Are England Fans Racist?

[sunnydelight786]

The "Bonfire" tune, imho, is not racist but the chant of "You know what you are" sung to Rio at the San Marino game is.

 

[jj87]

The bonfire chant has some pretty nasty undertones - why else would England fans care about Anton Ferdinand if not for calling scumbag Terry out? The idea that England as a national side wouldnt have some racist fans is ludicrous - there are enough morons out there.

 

[Bill_Oddie]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...h-football-racist-fa-looks-other-way#show-all

The racist connection seems to boil down to three things:

1. The "No surrender" sung between lines of God Save the Queen, which apparently is a Combat 18 / EDL thing.
2. The original dispute between Anton and Terry was a racist one, with a section of Terry's supporters blindly supporting their captain's racist abuse of AF. Whether that support can be classed as racist itself is open to question as it seems to me to be typical one-eyed football fan stuff.
3. By choosing to abuse two black players with a song which throws them on the fire and so has undertones of the racist lynching which went on in the US last century.
4. The chant "Rio Ferdinand we know what you are!" which means what? It's menacing, what do they know what he is that they can't state explicitly? As an aside the football fans federation says it was "We know where you are!", in reference to him being in Qatar, however the Guardian journalist points out the "We know what we are!" song was sung at Anton previously, so it seems pretty certain that is what was sung.

In summary, England is probably followed by many racists, I suspect a greater proportion of England fans are racists than you'd find in the general population (just look at footage of your usual EDL march, look at what they're wearing, listen to what they're chanting and compare that to your own experience of going to see England play!), there is a history by some fans of attacking a player who was racially abused for defending himself, that player was again attacked as was his brother, they were attacked in two chants with clear racial undertones. What I would say is that I doubt many would have got this and would be chanting because it's a laugh and they're joining in and not because they are being racist, but there would definitely have been a hard-core who knew exactly what they were doing and the intent and meaning behind it.

At the risk of turning into Richard Littlejohn...

This suggestion that "The Bonfire Chant" is in any way racist is sheer fantasy. Dangerous fantasy, truth be told.

As has been established, this chant has done the rounds for the best part of a hundred years with absolutely NO racist undertones, until this week. This week. When has this chant ever had anything to do with black people in England?

1. "No Surrender" is a nasty chant and has no place in football. The first time I heard it I was twelve. That was 1992. I've heard it at most England games since. It never had anything to do with black people... until this week. Apparently.

2. The Anton/Terry thing is the fuel here. The fuel. I totally agree with your assessment that it's typical football fan stuff. Not racism.

3. You're going to have to tie last century behaviour in the US to standard field-of-reference for UK semi-neanderthal football fans. They simply aren't that smart. Bonfire's to these guys means "Guy Fawkes". It's more likely that they're having a go at Rio/Anton for their hatred of the Houses of Parliament and their support for the Pope. Burning black people on bonfire is so peripheral to these guys' world experience, that it wouldn't appear in a song.

4. Massive dispute over what was actually sung. And at worst is Chelsea fans turning the "Racist John Terry, we know what you are" chant on its head.


There are obviously a lot of grade A ****s that follow England. Nasty Combat-18 types. There have always been and it's good that their numbers have gone down over the years. It is fact that several racist people follow England. They are possibly even the most vocal element of the support (it's the damaged brain cells, innit?). But to suggest that this particular incident is racist is well wide of the mark.

Or should my Dad also have been defended by FARE?

 

[Dinghy]

It's the working class that is the problem. They are inherently racist and should be abolished from the terraces stands...

[edit: terraces have already been abolished and yet the damn working classes still turn up en masse.]

 

[sloth]

At the risk of turning into Richard Littlejohn...

This suggestion that "The Bonfire Chant" is in any way racist is sheer fantasy. Dangerous fantasy, truth be told.

As has been established, this chant has done the rounds for the best part of a hundred years with absolutely NO racist undertones, until this week. This week. When has this chant ever had anything to do with black people in England?

1. "No Surrender" is a nasty chant and has no place in football. The first time I heard it I was twelve. That was 1992. I've heard it at most England games since. It never had anything to do with black people... until this week. Apparently.

2. The Anton/Terry thing is the fuel here. The fuel. I totally agree with your assessment that it's typical football fan stuff. Not racism.

3. You're going to have to tie last century behaviour in the US to standard field-of-reference for UK semi-neanderthal football fans. They simply aren't that smart. Bonfire's to these guys means "Guy Fawkes". It's more likely that they're having a go at Rio/Anton for their hatred of the Houses of Parliament and their support for the Pope. Burning black people on bonfire is so peripheral to these guys' world experience, that it wouldn't appear in a song.

4. Massive dispute over what was actually sung. And at worst is Chelsea fans turning the "Racist John Terry, we know what you are" chant on its head.


There are obviously a lot of grade A ****s that follow England. Nasty Combat-18 types. There have always been and it's good that their numbers have gone down over the years. It is fact that several racist people follow England. They are possibly even the most vocal element of the support (it's the damaged brain cells, innit?). But to suggest that this particular incident is racist is well wide of the mark.

Or should my Dad also have been defended by FARE?

Basically I mainly agree.

1. The "No surrender" chant is deployed by would be facists who are part of a racist group. Although racism against the Irish was rife until relatively recently I don't think the chant is racist so much as symbolic of a racist, violent, and frankly a bit of a pathetic mind-set. It sets the scene and lets us all know that there a bunch of hard-core racists who follow England and make a noise in the stadia.

2. I wouldn't be as certain as you, or at least I wouldn't clear everyone chanting it with the same excuse.

3. Combat 18, the EDL, and the BNP are full of quasi-scolastic types, who read their history and concoct their conspiracy theories. They're stupid because they select what sources to believe on the basis of what they've already decided is the truth. These types will be a minority within the minority, they'll often be the leaders, but the rest of them will be happy enough to believe what they're told. It's not stretch at all to believe that they're well aware of the racist undertones implicit in suggesting black men burn. That said, for most I'm sure it's just a case of joining in with a funny chant, and would never be thought of as racist.

4. What is it that they know him to be do you think?

The bit I mainly agree with is that for the majority the chant won't have been intended in a racist way, but intended or not it did, imo, contain unpleasant racist undertones, and it's right that a fuss be made about it, the matter be considered and a judgement passed down, for example the FA come out and say that it may not have been intended as racist, but it could be interpreted that way, and if it's deployed again it will considered that those chanting it now intend it to be racist.

 

[Bill_Oddie]

Apologies for trimming. Just answering direct question.

4. What is it that they know him to be do you think?

As you mention, the fans sitting next to where the chants originate still think it was "We know WHERE you are", which is somewhat clever and apt. Assuming it wasn't that, it's not actually clear. It could be a straight rebuttal to the ubiquitous "We know what you are" to Terry. Or a very base sense of playground attitude "I know you are but what am I?" type thing. It could be a reference that JT called his brother (not himself) a "black ****" and therefore that's "what he is". I guess. But it's far from clear.

To be honest, this interpretation takes reading between the lines to a whole new level. You can't ban fans or punish them for that under the same rules that see other countries fans throwing bananas and making monkey noises.

I am hearing from sensible, intelligent people like yourself, Marina Hyde, Tony Barrett and others that this chant has racist undertones. So I want to agree. But I just can't see it. Or hear it. I seriously don't get the mad fuss over this chant when there are genuine, serious issues to address with fanhood (including England's). By all means, make a fuss about England fans where it's merited, but we're talking about an extremely broad interpretation. Show me a football chant where that isn't true.

"You can shove your XXXX up your arse..."

This is much more homophobic in nature than the Bonfire chant is racist.

Just for example.

 

[sloth]

Apologies for trimming. Just answering direct question.



As you mention, the fans sitting next to where the chants originate still think it was "We know WHERE you are", which is somewhat clever and apt. Assuming it wasn't that, it's not actually clear. It could be a straight rebuttal to the ubiquitous "We know what you are" to Terry. Or a very base sense of playground attitude "I know you are but what am I?" type thing. It could be a reference that JT called his brother (not himself) a "black ****" and therefore that's "what he is". I guess. But it's far from clear.

To be honest, this interpretation takes reading between the lines to a whole new level. You can't ban fans or punish them for that under the same rules that see other countries fans throwing bananas and making monkey noises.

I am hearing from sensible, intelligent people like yourself, Marina Hyde, Tony Barrett and others that this chant has racist undertones. So I want to agree. But I just can't see it. Or hear it. I seriously don't get the mad fuss over this chant when there are genuine, serious issues to address with fanhood (including England's). By all means, make a fuss about England fans where it's merited, but we're talking about an extremely broad interpretation. Show me a football chant where that isn't true.

"You can shove your XXXX up your arse..."

This is much more homophobic in nature than the Bonfire chant is racist.

Just for example.

Much as I love a good argument I pretty much agree, the only slight difference being the fact that so many have picked up on it could be evidence that there are those undertones whether intended or not, but I accept there's an element of self-fulfilling prophecy about that argument!