Webber makes the national news

[Davidlingfield 63]

31 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

I’m not sure how active his charity really is yet. There’s not much evidence of activity in its website other than his climb and the podcasts. No mention of any programmes or grants they are running/offering yet. 

Personally, im surprised more eyebrows were not raised at the time when the two most senior executive employees at the club set up their own foundation, whilst in full time employ of the club and with more or less the same objectives and aspirations as the clubs own charitable foundation of which Zoe is a trustee. He could easily just have raised money through his climb for the CSF but perhaps that doesn’t set up their foundation for the future for them. 

 

 

Clear conflict of interest for Zoe given her CSF role, but I don’t imagine that will concern her a jot, if indeed she has even realised the conflict exists.

[hogesar 9,690]

[Newtopia 517]

It was a pretty awful thing to say, and let’s be honest will put a lot of future employers off him.  Tbh right up there with his comments about women’s football.  He really should think carefully about whether he is suited to a directors role.  Straight talking / spade is a spade types are great, but not if they don’t care about football played by half their potential customer base nor the feelings of players from a different back ground.

Edited March 26 by Newtopia

[JonnyJonnyRowe 447]

1 hour ago, PurpleCanary said:

Webber's remarks concerned what these players might have become rather than what they did become. That makes the question of libel less clearcut than it might have been. "M'lud, my client has been accused of triumphing over adversity."🤩

Even if libel was proved the players would then have to demonstrate actual reputational and financial damage. Webber has apparently apologised to at least some of the players and apologised in general. As said on another thread, perhaps he might care to divert some of his Everest charity money to Kick It Out or a similar body. Even if not I would be surprised if he gets sued.

Jamal Lewis has his own charity, which funds youth projects in London and Belfast, so I'm sure he'd personally feel that was a better direction for any donation?

[Mr.Carrow 376]

11 minutes ago, Newtopia said:

It was a pretty awful thing to say, and let’s be honest will put a lot of future employers off him.  Tbh right up there with his comments about women’s football.  He really should think carefully about whether he is suited to a directors role.  Straight talking / spade is a spade types are great, but not if they don’t care about football played by half their potential customer base nor the feelings of players from a different back ground.

Were his "comments" on women's football not him just saying he didn't watch it? Or did i miss some?

[hogesar 9,690]

1 minute ago, Mr.Carrow said:

Were his "comments" on women's football not him just saying he didn't watch it? Or did i miss some?

I think he might have also said he thought the quality was poor. Beyond that he said it wasn't for him.

 

[lake district canary 4,537]

1 hour ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Keep tying yourself up in more knots. 

At least I'm thinking about it rather than just shouting one line accusations out. 

[Midlands Yellow 3,995]

5 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

At least I'm thinking about it rather than just shouting one line accusations out. 

Excusing it to be precise. 

[Cowboy 197]

17 hours ago, lake district canary said:

I agree with you, it isn't a good look, but he was trying to draw attention to a problem that exists for young black people -as reported widely on all sorts of news programmes/documentaries. But he did it in a Webber like way - clumsy and lacking in judgement.

Actually, no! Very much no! It's a problem that exists for young people from disadvantaged backgrounds. Very much NOT what you said, or he implied. That's the crucial thing you and others have to get your heads around.

[The Bristol Nest 517]

Regarding the religion but: Webber was the messiah once. Turns out that he is a very naughty boy.

Racist **** of a thing to say.

Edited March 26 by The Bristol Nest
T w u n t

[dylanisabaddog 4,932]

1 hour ago, JonnyJonnyRowe said:

Jamal Lewis has his own charity, which funds youth projects in London and Belfast, so I'm sure he'd personally feel that was a better direction for any donation?

Quite extraordinary that he didn't end up in jail isn't it..... 

[Newtopia 517]

1 hour ago, Mr.Carrow said:

Were his "comments" on women's football not him just saying he didn't watch it? Or did i miss some?

Absolutely he said he wasn’t interested in woman’s football and suggested it wasn’t very good.  I am not suggesting it was anywhere near as bad as his recent comments and the issue is that he is a director of an organisation which is trying to grow the Women’s game.  He is entitled to say what he thinks, but shouldn’t say so whilst he is DOF at a club trying to grow its women’s side, who are paying him a significant amount of cash.

[shefcanary 2,410]

4 hours ago, JonnyJonnyRowe said:

If he's sued Mr. Carrow the argument won't be about whether Webber's remarks were racist or involved racial profiling. So many people seem stuck on this bit. 

It will be about whether he has damaged the reputation and possibly the earnings potential of the 5 individuals by smearing their name like this, and I feel that this is undeniable and could prove incredibly expensive to Webber. I would suggest that if he gets the opportunity to settle out of court he does so swiftly.

Not just the individuals but just as importantly their parents and the rest of their families, if not their neighbours as well. I would be damned annoyed at Webber if I lived next door to the parents of the five players, on their behalf but also on mine as well. 

There was no need to name any individual. He is even risking an ICO investigation of the club by doing so. The more I think about it, the more issues that interview raises. 

🤦‍♂️

[Grumpy 122]

Having read all the posts I am quite disappointed at the hate there is for Webber from members of the forum. Yes he is outspoken and sometimes controversial but what would you rather have,someone like Knapper who has hardly said a word and has been blasted on here for that.Whichever way you look at it he hasnt done a bad job over the last 6 years.
I am inclined to side with Lakey in all of this.The woke brigade were always going to have a field day with Webbers comments but as far as I am concerned reading between the lines he is probably correct.I read the article and found it interesting and informative and certainly nothing to get all agitated by.

[shefcanary 2,410]

4 hours ago, lake district canary said:

but it is obvious to anyone that has a brain that he was trying to make a positive comment about football being good for black youngsters

Its also good for white kids, brown kids, yellow kids, so what is your point? FFS Lakey, roll in your neck quickly mate, your digging yourself into a hole here.

[shefcanary 2,410]

3 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

I’m not sure how active his charity really is yet. There’s not much evidence of activity in its website other than his climb and the podcasts. No mention of any programmes or grants they are running/offering yet. 

It was only set up when his partner realised his initial infamous interview about climbing that damn mountain had got both Webber himself and the club into a pickle. Her advice to him was that they needed to demonstrate other people would benefit by him only putting "90%" into his working life. The charity was set up on 23 March 2023, some time after the interview (actually strangely about the time Stu handed his notice in to the club). The first financial year has not ended yet so no official records of what they have done so far. The trustees are as follows:

[Grumpy 122]

4 hours ago, JonnyJonnyRowe said:

If he's sued Mr. Carrow the argument won't be about whether Webber's remarks were racist or involved racial profiling. So many people seem stuck on this bit. 

It will be about whether he has damaged the reputation and possibly the earnings potential of the 5 individuals by smearing their name like this, and I feel that this is undeniable and could prove incredibly expensive to Webber. I would suggest that if he gets the opportunity to settle out of court he does so swiftly.

Sorry but this has now gone a bit ott.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

2 hours ago, JonnyJonnyRowe said:

Jamal Lewis has his own charity, which funds youth projects in London and Belfast, so I'm sure he'd personally feel that was a better direction for any donation?

That would cetainly seem appropriate.

[lake district canary 4,537]

9 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Its also good for white kids, brown kids, yellow kids, so what is your point? FFS Lakey, roll in your neck quickly mate, your digging yourself into a hole here.

There have been countless studies highlighting the problems for black people getting jobs compared to white people. Why shouldn't anyone highlight that if they want to? Is that racism, inverse racism or some other 'ism? I don't think so. 

Webber was ham-fisted, clumsy and wrong to name names, but that is all. 

[lake district canary 4,537]

2 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Excusing it to be precise. 

Rubbish. I have done all I can to say how stupid his comments were. I am just prepared to try and understand what was behind what he said, not just jumping on the bandwagon of accusations. 

[lake district canary 4,537]

13 hours ago, Well b back said:

A few people on here living in the past and not quite understanding racism. 
I am actually quite surprised that this thread has not been removed, with the defending of racial profiling. 

I don't think anyone is defending racial profiling. I'm talking about defending someone's right to talk about a specific problem.

How else can someone talk about the problems black people have in society without being free to talk about it? There are many studies and reports that highlight that particular issue and Webber has a right to talk about it if he wishes.

That he totally messed it up is clear, but he still had the right to try and talk about the issue. 

[pete 319]

Making these comments were crass and ignorant in the extreme from a person we believed had some intelligence.  Now we know the truth how some manage to try to explain these comments as not being racist casual or otherwise.  The players identified are all black players as if white players could never end in jail.  This will exclude Webber from any high profile roles, not a bad thing. 

[Midlands Yellow 3,995]

29 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Rubbish. I have done all I can to say how stupid his comments were. I am just prepared to try and understand what was behind what he said, not just jumping on the bandwagon of accusations. 

No bandwagon, I just listened to what he said. 

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,434]

55 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Its also good for white kids, brown kids, yellow kids, so what is your point? FFS Lakey, roll in your neck quickly mate, your digging yourself into a hole here.

I would replace “digging” with “dug” . 
 

[Mengo 824]

8 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

No bandwagon, I just listened to what he said. 

When you’re the creator of a universe, it’s easy to start to feel like you’re a little bit untouchable. But some people take it even further than that—they genuinely think they’re God—or at least, a god. What is it that makes us believe in the divine? Why do we think we can control the weather? And how do we know what’s real and what isn’t when we can’t see the whole picture? We’ve all been there. You’re sitting in a coffee shop, on the bus, or at the park, and you see someone who is just… different. They’re not like anyone else around them, and they know it.

They walk differently. They talk differently. They act differently. And they talk about themselves like they are God-like—as if they can do anything and everything with just a thought and a snap of their fingers. From celebrities and politicians to religious leaders and average Joes on the street, countless people believe that they have been chosen by God to do His work on Earth.

Maybe just Maybe, you never no with some people. 😉

[Big Vince 318]

20 hours ago, lake district canary said:

Unbelievable. Reported for racist comments? His intention was clearly to reflect the problems young black people have in society - a problem the BBC and other news groups have reported on, multiple times. He was clumsy with what he said, but to me he was highlighting social problems and how these players might have avoided them by being involved in football. That is a good thing.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like him and think he is egotistical and lacking in humility, but in this case, there is nothing here to get excited about in so far as reporting him.  I think it's ridiculous - he might need to apologise and explain himself a bit more  what he was trying to say, but to villify him nationally is just over the top.

Webber is the good guy. Look at all the good work he did at Colney and setting up in South America. Delia is the bad girl. Look at all the players she sold over the top of his head.

[Cowboy 197]

26 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

I don't think anyone is defending racial profiling. I'm talking about defending someone's right to talk about a specific problem.

How else can someone talk about the problems black people have in society without being free to talk about it? There are many studies and reports that highlight that particular issue and Webber has a right to talk about it if he wishes.

That he totally messed it up is clear, but he still had the right to try and talk about the issue. 

If you just think about it for a minute, you will realise that people who are black, white, yellow, brown and all the lovely infinite shades in between, and come from a disadvantaged background are more likely to get into trouble and and up in jail. That's where the focus should be. If you focus on the black members of that group only, you are being racist. If you then include some other black people who ARE NOT from that disadvantaged background you are being doubly racist and a complete tvvat.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,776]

Webber could end all of this debacle by actually coming out and conveying the inside knowledge he supposedly has about the upbringings of Sterling ,Kamara ,Aarons, Lewis and Rowe that lead him to conclude that football has prevented them from this alternative life they may have had.

If he was able to do that, I'd have more respect for him than his apology.

If that is what he believes, stand by it and elaborate and explain it.

Of course this would be entirely at odds with what we have heard from the player/families of 3 of the 5 mentioned over the past couple of days

We've yet to hear as to whether Jonathan Rowe 'minds' Webber saying this

So, he is either correct...or it is a disgraceful slur on the familes,parents and upbringings on the 5 individuals mentioned.

Which is it...

[Monty13 2,235]

3 minutes ago, Cowboy said:

If you just think about it for a minute, you will realise that people who are black, white, yellow, brown and all the lovely infinite shades in between, and come from a disadvantaged background are more likely to get into trouble and and up in jail. That's where the focus should be. If you focus on the black members of that group only, you are being racist. If you then include some other black people who ARE NOT from that disadvantaged background you are being doubly racist and a complete tvvat.

Basically this, I’m really not sure what you’re not getting @lake district canary?

There’s a difference between being a racist and saying something racist.

What he said was objectively racist for the reasons above, why he said it is probably something for Webber to reflect on.

[dylanisabaddog 4,932]

Putting aside the morality for a moment, the main damage caused to our club is reputational within the black community. Norwich City will be judged on this whether we like it or not. If you were a young black player would you sign for us?

Thankfully he didn't say it 5 years ago because we'd be looking at a loss of around £70m. Having said that, the financial loss going forward could well be huge and there's little that can be done about it now. 

Edited March 26 by dylanisabaddog