The Football News Thread 2022/23

[Kenny]

Steve Hodge is selling the shirt he got from Maradona after the 86 Hand of God game. They reckon he will pick up £4m for it!! Decent swappage there, I reckon Diego used his Hodge England top to clean his house with

So loads of stories on this and they use pictures from a few years back of him with the shirt and one confuses me

"So Steve, can you hold the shirt up for us....actually make it look like you wear it all day and have no other tops...yep still hold it, you would look a daft twat wearing it mate"

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

1994 definitely was a different time.

Little Britain finished in 2007 and that is pretty much universally condemned (even by the creators) as unacceptable now. You can't hold people to different standards nearly 30 years on, especially when they acknowledge that they would never do it now. It's not like Jim Davidson doing the same act as he did in 1976.

There's no way I thought "that's racist" as a 13 year old in 1994. I did think Jason Lee was shite though.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Slavery was accepted at the time should we not condemn those who took part in it then?

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

This is an odd tangent.

Did you think it was racist in 1994?

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

This is an odd tangent.

Did you think it was racist in 1994?

I am just interested in the general thought process, if we are accepting minor forms of racism because they were accepted of the time, should we accept major ones too? It's a genuine question, i think it's an interesting discussion point.

 

[The Bear]

There's a difference between calling someone's place of business a mildly unacceptable term, and the physical subjugation of an entire race.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

I don't "accept" it as such, I accept that standards were different then and as much as we remember it as if it were yesterday, it's actually quite a long time ago. Slavery isn't racism is it, it's er, slavery.

Also whataboutery is the refuge of desperation. (Not levelled at you, the dickheads who reckon Baddiel can't call out Le Tissier for what he did yesterday because he did something ill-judged [but ok by the standards of the time] nearly 30 years ago)

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

There's a difference between calling someone's place of business a mildly unacceptable term, and the physical subjugation of an entire race.

I agree, of course i agree. But they're still the same face of the coin.

The statue of Colston is probably a good example, he was very much of his time, made a lot of money off the back of slavery, but was admired locally.

Obviously now we look back and think, "what a cunt". But ultimately isn't this just a man of his time?

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

I don't "accept" it as such, I accept that standards were different then and as much as we remember it as if it were yesterday, it's actually quite a long time ago. Slavery isn't racism is it, it's er, slavery.

Also whataboutery is the refuge of desperation. (Not levelled at you, the dickheads who reckon Baddiel can't call out Le Tissier for what he did yesterday because he did something ill-judged [but ok by the standards of the time] nearly 30 years ago)

Totally agree with your last sentence, i just think there is a little bit of hypocrisy here if we are going to make apologies for the like of Baddiel or Little Britain, is it ok to make apologies for Colston and Churchill too?

I know this is an argument that the right like to use, but how if you are saying Baddiel or Trudeau was ok to blackface in the 90s which was seen as perfectly acceptable, can we also think it's ok to pull down statues of Colston? (and i agree with both, it just seems a contradiction that i can't square.)

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

I wouldn't make apologies for Churchill, he was a horrible fat racist cunt.

Ultimately standards change over time. You can't predict what will or won't be acceptable in years to come, I know there's language I've used in the past (calling Olofinjana "gay" for pulling out of tackles, for example) that I would never even think of using now.

 

[AndyWolves]

Baddiel has himself apologised for his treatment of Jason Lee. The point stands it was acceptable at the time and isn't now. Whether that's right or not is another matter, but that's what the facts are

Are you expecting Baddiel to have known what was going to be culturally acceptable in 2022 when he made Fantasy Football?

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Sigh, Andy, you've clearly drawn a conclusion of what I think rather than reading what I was saying.

Are you expecting Baddiel to have known what was going to be culturally acceptable in 2022 when he made Fantasy Football?

No, of course not, i'm also saying that Colston wouldn't have known either, and whilst I was all for them pulling down his statue at the time, the Baddiel blackface shows that it's far more nuanced than i had considered before.

 

[Tony Towner]

I think what we have to consider is the uncomfortable truth that to white, heterosexual males there was - and in the cases of some there still is, an ingrained inferiority in anyone who doesn't tick all 3 of those boxes. The attitudes towards women, racial minorities and anyone gay was very much that they were second class or worse. You only need to see TV programmes from the time to see it demonstrated in all those instances. It was learnt superiority. Do you know how many kids were openly gay when I was in the 5th form in 1989 in a year of 300+? 0.

The further back you go, the worse that gets, leading to slavery being acceptable because those in slavery were so inferior it didn't count. Throw class in there and the disparity is even greater. Personally it's so inhuman I think it needs to be judged in a seperate category to evolving times

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Social morays change over time. Blackface comedy was still considered acceptable in 1994. Blatant racist TV was considered acceptable in the mid-70s. Slavery was considered perfectly normal until 1807. However, there are degrees of the offence. Slavery is clearly the worst offence of the three and should absolutely be a matter of national shame.

Baddiel has expressed his personal shame about the Jason Lee sketches and that is the right thing to do. I don't personally think there is any amount of "personal shame" that would exonerate the slave traders of 220 years ago.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Also 0 openly gay students at our (male only, well except for I think it was four token girls in sixth form) Grammar school at graduation in 1999.

Some quite obviously are gay as has been proven since (and all power to that elbow, I don't care who they sleep with) but they would no way have felt comfortable coming out then.

 

[AndyWolves]

Sigh, Andy, you've clearly drawn a conclusion of what I think rather than reading what I was saying.



No, of course not, i'm also saying that Colston wouldn't have known either, and whilst I was all for them pulling down his statue at the time, the Baddiel blackface shows that it's far more nuanced than i had considered before.

Apologies for misunderstanding.

I see the pulling down of Colstons statue as a reflection of how we view slavery through a modern lens. We find it so abhorrent that we tear down monuments to people involved even if the person demonstrated other virtues of "good".. I think it's fundamentally ok for society to change what it finds acceptable and to act on that.

It's not inconceivable that in the near future we'll be judged even more harshly by future generations for the damage we do to the planet on a daily basis. However, right now it's socially acceptable to not really care.

 

[Jabbawolf]

Social morays change over time. Blackface comedy was still considered acceptable in 1994. Blatant racist TV was considered acceptable in the mid-70s. Slavery was considered perfectly normal until 1807. However, there are degrees of the offence. Slavery is clearly the worst offence of the three and should absolutely be a matter of national shame.

Baddiel has expressed his personal shame about the Jason Lee sketches and that is the right thing to do. I don't personally think there is any amount of "personal shame" that would exonerate the slave traders of 220 years ago.

Isn’t slavery just an extreme case of racism where, mistakenly, white people were making their own lives better (which justified their actions to themselves) at the detriment of a (wrongly) perceived lesser class of human.

Please do not take this a defence of slavery, but just as an example of how when we see ourselves as in any way better than another group of fellow humans, we can start excusing abominable behaviour - this could be slavery, workers rights, anti-semitism, and even the behaviour of a certain PM.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

I think it is a very extreme case of it yes. Plus lots of murder and removal of rights.

 

[sycophantia]

Apologies for misunderstanding.

I see the pulling down of Colstons statue as a reflection of how we view slavery through a modern lens. We find it so abhorrent that we tear down monuments to people involved even if the person demonstrated other virtues of "good".. I think it's fundamentally ok for society to change what it finds acceptable and to act on that.

It's not inconceivable that in the near future we'll be judged even more harshly by future generations for the damage we do to the planet on a daily basis. However, right now it's socially acceptable to not really care.

My youngest already judges my generation on its damage to the planet.
Slavery is abhorrent and as a nation we should hang our heads in shame, of course Wilberforce and his like deserve credit for their efforts.
I would also like other countries that were involved in slavery to hold their hands up.
One of the worst aspects of our part in slavery is the fact we've not long finished paying reparations to slave owners families, not sure how that was allowed

 

[Dennisons Wrong Foot]

I don't personally think there is any amount of "personal shame" that would exonerate the slave traders of 220 years ago.

220 years the slave traders and those making money from it were aware of criticism, so must have made a conscious decision that their activities were acceptable - but what about 450 years ago? I'm not aware of a 16th century Wilberforce trying to outlaw Francis Drake. If none of his contemporaries questioned his actions then it is more difficult to now portray him as evil.