach LGBT inclusion, it was absolutely farcical.

I don't disagree Chester, he was right to walk, and if he didn't he should have been pushed. A farce is what it was, but not something to get angry or upset about. More shake your head and roll your eyes.

Colburn_Claret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 9:23 pm

You need to look up the meaning of derogatory.
He wasn't being critical or even disrespectful, he was just showing his ignorance.
For that he should be shown the error of his thinking, but the ott reaction of some is madness. If anyone can get upset by that statement, then I think they are the ones with deep issues.
Its a sad world where people are frightened to say anything, for fear of upsetting someone. Self confidence comes from accepting who you are, and liking yourself. If you do that you really couldn't give a damn what anyone else says about you.

I know perfectly well what derogatory means. Of course he’s being disrespectful by suggesting that homosexuals are making a lifestyle choice. I agree that his disrespect is probably borne of ignorance rather than anything more sinister, but that still doesn’t make it right. Someone in his role has no excuse to be ignorant of such matters.

Colburn_Claret wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 9:34 pm

I don't disagree Chester, he was right to walk, and if he didn't he should have been pushed. A farce is what it was, but not something to get angry or upset about. More shake your head and roll your eyes.

But I don’t see anyone getting angry or upset, or even offended as has been suggested.

snapcrackleandpop wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:57 pm

I know I’ll get pelted for this but I genuinely don’t understand, I’m sure someone will educate me. Why is it offensive saying a coloured person but not offensive to say a person of colour.

Because one is not offensive and one is highly offensive. Durrr.

And Lord help anyone who can’t tell the difference.

Spiral wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 8:42 pm

Bit more than that. I don't mean to be an arse by saying this but you'd have done yourself a favour by reading into the story a bit more before coming to that conclusion. He alluded to a few old stereotypes about South Asian people and women, and said something about homosexuality as a 'choice' (a claim widely rejected by academia). His heart is probably in the right place but this isn't the first time he's put his foot in his mouth, and he's been sacked for being useless in his capacity as chairman where a higher level of understanding, higher standard of communication, and lets face it, better public relation skills are demanded.

Fair enough. It just ticks me off that you don’t know from one day to the next what expression is allowed. I never want to say anything racist but you end up scared to speak, not knowing who will be offended.

huw.Y.WattfromWare wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 9:49 pm

Fair enough. It just ticks me off that you don’t know from one day to the next what expression is allowed. I never want to say anything racist but you end up scared to speak, not knowing who will be offended.

I suppose if you treat everyone the same you'd have no need to use any terminology?

dougcollins wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 9:57 pm

I suppose if you treat everyone the same you'd have no need to use any terminology?

Don’t think that would hold up, Doug.

Why should you never be able to use terminology simply because you weren’t aware of the particular phrase du jour?

By your logic, nobody who wasn’t racist but didn’t know the terminology would be able to discuss the subject.

The only people who could discuss the matter would be those who knew the terminology (whether they were racist or not) or people who were openly racist.

Stayingup wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:42 pm

Why would it not? Or why should it not be.

You are serious need of re-education. Applications to Mr Xi Jin Ping. Stalin isn't around now.

But hey have you and the other bloke not noticed there is a moratorium on poltical talk on this dite. So behave

If you're going to post a patronising reply, it always helps if your grammar is up to scratch.