Mr.Carrow

The problem with that is that everyone would be sitting on different coloured seats which is clearly performatively exclusionary. The only solution would be for every seat to be rainbow coloured. Woe betide the club if they leave out any colours or any shade of any colour. It goes without saying that each seat must be fitted with a list of colours/shades included so that colourblind folks don't feel excluded.

How on earth would they even settle on the colour of the seats? Every colour is problematic in some way.

Yet again, all this was said about Brady, the Murphy's, Pritchard, Maddison, Lewis and Godfrey. We actually improved overall from pretty much all of those sales. Why can't people focus on the stunning work our recruitment team does rather than throwing a paddy every time we lose a player?

Fair enough, I'll take your word for it. Yeah I love watching players like Hoolihan, Maddison and Buendia. The thing is the first had to step aside to make way for the second and the second for the third. I'm not claiming we should be happy to lose Buendia, but it's possible the money can bring three players in to significantly strengthen the squad overall.

We can't compete on wages. We can compete on being a brilliant,honest, reliable path to the top for the best young talent in the world. How highly do you think Buendia would recommend City to his footballing mates in South America if he gets a big move as we promised him? How highly do you think he'd recommend us if we break that promise. Also, I seem to remember you saying similar things when we sold Godfrey and Lewis. How did that work out for you?

On top of that all our young players and any thinking of joining us will see us as dishonest charlatans who say one thing and then opportunistically block a player when it suits us. Unfortunately there are no halfway measures with our approach other than to hold out for our top valuation every time. The simple fact is is that a big move for Buendia makes us more attractive to his replacements because they will be hoping to do the same.

I think it comes down to weighing up the pride inherent in the "do different" way we've achieved what we have in recent years, against the frustration at the limitations of the model. I'm personally much more focused on the former and I question many of the assumptions behind the doom and gloom often connected to the latter. We've shown time and again that losing players (whilst it feels terrible in the moment) isn't a disaster and can even result in an overall stronger position. I see no reason to think that the next year will be any different.

I watched River Plate beat Santa Fe of Colombia with only ten fit and available players (played an injured midfielder in goal). Obviously not premier League quality but Carrascal at no.10 and 21 year old Alvarez up front looked extremely talented. With Argentina being in another crisis and no fans in the ground I should think bargains could be had...

Pretty much all good news. Only slight negative I can see is Webber's phrasing of "staying a bit longer". Given he makes a big deal of honouring his contracts, it could be that he doesn't want to commit himself to a longer one. Whatever he decides, he should be praised to the heavens even if he does leave next year.

I'm just imagining the response had I posted Sun and Mail articles in support of my claims. Yet again Horsefly, I think you have a fair point about the Woke term. However terms such as "institutional racism" work in much the same way, encompassing many different concepts the meaning of which changes depending on the ideological bias of the person using the term. The main difference is that people who choose to use the Woke term as shorthand for various forms of identity politics authoritarianism don't call others racist bigots if they object to it.

Here in Argentina, after I've told people I'm a Norwich fan (and usually mentioning Emi), I often get the question "yes, but who do you support of the big teams?". I'm quite proud explaining the UK tradition of only supporting your local team.

Woke mentioned several times here, but keep on believing it's a phantom issue made up by the Right.... https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/08/labours-khalid-mahmood-says-party-has-become-london-centric?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other&fbclid=IwAR1FEpYso_iALSiBcKO8V75XWVjtAIle_haX-uVOIYny3hQZFq2Q8biocUg

https://www.newsweek.com/i-left-islam-liberal-values-now-woke-liberals-are-embracing-new-religion-opinion-1586128?fbclid=IwAR2wfPzsx4yz9CxcwXxykciI-jpG4dyaJkXDIE7-lK0F9ajKtUSG2rfkyKY

"Covid gap". With respect, where do you think all the money saved last season, parachute payments plus £40m from Lewis and Godfrey went? The club are openly saying that there is room is improve the squad and that doesn't seem to be dependent on anyone leaving.

Thousands of stories such as this out there: https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/i-refuse-to-stand-by-while-my-students?fbclid=IwAR0gUhMHILa3HmIpUQAvnakPlG1E9TX3TPjCnrRPm_uEV0bcP-uBvFNKMIU

All I'm doing is endlessly repeating myself. CRT and Critical Theory are well established in the UK as well as the US, although probably not as advanced. We have a long tradition of importing movements from the US therefore the likes of McWhorters (and many others) input should be seen as a potential early warning. On your second point, I really don't know how many times I need to repeat it. NOBODY (bar a handful of morons) IS SAYING THAT RACISM ISN'T A FACTOR and that includes the report in question. Simply framing it as all being about racism is not supported by the evidence, therefore is actually harmful to parsing the myriad different factors leading to some groups doing worse than others (even of their own racial group). In other words, not understanding a problem properly (or insisting on a purely ideological framing of it) actually impedes the prospect of solving it.

This isn't a debate. This is me presenting information that most on here don't seem to be aware of and getting the predictable reaction when ideologically certain people have their world view challenged. Purple at least engaged with the information and came up with a reasonable and thoughtful counterpoint. There is a wealth of information on this topic, Cynical Theories book, McWhorters book coming soon etc and if you don't understand the point I am making I suggest engaging with it. On your last point, again, if you want to make such a simplistic blanket statement you have to explain why black Africans are doing so well in the UK but not black Caribbeans and why the same is true for people of Indian and Pakistani origin.

This from the black linguist John McWhorter: https://www.persuasion.community/p/john-mcwhorter-the-neoracists

I think you are missing the point that critical theory includes historical oppression and victimisation in its calculations of the victim heirarchy (think about third wave feminism and the current furore over slavery and colonialism....). The Jews have a pretty solid claim to that, therefore have a pretty iron clad victim card to wave to counter the idea that they are currently oppressors.

He was using the dichotomy to illustrate the inherent contradictions within standpoint theory. If both sides "feel" they are victims and that is their lived experience, then where is the path to resolution? There is no nuetral, dispassionate observer because there is no objectively true position to be arrived at and somebody who isn't part of the "oppressed" group has no right to an opinion on it. I do think he could have chosen a less inflammatory example. Think about the "believe all women" phrase which went viral during Me Too and what happened to it when people on the "right side" (Biden etc) started to face allegations.

I think it's pretty obvious that the spine needs to be better and more athletic. I would hope we strengthen every single central position: ie centre back, central midfielder, number 10 and quality competition for Pukki.

https://www.persuasion.community/p/who-decides-whats-racist?fbclid=IwAR0pw9959iVapA3RMjkc12bnB_uAb1ac-3wkSCQz8I1Ex1SCPfyxjjq0vXo

Good for you. Respect.

In that case I encounter "mild unintended racism" pretty much hourly. The point is whether it is really accurate, fair or constructive to project such a loaded "nuclear" term on to well-meaning people who misstep. I've met very few people who have hate and division in their hearts and those who have have generally been in thrall to ideological certainty. Billy Bragg sang "I've got Socialism of the heart" and I used to believe that the Left were fundamentally Rousseaian and optimistic about humanity whilst the Right were Hobbesian, negative and dismal. Witnessing the abject misanthropic projections coming from the modern radical Left (plus the disinterest from the rest of the Left in standing up to them), I now have serious doubts.