It's good to hear that the authorities will act if anything occurs. Do you lot hold out any hope, or will this be 3 in a row? I don't agree with the game and normal fans having to suffer because of a few idiots, but is there anything else that can be done? Apologies for the multiple posts, I find it easier to read if the subject is split into sections instead of one big post. I didn't put this in the game thread, because I want that to hopefully remain racism free.
At this current moment in Holland I'd be more concerned about anti-Muslim chanting than anti-black. Either way I hope everyone just shuts the fcuk up and lets the players play.
If the ref does take the players off, you can be sure that fans and even players will use it as a way to get a game abandoned when their team isn't doing well. It sets a dangerous precedent. The only way to eradicate this kind of thing is to enforce the existing laws against racism. If someone is found to be shouting racist remarks, it can't be that hard to identify them with stewards, CCTV etc. On Sunday, Dwight Yorke knew exactly who he wanted to talk to. Ejecting them from the ground isn't good enough, detainment at Her Majesty's pleasure will give them plenty of time to think it over.
Problem is that Sepp Bladder did not indicate what would happen to the result if racist chants result in a walk-off. Hypothetical situation - PSV are 2-0 down with ten minutes to go. Do their fans start racist abuse in the hopes of having the game abandoned? At the moment it is unclear what the next steps would be. Would Arsenal automatically be handed the win? Would the game be replayed behind closed doors? etc Common sense would seem to dictate that Arsenal would be handed the win in the above situation but without this being clear then god knows what might happen.... Call it an unlikely scenario but these things should have been ironed out by now - especially after Bladder's comments and the ref indicating he would stop the game.
I reckon that if the game gets abandoned because of racist taunts... its a 3-0 loss to PSV~ like what happened with ROMA earlier in the champions league.. sure one fan threw a coin at Frisk, but none-the-less, the match was abandoned and roma given the loss (i know they were down anyway). Would like to hear what a demarcus beasley has to say about the actions of his,err.. supporters..
I hope the fans and club get this all sorted out. Calling off the game will have a tremendous impact both on this game, but the CL and football in general. Some good points made above.
Arsenal loses the match, the fans identified, banned, and detained. After all that has been going on and the good behavior of many English fans of late, I don't think it will happen.
He he he - just noticed your sig phishy.... Sorry about that, caught me on a bad day there.... Never mind, fame at last!!!!
I can't see the ref. making that decision unless it's clearly effecting the players on the pitch. And anyway the way I read the interview with the ref. it was not that he volunteered that he was suggesting taking off the players if it happened, but that he was asked by a journo if it was possible, to which he replied 'of course it is possible, it's in the rules.' But if the players did get called off the pitch, just think what might happen next time, it'll encourage all those idiots out there to do it again. Todays favourite phrase " It'll open a can of worms "
lol.. i know prawnie.. i thought it was funny~ ---------------- well, i'd hate to say it, but i feel that with all the hype regarding the racism and such.. it only encourages the behaviour and i can guarantee that we will see the same nonsense as we did 2 years ago. *sigh* it probably will be worse just to prove "their" point... senseless... shameful~
In somewhat related news: Two fans accused of racist taunting of Dwight Yorke have been arrested. (according to the BBC news ticker)
I am against racism no doubt, but I have a conflicted consience when it comes to arresting racist people. I mean are we not supposed to have freedom of speech. Dont get me wrong id rather it wasnt an issue in the first place but you know... ...who gets to decide what is allowed to be said and what isnt. Doesnt the very fact that someone is making that descision mean we no longer live in a truely free society. Are we not just all living under an elected dictatorship? Im sure Nicrophowhatsit will be along shortly to shoot me down
"It is the official position of the directors of this Board that soccer is a gentleman's game, and gentlemen do not shout racist taunts. We have therefore concluded also that only gentlemen attend soccer matches, and that therefore there is no racism in soccer. Any statements to the contrary will be rudely interrupted with reminders of human social progress and a token reference to some civil rights leader, preferably one who has already been assassinated. "Many sinister forces at work in the greater society are jealous of soccer's stature in the world as a universal force for healing and brotherhood among men. Some of them are known to be located on grassy knolls, while still others take spurious 8 mm films from a distance which may be referred to as 'snuff' films, as they are trying to 'snuff' out the respectable status of the World's Most Popular Sport. These forces should be taken no more seriously than the ravings of any Speaker's Corner lunatic, or any given pretense of suffering by middle class bourgeois 'punk' bands. It is the opinion of this Board that such people are hired by certain jealous sports owners, in particular, one Malcolm Glazer, and a coalition of feminists with penis envy. More serious vigilance is required of us all to maintain the purity of the name of Football everywhere throughout the globe, lest we yield Dunkirk, Battle of the Bulge, dogs and cats living together in sin, and homosexual trash can lids that clang all day and night." --Van Raaij, in an open letter to the National Enquirer and The Sun (UK), Martember 37, 2525 A. H. (After Hiddink) Geez, don't you people read the papers? There is no racism in Sport...
As i think has already been mentioned you cant abandon a match for the reasons being cited as it puts power in the fans hands to end a game early. Further more, while I expect a club to take responsibility for its fans, I also realise that they dont actually have much controll over them at any given moment in time, and thus to punish the club seems wrong to me. Lets also consider a situation where it is the Arsenal Away fans that are being racist. Arsenal gets penalised. THose people represent a tiny fraction of the global Arsenal fan base and yet we have to suffer. Hardly fair. Further more, as a rather devious individual it occurs to me that if I REALLY want to make sure Arsenal go through to the next round(s) all me and a few like minded folks have to do is go get membership to PSV, take our out seats with the Eindhoven fans, and in out best Dutch accents hurl abuse at the referee. Match is stopped. Arsenal win. Wooo.
I would imagine that they were arrested for creating a discturbance of some charge like that. I doubt the actual racist remarks are at issue. There have been some good points about how to deal with the issue. It is a Catch 22. If the issues is brought up and constantly in the news, it may incite more people to spew racist comments. However, do nothing, and it seems as if the issue is no big deal and not worthy of addressing. It is a delicate rope to walk, but I think it needs addressing. It seems over the years there have been step forward but many back as well.
Ah ya lucky for Bigsoccer i'm taking law and we just happened to start this unit. Said person who we will name "A", expresses their dislike for an indentifiable minority we shall name "b". If group "b" moves to press charges for creating a poisoned environment, no right can protect you. This is because you rights are not actually rights but something less, named "rights" which are something that can be removed. Rights have a limit, which is drawn when your rights interfer with the rights of another. So rasist chants, and anit-religous slogans, etc etc, clash with the rights of said group(s) . So basically you can say whatever the hell you want until you step on someone elses rights, hence an arrestable offence, which can be given a suprising amount of jail time or a shall we say massive fine. Oh ya and don't be fooled by the term "free society" your not free at all. A free society is an oxymoron. Societies by definition have rules and laws, and regulations(rules, laws and regulations are very different), so to have a society free of said rules wouldn't be a society at all. Dispite what you think about your local politition, hes alot smarter than you think, in a devilish kinda way, people will believe anything you tell them aslong as they think its positive.
Wiz, are you studying Canadian law or comparative? I.e., that's all very interesting but is it relevent in Eindhoven?
THats American Law, for sure. I dont know if the same can be said about the UK. Maybe it can. Our leaders seem to be in a big hurry to implement as many of America's laws as possible so its only a matter of time if it is not already. Bring on the ambulance chasers. Ooops too late. Thing thing that gets me with the whole "as long as it doesnt step on anybody elses toes bit" is its a bit catch 22-ish. Let me present an analogy that while a little flawed demonstrated my point I feel. I have a right to pass wind in a crowded elevator, else nature wouldnt have built me this way. Anti-Smoking Laws laws have proven that people have the right to breathe fresh air so they have a right not to wiff my farts. My right to fart then becomes null and void. However their right to not wiff my fart now infringes on my nature-given right to fart, so does not their right no to wiff it become null an void. And round we go, in an infinate loop. I think all humanities problems, at root, boil down to the fact that we as a species were never designed to live in the numbers, the population density, we now do.
Actually in canada there isn't a right to breathe fresh air, if any exist anymore. But there is a right to safe, and heathly environment. I hardly think breathing in a little extra methane(i mean honestly how large are your umm... butt coughs, that you could seriously harm my lunges ), can be compared to breathing in the infinite chemicals in cigarette smoke. But i do see your point. lets put it this way, shall we. All rights are bound to a collar of reason, and a reasonable limit. How many of you have hit on the sexy co-worker? It could be considered an intrusion on her rights, but reasonably it isn't unless you countinue, after the rejection...You can excercies your right not to constrict your bowels...as long as it doesn't effect the "performance" or the work environment of others constantly, or countinously. In which case you would be violationg their rights. Rather than calling foul, i'd be calling for a good tall glass of prune juice.