The homophobic chant at Billy Gilmour

[Greavsy 2,412]

3 minutes ago, Van wink said:

You either agree with Billy or you are a racist bigoted right wing nut job, a binary poster.

Or you're a LIAR! 

[Greavsy 2,412]

Surprise Surprise. 

Lurker Alert! 

[horsefly 4,273]

11 hours ago, Ken Hairy said:

You wouldn't have the balls to call me a bigot in real life I promise you, kindly don't do so on here 🤷‍♂️. No one has made bigoted comments, we're simply requiring you to prove the chants are racist? I haven't actually said some of the fans weren't racially motivated yesterday, but you're claiming they all were (hmm.... Slightly ironic actually), so prove it. I have provided you with many examples of dogs abuse to white footballers after tournaments, again you've chosen to ignore this. 

Stick to your Bill character, it's more amusing than your horse**** one 👍

You're simply repeating the same falsehoods over and over. This is what you said, "but calling others racist without justification or proof is disgusting, and as much part of the problem as opposed to the cure". Now show me where I said all the fans engaged in the chant were motivated by racist intentions. I said nothing of the sort as you would know if you ACTUALLY bothered to read was was ACTUALLY written. I said the abusive chant about that specific episode in those players lives was racist because of the inextricable connection between those three players missing the penalties and the torrent of racist abuse they received which blamed the colour of their skin for the fact that they missed. There is a world of difference between describing an act as being racist, and claiming that anyone engaged in that act intended to be racist. Conflating those two things, as you do in your replies, is completely erroneous.

I explained that people can become unwittingly complicit in an act of racism without remotely intending to be racist (The very opposite of what you claim I said, and outrageously described as "disgusting"). I even provided tan alternative example of the egregious chant "Always the victim, it's never your fault". There may be many of our fans who have no idea that the chant is inextricably tied to abuse of Liverpool fans by taunting them about the Hillsborough tragedy. Some may even have joined in the chant without the slightest intention of of referring to that horrendous event in an abusive manner. Nonetheless, the chant is inextricably tied to abuse about that tragedy, and anyone using it becomes complicit with it irrespective of their intentions.That's why MUFC unequivocally condemned their own fans for using the chant recognising that no amount of bitter local rivalry could justify its use (https://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/sep/15/manchester-united-liverpool-victim-chants).

It was you that said you couldn't be bothered to read what I had written, yet you feel perfectly justified to comment on what you clearly haven't read (pretty much a definition of bigotry). And yet again you say I said nothing about abuse of white players, despite the fact I condemned it outright (but of course, you wouldn't know that because, as you said ,you couldn't be bothered to read what I had written). 

If you want a civilised discussion I suggest you don't claim I have said things that I clearly haven't said and would indeed reject.

Threats of violence don't intimidate me so kindly don't bother with those. And if you think the childish playground antic of calling me Bill is going to trouble me you really are as mistaken about that as you are about pretty much everything I actually claimed. 

 

[horsefly 4,273]

12 hours ago, hogesar said:

Bit of a jump to accuse him of 'bigoted tripe'

When someone boasts that they can't be bothered to read what you have written but nevertheless claim you have said things that you definitely haven't said in order to describe you as "disgusting", that pretty much fits the defintion of bigotry.

[horsefly 4,273]

13 hours ago, Greavsy said:

Thanks! Appreciate that Bill! 

Your stalking obsession with Bill is really quite alarming. 

[Ken Hairy 3,757]

1 minute ago, horsefly said:

When someone boasts that they can't be bothered to read what you have written but nevertheless claim you have said things that you definitely haven't said in order to describe you as "disgusting", that pretty much fits the defintion of bigotry.

Seriously, stick to Bill, its more believable 👍

[Ken Hairy 3,757]

9 minutes ago, horsefly said:

If you want a civilised discussion I suggest you don't claim I have said things that I clearly haven't said and would indeed reject.

 

I've seem enough of your posts on here, in all your terribly disguised guises to have seen enough, you haven't once claimed that those chanting at Old Trafford weren't all racist, feel free to correct that? 

I've read enough of your posts to see the windup troll you are, and I'm led to believe you're even more odious on the non football section. 

Whatever floats your boat I suppose, but I'll never understand multi log on posters like you, especially when pretty much everyone knows what you're doing 🤷‍♂️

[horsefly 4,273]

4 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

I've seem enough of your posts on here, in all your terribly disguised guises to have seen enough, you haven't once claimed that those chanting at Old Trafford weren't all racist, feel free to correct that? 

I've read enough of your posts to see the windup troll you are, and I'm led to believe you're even more odious on the non football section. 

Whatever floats your boat I suppose, but I'll never understand multi log on posters like you, especially when pretty much everyone knows what you're doing 🤷‍♂️

Oh dear! What a garbled pile of rubbish. Are you really so ignorant that you are incapable of reading and understanding what I had actually written. Go back and actually read the posts and find the bit where I said what you claim I said. The FACTS are clear that I never remotely claimed that all those engaged in the chant were motivated by racist intentions, yet you blatantly LIED that that is what I said and continue to do so despite the evidence to the contrary. Your intellectual incapacity to be able to distinguish between acts and intentions is your problem not mine. I explained it clearly, but of course that is pointless in your case because you boasted about not reading what I had written.

As for your pathetically childish insults claiming that I post under multiple names, well that seems to be the resort of all those on this site when they don't possess the ability to present a cogent argument. I have only posted under this name and have said on many occasions that anyone questioning the truth of that, has my permission to contact the board's regulators to confirm that fact. If you are sad enough to do so, feel absolutely free to contact them and quote this post from me giving them permission to tell you that I only post under this name.

That really is the last time I am going to waste effort repeating the same explanations to someone who clearly has not the slightest interest in bothering with the truth of what I said as opposed to his bigoted false version. So feel free to continue your childish playground games, it will no doubt titilate the other few buffoons that like to play those games with you.

 

 

[hogesar 9,611]

40 minutes ago, horsefly said:

When someone boasts that they can't be bothered to read what you have written but nevertheless claim you have said things that you definitely haven't said in order to describe you as "disgusting", that pretty much fits the defintion of bigotry.

I just think you've not offered any balance on this one which is why people have reacted.

Fundamentally, because of the racist abuse the likes of Rashford received after missing his penalty, it would have been sensible to avoid those sort of chants. It's also entirely possible that some of the fans singing it were racially motivated to do so.

However, it is not the case that everyone singing it was racially motivated to do so. For many i'm sure they saw it as standard football rivalry and probably wouldn't even make the link back to the racist abuse (which, if you're not racist, might not even cross your mind) in the first place.

[Ken Hairy 3,757]

19 hours ago, KeiranShikari said:

Apparently Leeds fans chanting about Rashford and Sancho letting their country down was racist too.

 

19 hours ago, horsefly said:

It obviously was.

There you go Horsie, not some of it obviously was, not 1 or 2 of them definitely where, but a definitive IT, suggesting a whole, as obvious as the Bill on your face. 🤷‍♂️

[Ken Hairy 3,757]

1 minute ago, hogesar said:

I just think you've not offered any balance on this one which is why people have reacted.

Fundamentally, because of the racist abuse the likes of Rashford received after missing his penalty, it would have been sensible to avoid those sort of chants. It's also entirely possible that some of the fans singing it were racially motivated to do so.

However, it is not the case that everyone singing it was racially motivated to do so. For many i'm sure they saw it as standard football rivalry and probably wouldn't even make the link back to the racist abuse (which, if you're not racist, might not even cross your mind) in the first place.

100% This 👍

[horsefly 4,273]

4 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I just think you've not offered any balance on this one which is why people have reacted.

Fundamentally, because of the racist abuse the likes of Rashford received after missing his penalty, it would have been sensible to avoid those sort of chants. It's also entirely possible that some of the fans singing it were racially motivated to do so.

However, it is not the case that everyone singing it was racially motivated to do so. For many i'm sure they saw it as standard football rivalry and probably wouldn't even make the link back to the racist abuse (which, if you're not racist, might not even cross your mind) in the first place.

And that is precisely what I said repeatedly. Everything you have said here is precisely what I claimed in several posts. One only has to read what I actually said rather than what someone else falsely claim I said. Feel free to do so and come back at me if I am making this up.

Edited August 16, 2021 by horsefly

[horsefly 4,273]

5 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

 

There you go Horsie, not some of it obviously was, not 1 or 2 of them definitely where, but a definitive IT, suggesting a whole, as obvious as the Bill on your face. 🤷‍♂️

Christ almighty! You still can't distinguish between calling a chant racist and calling everyone engaged in that chant racist. The two things can not be conflated. How can anyone make this more simple for you to understand?

[Ken Hairy 3,757]

2 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Christ almighty! You still can't distinguish between calling a chant racist and calling everyone engaged in that chant racist. The two things can not be conflated. How can anyone make this more simple for you to understand?

Gotchya, we're all wrong and you're right..... There you go dude you can crack on with your day now 👍

[Uncle Fred 526]

44 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Christ almighty! You still can't distinguish between calling a chant racist and calling everyone engaged in that chant racist. The two things can not be conflated. How can anyone make this more simple for you to understand?

I think you are probably the most extreme woke troll I have ever come across on any forum

you must be fun to live with 

[Lord Horn (again) 129]

Well, I've read through all this and all I can say is all those calling out Horsefly to prove that the chants were made with racist intent have not offered up any evidence to show they weren't.  As for the suggestion that we should ask the Leeds fans as to whether there was any racist motivation to the chant - yeah, I'm sure they're going to admit to that.

As for the Gilmour chants from the Liverpool fans and the 'victim' chants from our fans I could hear them both clearly in the middle of the Lower Barclay (and my hearing isn't that good!!!) - the 'victim' chant started in the Snakepit and not many others joined in.

BTW - please,  please can we stop dragging out the Tony Martin incident based chant, particularly as most of those singing it weren't even born when it happened!!!  Really shows a 'little old Norwich' mentality.

[Ken Hairy 3,757]

9 minutes ago, Lord Horn (again) said:

Well, I've read through all this and all I can say is all those calling out Horsefly to prove that the chants were made with racist intent have not offered up any evidence to show they weren't.  

Then you need to read again, nobody has said they weren't, in fact pretty much all of us have agreed certain Leeds fans almost certainly will have had racists motivations. We're countering the suggestion that it was ALL racially motivated which many of us have quoted posts to suggest Horse did indeed originally intend it that way, its him who hasn't proved counter that and is of course back tracking now to suggest that isn't what he meant. 

Nobody, myself, Horse, anyone else is belittling racist abuse, all I entered this debate with was you have to be careful labeling something racist that may well be not, that causes more damage than good. 

Edited August 16, 2021 by Ken Hairy

[Keith Scott 243]

'Horsefly' is everything that is wrong with a hugh swathe of society today. Angry, divise, finger pointing, deluded, obnoxious, lacking in self awareness, egotistical, name shaming, bully. All under the misguided belief this makes them good human beings. Flinging out their personal misery onto others in the name of 'progression'. 

All the best Keith Scott.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,735]

1 hour ago, Lord Horn (again) said:

Well, I've read through all this and all I can say is all those calling out Horsefly to prove that the chants were made with racist intent have not offered up any evidence to show they weren't.  As for the suggestion that we should ask the Leeds fans as to whether there was any racist motivation to the chant - yeah, I'm sure they're going to admit to that.

As for the Gilmour chants from the Liverpool fans and the 'victim' chants from our fans I could hear them both clearly in the middle of the Lower Barclay (and my hearing isn't that good!!!) - the 'victim' chant started in the Snakepit and not many others joined in.

BTW - please,  please can we stop dragging out the Tony Martin incident based chant, particularly as most of those singing it weren't even born when it happened!!!  Really shows a 'little old Norwich' mentality.

We dont need to prove they werent ...the burden of proof lies with the person who made the accusation

[Uncle Fred 526]

38 minutes ago, Keith Scott said:

'Horsefly' is everything that is wrong with a hugh swathe of society today. Angry, divise, finger pointing, deluded, obnoxious, lacking in self awareness, egotistical, name shaming, bully. All under the misguided belief this makes them good human beings. Flinging out their personal misery onto others in the name of 'progression'. 

All the best Keith Scott.

He is an evil man no 2 ways about it pure evil 

[lake district canary 4,531]

I've now read through this too and the way Horsefly and others of his ilk talk, it is as if anything you say about a black person is racist. It's the same with the jewish issue - to some people you can't say anything at all about that issue without being called anti-semitic.  It actually destroys balanced debate. 

It's become as simple as saying you can abuse a white person for missing a penalty but you can't abuse a black man for missing a penalty.  It's almost comical.  Abuse is unsavoury wherever it occurs and I would far rather all abuse was condemned - and to say one set of abuse is racist and another set of abuse is acceptable is kind of....well.....a bit ridiculous. 

My opinion - and the same as most on here - is that some of the chant about those penalty takers would have been racially motivated, but a lot of it wouldn't.  Either way it is a pathetic chant and that it has stuck and we will probably hear it whenever those players are on the field is a sad reflection on football supporters as a whole - not because of whether it is racist or not, but because it is just abuse. 

[Van wink 2,994]

26 minutes ago, Uncle Fred said:

He is an evil man no 2 ways about it pure evil 

Pure terracotta

[Monty13 2,229]

34 minutes ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

We dont need to prove they werent ...the burden of proof lies with the person who made the accusation

Unfortunately seems to be less and less the case in the court of public opinion nowadays.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

35 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

I've now read through this too and the way Horsefly and others of his ilk talk, it is as if anything you say about a black person is racist. It's the same with the jewish issue - to some people you can't say anything at all about that issue without being called anti-semitic.  It actually destroys balanced debate. 

It's become as simple as saying you can abuse a white person for missing a penalty but you can't abuse a black man for missing a penalty.  It's almost comical.  Abuse is unsavoury wherever it occurs and I would far rather all abuse was condemned - and to say one set of abuse is racist and another set of abuse is acceptable is kind of....well.....a bit ridiculous. 

My opinion - and the same as most on here - is that some of the chant about those penalty takers would have been racially motivated, but a lot of it wouldn't.  Either way it is a pathetic chant and that it has stuck and we will probably hear it whenever those players are on the field is a sad reflection on football supporters as a whole - not because of whether it is racist or not, but because it is just abuse. 

Agree with all of that Lakey 👍

[Uncle Fred 526]

15 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Pure terracotta

Pure something that is for sure winky 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

2 hours ago, Lord Horn (again) said:

Well, I've read through all this and all I can say is all those calling out Horsefly to prove that the chants were made with racist intent have not offered up any evidence to show they weren't. 

Well the burden of proof I would offer up is the fact that plenty of white players have been on the receiving end of such chants in recent years - obvious examples made on this thread being Beckham and Green. Beckham was especially vilified and Green's career and mental state took a real hit. 

If there had been no such abuse EVER before made for a white player, then you would have a pretty solid case to say it absolutely was racially motivated. But as it happens there are plenty of historical examples to the contrary, plenty enough to show that the player's skin colour has absolutely nothing to do with the chant.

If you think a whole crowd of people can be galvanised to sing a racist chant very audibly, then such chants would be a lot more common, would they not?

[TIL 1010 4,718]

24 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Pure terracotta

Or could it be broken terracotta ?

[Van wink 2,994]

1 hour ago, TIL 1010 said:

Or could it be broken terracotta ?

All I see is shattered dreams 😀

[Nuff Said 5,082]

On 15/08/2021 at 10:35, Branston Pickle said:

I heard neither, certainly nothing anti Liverpool…but of course Liverpool will always make themselves the victim, it’s what they do best.

That’s certainly not intended as a slight on anyone who suffered at Hillsborough, it’s a general observation about the whole city and it’s attitude. 

Any other large groups of people, who in your opinion are all exactly the same, that you’d like to criticise? Blacks, Jews, women? Under 25s, over 70s? 

[Branston Pickle 3,632]

14 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

Any other large groups of people, who in your opinion are all exactly the same, that you’d like to criticise? Blacks, Jews, women? Under 25s, over 70s? 

No….actually, yes: let’s go for idiots who try to compartmentalise others and read far too much into throwaway comments on a football forum.   Actually, that isn’t such a large group, it largely appears to be you on your own.  

Edited August 16, 2021 by Branston Pickle