Mong?

[one]

Take your above scenario. The FA receive various reports from players and/or supporters who were offended by the racist language they heard on the pitch during your game. They contact you, the referee. Whats your response??

No they won't. If you read my scenario it clearly implied they would not have heard it. It was to make a point about context being important. Many other players and spectators hearing it changes the context and may required a different decision. See my post #112

In either case, my response to any dispute regarding my opinion is simple, that was my opinion at the time for that incident within the context of the game.

 

[Sheffields Finest]

So that would be your response would it?

There is such a HUGE difference between routine swear words and racist language and anyone that cannot see the difference worries me a little to be honest.

I didn’t mention racist language in that post, I said swear words!

Previously we’d touched on two black players exchanging views, again completely different and not racist in the dictionary definition .... why are people mixing the two as they are completely different occurrences. We all know and accept that racist language is unacceptable, that’s a given.

The main discussion here is Mong I thought and if that is in anyway acceptable

 

[QuaverRef]

I didn’t mention racist language in that post, I said swear words!

Previously we’d touched on two black players exchanging views, again completely different and not racist in the dictionary definition .... why are people mixing the two as they are completely different occurrences. We all know and accept that racist language is unacceptable, that’s a given.

The main discussion here is Mong I thought and if that is in anyway acceptable

I think this is a result of some bad quoting which made it look like your reaction to the use of racist language would be comparable to swearing.

I think we all have to look at in through the eyes of the FA, we are representatives of theirs after all. Would they agree that the N word is acceptable in some circumstances? or the word mong? The likelihood is they won't, so we probably shouldn't either.

Imagine for example, two black players in the premier league got caught saying it on the pitch to each other after scoring a goal, there would be absolute uproar because its not acceptable word in today's society

 

[one]

Imagine for example, two black players in the premier league got caught saying it on the pitch to each other after scoring a goal, there would be absolute uproar because its not acceptable word in today's society

What would be just as contravercial is if the whisper of the word in the context my scenario got picked up by the camera and the referee sends him off. It's not what football wants.
Anyway comparing grassroots football to PL is like comparing apples and oranges.

 

[QuaverRef]

What would be just as contravercial is if the whisper of the word in the context my scenario got picked up by the camera and the referee sends him off. It's not what football wants.
Anyway comparing grassroots football to PL is like comparing apples and oranges.

Whilst comparing the two standards of football is extravagant, the point I was trying to make was it shouldn't matter who it is said to or in what context as the word is highly offensive for many many reasons

 

[Cheshire Ref]

No they won't. If you read my scenario it clearly implied they would not have heard it. It was to make a point about context being important. Many other players and spectators hearing it changes the context and may required a different decision. See my post #112

In either case, my response to any dispute regarding my opinion is simple, that was my opinion at the time for that incident within the context of the game.

What would be just as contravercial is if the whisper of the word in the context my scenario got picked up by the camera and the referee sends him off. It's not what football wants.
Anyway comparing grassroots football to PL is like comparing apples and oranges.

Your badly worded opening theory has now gone to players whispering it to each other. Straws and clutching spring to mind

 

[JH]

Offensive, insulting and abusive is a huge bracket which could potentially cover a lot of language. But it is not defined, therefore it is up to the referee to make that judgement. The problem I have with what has been said so far is, how in the world can we as individuals judge what 22 players, staff and potentially supporters find as offensive etc. If you asked all of them about certain phrases you'd get wildly different answers, that's being an individual.

 

[QuaverRef]

Offensive, insulting and abusive is a huge bracket which could potentially cover a lot of language. But it is not defined, therefore it is up to the referee to make that judgement. The problem I have with what has been said so far is, how in the world can we as individuals judge what 22 players, staff and potentially supporters find as offensive etc. If you asked all of them about certain phrases you'd get wildly different answers, that's being an individual.

Which is correct, everyone has different thresholds and tolerance levels but I'm not sure that is the debate here. There seems to be a tolerance towards particular words which are commonly used against people with disabilities, racism etc which referees are essentially turning a blind eye to if:
- They are not personally offended
- The player says it quietly
- Player isn't aggressive

What I'm attempting to understand is the following: Words such as Faggot, The 'N' word, Mong etc are all considered a hate crime when used towards an individual who is gay, black, disabled so why are we permitting them on a football pitch purely on the fact nobody of that description heard them being said, when it is still offence, insulting and/or abusive language?

 

[Tealeaf]

There are valid learning points in here - I'd only ever come across the term to mean someone stoned, or so addled/dependent on substances that they can't think straight (in context "monged out" = wasted after injecting heroin) - but clearly not.

However, THIS ENDS NOW.

7 pages of biting at one another? I despair.

Doubtless if I was to trawl everyone I'd find enough posts/comments to warn or ban no end of people. I'm not going to. I could purge it, but I'd be here all day.

THREAD CLOSED