Police Urge FA to Act on Judas Abuse

[worcestersauce]

Rez, I think he's referring to the Adebayor chant.

You may be right Archi' but by my recollection the final conclusion wasn't that that was racist there was disagreement, I certainly don't accept that, it's a shitty song and the idea of Tottenham fans singing arsenal players names all game is out of order but the mention of elephants is not racist just because somone is black no more than mentioning sheep to a Welshman.
I comebck to my point about thin skins

 

[talkshowhost86]

Sol Sol
it's not because you're gay
And it's not racist in any way
We don't sing this because you are black
We sing it because you're a judas twat


Shamelessly stolen from FTL. I think it just about strikes the right chord.

 

[rich75]

That's fair enough. I've never liked that song. That almost definitely has a racist element to it, and should be stopped.

But I've not heard that sung at the Lane. In fact, I've only ever heard it when I saw it on YouTube. I would have thought it was just at Arsenal games (not that I'm condoning its singing at any time).

I've never considered our fanbase to be racist. There will always be the Neanderthal who simply does not understand how meaningless (not even analysing the moral aspects) his (or her) prejudice is. But to say that it's rife among Spurs fans is a little strong, wouldn't you say?

It's not bias that makes me say we have among the best fans in the world. From an objective point of view, Spurs' fanbase has always struck me as educated, cosmopolitan and diverse. Look at Leeds fans. There's racism. I saw a cartoon in the Telegraph (I think), many years ago, which had a group of Leeds supporters in the stands, with a black player in front of them. And the speech bubble from the Leeds supporters was "$Z^&%£&*!, except Tony Yeboah" (a Nigerian footballer who played for Leeds). That really hits home as to how stupid any kind of racism is and I just don't see it with Spurs fans.

When you look back on the last 30 years and consider the number of "non-WASP" players we've had, it makes it hard for any Spurs fan to engage in that type of thing without lookig supremely foolish, like the Leeds fans in the cartoon. We need look no further than your namesake, A&C (or half-namesake, to be accurate ) to see a perfect example of how stupid it can be to use a player's skin colour to draw a conclusion.

I'm sorry you don't feel that you can go to WHL anymore, Rupstoh, but I wonder if maybe you're overstating the case and denying yourself the pleasure of watching the team you support first hand.

The Campbell song isn't racist. It isn't homophobic. What it is is a case of "2+2=yellow", providing grist for the football mad press mill. I've been slated for regurgitating the press view on certain aspects of the club's management (a charge I vociferously refute), so surely we need to ignore it in this instance too and actually make an informed decision, rather than jumping on the Screaming Hysterics Ride? Especially when the tickets are being sold by rags like the Sun, itself one of the most morally bankrupt organisations the world has ever seen, who actively engage in explicit racism, dressed up as moral leadership.

The press are trying to fool us and the rest of the football world that this case exists. The worst thing we can do is go along with it and fool ourselves.

Thats all pretty fair Rez...I agree that the campbell chant in isolation isn't racist/homophobic.. fucking nasty yes, but not racist/homophobic. The trouble is that there have been for years now supporters who accuse campbell of being gay along with ashley cole and Le Saux and use it to abuse them.. either in chants at games or on forums like this on the web.
Maybe whoever came up with this chant wasn't using an HIV reference to suggest Campbell was gay, but it wouldn't be particularly surprising if that person thought that by saying HIV it would be obvious to all and sundry that Campbell was gay, " cos after all it's them poofs wot get aids innit" . You can say that's reaching for a homophobic angle and maybe it is, but the implication remains and if people are going to stand up in public en masse and chant, then it's not surprising that other people will draw conclusions from it.

 

[rez9000]

Thats all pretty fair Rez...I agree that the campbell chant in isolation isn't racist/homophobic.. fucking nasty yes, but not racist/homophobic. The trouble is that there have been for years now supporters who accuse campbell of being gay along with ashley cole and Le Saux and use it to abuse them.. either in chants at games or on forums like this on the web.
Maybe whoever came up with this chant wasn't using an HIV reference to suggest Campbell was gay, but it wouldn't be particularly surprising if that person thought that by saying HIV it would be obvious to all and sundry that Campbell was gay, " cos after all it's them poofs wot get aids innit" . You can say that's reaching for a homophobic angle and maybe it is, but the implication remains and if people are going to stand up in public en masse and chant, then it's not surprising that other people will draw conclusions from it.

What you say is absolutely true, rich. Chances are the song was concocted by someone who wanted it to have homophobic and possibly racist connotations. And as for drawing conclusions, again, you're right that there will be those who will add '2' to '2' and come up with 'yellow'.

The problem is not the condemnation of the song, but rather the tarring of people, with no motive other than to vent their utter hatred of the treacherous bastard, with the same racist/homophobic brush. But the issue is that if the song had merely been labelled 'unpleasant' or 'vicious' or 'nasty' it wouldn't have whipped up such a storm of controversy. And this is where the moral bankruptcy (I'm overusing that phrase and I apologise) really shines through.

Because those who have condemned the people who sang the song at Fratton Park, and labelled them racists and homophobes, have in actuality used two issues already fraught with potential violence, controversy, and inhumanity, to advance a personal agenda and/or to gain press exposure. That, to my mind, makes them worse than a petty racist or homophobe. A racist or homophobe is merely prejudiced because of their own ignorance. Someone who uses those issues, knowing full well that they don't exist, is not only demeaning those he attacks, but also the very people in whose defence he claims to be acting.

I'm not defending the song in any way shape or form. OK, I suppose asserting it's non-racist and non-homophobic aspects could be classed as defence. But my motives are more to do with revealing the undercurrent of hypocrisy that is screening the real issue, which is that poor old Scumbell can't handle the invective he invoked. And what's more, he is supported by groups and individuals who don't give a damn about who they damage, demean and denigrate (Spurs, Spurs fans, ethnic minorities and homosexuals) in their pursuit of their personal agenda.

 

[rich75]

I do get your point Rez, but to be honest if this whole business raises the profile of homophobic chanting, whether its correctly connnected or not to this particular chant, then thats a good thing. In fairness as well if you go through this thread or indeed the newer one on the front page there are plenty of small minded little fuckers who are quite openly homphobic and think its hilarious.

I do think as well that it's a bit of a dodgy place to seat your argument when regardless of any racist/homophobic intent, it's a fucking horrible chant in the first place. This chant along with the wenger/paedophile chant don't, in my opinion, deserve the time of day and even vaguely defending them by disputing the intent is a pretty depressing state of affairs.

 

[rez9000]

I do get your point Rez, but to be honest if this whole business raises the profile of homophobic chanting, whether its correctly connnected or not to this particular chant, then thats a good thing. In fairness as well if you go through this thread or indeed the newer one on the front page there are plenty of small minded little fuckers who are quite openly homphobic and think its hilarious.

I do think as well that it's a bit of a dodgy place to seat your argument when regardless of any racist/homophobic intent, it's a fucking horrible chant in the first place. This chant along with the wenger/paedophile chant don't, in my opinion, deserve the time of day and even vaguely defending them by disputing the intent is a pretty depressing state of affairs.

It's not about the song, rich. It's about the hypocrisy surrounding it, and the way in which the 'race' card has been played by Campbell and Redknapp, and the way the likes of Lord Triesman, Peter Tatchell, the FA, and most of all the press have lapped it up. There are far worse things sung around the country on matchdays and the police don't come near or by.

If it was definitively racist or homophobic, I'd be first in line to condemn those who partook, but it's not, and yet we're all being labelled as savages and that to me is far more of a sin. Racism breeds from ignorance. These people know what they are doing and still proceed even though they are spitting in the face of those whose name they invoke to make their case.

 

[rich75]

I do understand Rez, really I do BUT!!!...

In this instance I don't really care if there's hypocrisy or not, I'd just much rather chants of this nature anywhere in football were clamped down on. The point remains also that if there's even a hint of racism/homophobia that can be taken then the press will leap on it, regardless that half of them print more obviously racist/xenophobic/homophobis shite on regular basis. Peter Tatchell I long ago gave up paying any attention to, he is your archetypal rent a gob on anything even slightly concerned with homosexuality.

I would say as well, though correct me if I'm wrong that I haven't actually seen a direct quote from either redknapp or campbell saying it was actually racist/homophobic.. the closest is this from campbell:

"But when you get to the level of personal abuse that I and other players are subjected to, it's got to stop now."
And Campbell thinks verbal abuse is as bad as racist chanting.
"There is no difference for me," said the 33-year-old centre-half. "It's harmful. They are trying to belittle you and it is downright out of order."



Triesman. the FA and Tatchell are responding to the complaint that was made to the police which claimed it was racist.. that complaint was made by who, I don't know?


Essentially it seems to be the media that have turned it into a racism story based on one complaint, which is no great surprise given it sells papers. I would totally agree with you that thats bollocks but then it goes on the whole time with the media, what can you do?



As for the quote i've read from campbell/Redknapp which mainly say the chanting was "filthy" .. I 100% agree with them

 

[lily_lane]

Sol Sol
it's not because you're gay
And it's not racist in any way
We don't sing this because you are black
We sing it because you're a judas twat


Shamelessly stolen from FTL. I think it just about strikes the right chord.

:clap: I like it. It's suitably sarcastic in tone. With a killer punchline.
Well done that man who thought it up. :clap:

 

[mezza84]

Rich75 and Rez9000, i just want to say i'm loving your debate.

Great points from both sides of the arguement, I'm still sticking with my original opion that it's just a football chant and i feel any homophobic or racist slant has been extrpolated by some people (2+2=yellow).

I've already repped rez but i'm repping you to rich!


The 1 thing i've learned? Don't trust the media!!!!!

 

[spursgirls]

Sol Sol
it's not because you're gay
And it's not racist in any way
We don't sing this because you are black
We sing it because you're a judas twat


Shamelessly stolen from FTL. I think it just about strikes the right chord.

Oh dear, I know I shouldn't be laughing, but i couldn't help it.... !

 

[Banjo]

:hello:

All this anti-Judas stuff is coming across as a bit anti-semitic to me. Depends on how paranoid one wants to be. :roll:

:razz:

But seriously, I don't feel the song is particularly racist or homophobic - unless people want to interprit it that way. For me it clearly is offensive/unpleasant and on the wrong side of enough.

But I do feel that there is a lot of hypocrasy being aimed at Spurs fans; who are a pretty open minded bunch. Has no one here heard a certain hissing from opposing fans on numerous occassions?

:shrug:

That's OK then?

:hump:

 

[Freezy Water]

:hello:

But I do feel that there is a lot of hypocrasy being aimed at Spurs fans; who are a pretty open minded bunch. Has no one here heard a certain hissing from opposing fans on numerous occassions?

:shrug:

That's OK then?

:hump:

I'm sure i've seen Newcastle fans with banners saying 'We hate cockney's' & Cockney's out' on banners - is this not offensive or racist? if so why are they not in the dock for it?!:shrug: It does seem we are being singled out

 

[SelbYido]

Lily, to say the song is homophobic is to deny who's singing it. Let's be clear, The song is distasteful, and there are better alternatives (see below). But the key element in any kind of prejudice is intent. In a case like this, where the reference is unclear, then it depends on the person singing it. So who do we prosecute? How do we know what is pasing in the mind of the person singing? The usual answer is that we should ban all instances of it. But then we have the beginnings of thought policing and infringements of civil liberties.

If I sang that song (and in the heat of the moment, I can't deny that I wouldn't have gone along with it), there would be no racist or homophobic intent whatsoever.

The point is that the club have said quite clearly that this chant has no place in our ground because it casts our fans & by association the club as being bigots, regardless of whether that's true or not. The club make the rules so, unless you think its worthwhile petitioning the shareholders to have the song allowed as a 'civil liberties' issue, then your best course of action is to sing something else. As I know you visit the D&D forum from time to time, you will know I'm a keen defender of civil liberties but this, for me, does not come into that category.

The reference to HIV alone does not make it a homophobic song. If anything, those who are using the HIV reference to try and suggest it's homophobic are the ones who are engaging in sexuality prejudice, as they are suggesting that HIV is inherently associated with homosexuality. By extension, this means that anyone with HIV is gay, and everyone who is gay has HIV. And what makes their position even more morally bankrupt is to suggest that anyone with HIV or who is gay is automaticaly inferior and deserves protection from the storm of harmful words that are flying their way.

Bullshit. As I explained previously in this thread, I'm well aware that HIV is not solely a 'gay' issue but there is an association made (by bigoted twats mainly) &, having heard the rumours regarding R. Sol's sexuality, its not a huge leap to make in thinking that sexuality-related prejudice has informed this chant.

The last sentence is just complete nonsense - to suggest that people who object to this chant assume that gay people & HIV sufferers are weak is laughable. No, I assume they are equal to others & thus should not have their status used in a way that mocks or denigrates them or anyone else. Its not like the chanters are trying to use HIV as a positive reference to him, are they? So it is they who are insulting HIV sufferers by association IMO, rather than those who object to this.

And the same is true of the racist accusation. Even if it was a reference to Campbell being lynched, (which is in itself ridiculously tenuous) it still doesn't make it racist. Lynchings were not just meted out to people of colour, but to all manner of people, designated 'undesirable' at the time. Once more, to associate lynchings purely with black people is to simplify and denigrate the harrowing struggle that black people generally, and those in the civil rights movements in particular, went through to gain some semblence of dignity. Once more, we come to whether it was intended as a racial slur.

I agree the lynching thing is a bit tenuous - actually, it reminded me of Justin Fashanu's suicide, (apparently as a result of homophobic bullying) so its true that its down to interpretation. Even so, I think you're making a mistake by attributing a level of research & historical knowledge that is probably undeserved in the case of those who seem to love this song so much. No matter how well read you are, if someone suggests lyching, the immediate associating is with black people in the Southern states of the USA, just as if someone mentions 'gas chambers' the immediate conclusion for most is that it refers to jews. And yes, I'm aware that others died in gas chambers.

So, by your logic, opposition fans going, 'Hiiiiiiisssssssssssssssssssssssss' at Spurs fans is either aimed at all of the social & political groups persecuted by the Nazis or is just some kind of pantomime taunt that people use alongside 'boooooo'. But other teams don't get hissed at so why us? Use your imagination.

The primary intent of the song is to cause him to play badly, and to remind him of his treachery. However long ago it was, it needs highlighting. As a reminder of what's supposed to be important in football in this day of billion pound TV deals and 'comical-if-it-wasn't-so-tragic' wages. And also as a warning to players as to what is considered unacceptable by fans. Can you see any player making the same mistake Scumbag did? And lastly, if that's not enough of a reason for people, how about this one? It makes an opposition defender play badly. OK, it didn't help us on this occasion, but anything that makes a member of the opposing team play badly is OK by me.

Chanting "Nigger, nigger, nigger - out, out, out" would undoubtedly upset R. Sol & make him play worse but that doesn't make it acceptable - there has to be a line somewhere. I don't mind him being booed or insulted but to bring sexuality or race into it, whether the insults are real or perceived, crosses that line.

Now, I need a little help. Campbell should be roasted at every opportunity. But obviously, the current song is now taboo. So, I've come up with a little ditty of my own, sung to the same tune, but it's incomplete, and some suggestions would be nice. Here it is:

Sol, Sol, you lying S-O-B,
You went to the Scum on a fucking free,
Cry all you want, we'll never leave you be,
You Judas twat, da-da-da-da-dee.

I need help on that last line. And I think S-O-B is a bit weak. Any ideas?

Needless to say, your application for the position of Poet Laureate is...erm...pending. :wink:

 

[rez9000]

Christ, so much to answer! :wink:

The point is that the club have said quite clearly that this chant has no place in our ground because it casts our fans & by association the club as being bigots, regardless of whether that's true or not. The club make the rules so, unless you think its worthwhile petitioning the shareholders to have the song allowed as a 'civil liberties' issue, then your best course of action is to sing something else. As I know you visit the D&D forum from time to time, you will know I'm a keen defender of civil liberties but this, for me, does not come into that category.

I wasn't raising this particular song as a specific civil libertarian issue. I was talking about the more general practise of blanket censorship, which is very much a civil libertarian issue. My mention of an infringement of civil liberties, would be the extrapolated policy that would become commonplace as a result this blanket censorship. If the song has no racist or homophobic content (and it can be cogently argued that it doesn't), banning it is one step toward the acceptance of all-encompassing censorship.

Bullshit. As I explained previously in this thread, I'm well aware that HIV is not solely a 'gay' issue but there is an association made (by bigoted twats mainly) &, having heard the rumours regarding R. Sol's sexuality, its not a huge leap to make in thinking that sexuality-related prejudice has informed this chant.

With that, you are drawing a conclusion based on perceived evidence, not any explicit item. And once more, you are connecting HIV with homosexuality, not the singer. I know full well that HIV afflicts people from all walks of life. You cannot assume that if I sang the song, I would be associating it with homosexuality. It's a question of what connections already exist in the mind of the commentator and for that reason, it is a questionable practise to assign one's own preconceptions onto a vaguely defined thing. It is the same principle that leads to phrases like 'innocent sufferer'.

The last sentence is just complete nonsense - to suggest that people who object to this chant assume that gay people & HIV sufferers are weak is laughable. No, I assume they are equal to others & thus should not have their status used in a way that mocks or denigrates them or anyone else. Its not like the chanters are trying to use HIV as a positive reference to him, are they? So it is they who are insulting HIV sufferers by association IMO, rather than those who object to this.

Oh no, you don't get away that easily. If it were an explicit instance of prejudice towards HIV sufferers, then defence is the reasonable course of action not for the sake of defence, but for the sake of moral rectitude.

You've fallen into the same trap by assuming that the subject is HIV and those who suffer from it. It isn't. The song is designed to state that the singer hopes Campbell has the condition, which is vicious and reprehensible, of course, however, HIV is not the relevent reference. Campbell is, and that is why leaping on its allusion is an example of over-protection, which carries the concurrent suggestion of the weakness of those who suffer from it.

I agree the lynching thing is a bit tenuous - actually, it reminded me of Justin Fashanu's suicide, (apparently as a result of homophobic bullying) so its true that its down to interpretation. Even so, I think you're making a mistake by attributing a level of research & historical knowledge that is probably undeserved in the case of those who seem to love this song so much. No matter how well read you are, if someone suggests lyching, the immediate associating is with black people in the Southern states of the USA, just as if someone mentions 'gas chambers' the immediate conclusion for most is that it refers to jews. And yes, I'm aware that others died in gas chambers.

The same rationale applies with regard to intent, assignment of preconceptions and over-protection.

So, by your logic, opposition fans going, 'Hiiiiiiisssssssssssssssssssssssss' at Spurs fans is either aimed at all of the social & political groups persecuted by the Nazis or is just some kind of pantomime taunt that people use alongside 'boooooo'. But other teams don't get hissed at so why us? Use your imagination.

The difference here is that the primary motivation for the design of the Nazi gas chambers were for use against Jews. The term 'lynching' has become associated with the civil rights movement. It is in actuality, any killing of an individual or small group by a large mob and therefore has been used on any number of people throughout the history of mankind.

In addition, Chelsea fans have a history of anti-Semitic chants directed at Spurs fans, and it is those two aspects, the reference to a specific method of killing and the track record of those who use the chant, makes it far more explicit in nature.

Chanting "Nigger, nigger, nigger - out, out, out" would undoubtedly upset R. Sol & make him play worse but that doesn't make it acceptable - there has to be a line somewhere. I don't mind him being booed or insulted but to bring sexuality or race into it, whether the insults are real or perceived, crosses that line.

So very tenuous. I wasn't excusing racist or homophobic chanting because it would put a player off. I was answering those who say that we should stop lambasting him at every opportunity.

My net connection is likely to go down in the next day or so for anything up to a fortnight, so I may not be able to answer any further points on this subject for a while. Enjoy the debate while I'm gone, guys :up:

 

[rich75]

Christ, so much to answer! :wink:







The difference here is that the primary motivation for the design of the Nazi gas chambers were for use against Jews. The term 'lynching' has become associated with the civil rights movement. It is in actuality, any killing of an individual or small group by a large mob and therefore has been used on any number of people throughout the history of mankind.

In addition, Chelsea fans have a history of anti-Semitic chants directed at Spurs fans, and it is those two aspects, the reference to a specific method of killing and the track record of those who use the chant, makes it far more explicit in nature.

Thats way too intellectual an excuse for your average football crowd.

It is factually correct to say :

Lynching is associated in many peoples minds as the murder of individual black men in America by groups of racist white men. Often the method of killing was to hang them.

It doesn't matter in the slightest that Lynching was a pre-existing term, the important bit is what the majority associate it with.

Its like saying the crucifixtion shouldn't be associated with Jesus because he was just one of many to get nailed up.

It's all slightly irrelevant anyway because I doubt the chant actually uses that reference anyway, as far as I can see it's to do with suicide.

That last bit about Chelsea fans having a history of anti semitic abuse, well yes they do and we as a group of fan have a history of homophobic abuse at Sol Campbell.. it's all over the place, any spurs forum you'll find it

 

[MattyP]

Club have issued a wishy washy response.

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/articles/matchdaybehaviour101008.html

I guess that's the most they can do whilst investigations / discussions are ongoing.

 

[PT]

Club have issued a wishy washy response.

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/articles/matchdaybehaviour101008.html

I guess that's the most they can do whilst investigations / discussions are ongoing.

This was posted on the front page and there is a resulting thread running adjacent to this one with equally polarised opinions.

I think that the Club has been quite clear on the consequences of an individual found to be flouting the stadium rules, regardless of legal outcomes. The club is just re-iterating its stance in such a reoccurrance.

 

[ExcellentDude]

Does Sol Campbell deserve to be disliked by Spurs fans?

I am always alarmed at the hostility towards Sol Campbell from Spurs fans, I think it is unfair and is not deserved. Every footballer wants to reach the highest level he possibly can in his career so surely you can not hate him for wanting to leave Spurs for a Champions League club. I understand that some Spurs fans think he only left for the money, but I don't think that is true at all.

Sol Campbell was a great player for Spurs and I think Tottenham supporters should remember the good times instead of being angry that he left the club. Very few players in modern football stay at the same club for there whole career's, players leave to join other clubs all the time so I don't understand why Campbell has been singled out and targeted for abuse. He has never publicly displayed any hostility towards Tottenham since leaving so I would love for Tottenham supporters to explain what it is all about.

 

[yanno]

I am always alarmed at the hostility towards Sol Campbell from Spurs fans, I think it is unfair and is not deserved. Every footballer wants to reach the highest level he possibly can in his career so surely you can not hate him for wanting to leave Spurs for a Champions League club. I understand that some Spurs fans think he only left for the money, but I don't think that is true at all.

Sol Campbell was a great player for Spurs and I think Tottenham supporters should remember the good times instead of being angry that he left the club. Very few players in modern football stay at the same club for there whole career's, players leave to join other clubs all the time so I don't understand why Campbell has been singled out and targeted for abuse. He has never publicly displayed any hostility towards Tottenham since leaving so I would love for Tottenham supporters to explain what it is all about.

You really want to go down with all those prawn sandwich guns blazing, don't you?

Is there some convention where trolls meet up after they've been banned from all the vaguely intelligent sites in cyberspace?

You know, along the lines of a hall full of anorak trainspotters?

Or grown men who still get a thrill out of building Airfix model aircraft?

Or Trekkies who think Klingon jokes are the ultimate in sophisticated humour?

 

[donny1013]

I am always alarmed at the hostility towards Sol Campbell from Spurs fans, I think it is unfair and is not deserved. Every footballer wants to reach the highest level he possibly can in his career so surely you can not hate him for wanting to leave Spurs for a Champions League club. I understand that some Spurs fans think he only left for the money, but I don't think that is true at all.

Sol Campbell was a great player for Spurs and I think Tottenham supporters should remember the good times instead of being angry that he left the club. Very few players in modern football stay at the same club for there whole career's, players leave to join other clubs all the time so I don't understand why Campbell has been singled out and targeted for abuse. He has never publicly displayed any hostility towards Tottenham since leaving so I would love for Tottenham supporters to explain what it is all about.

I think your a Man Yoo supporter aint u? Well if Ronaldo went down the road to Citeh i am sure you would give him a standing ovation when he returned to Old Trafford, i think not. Scumball kept saying he would stay with us and we could have sold him after the World Cup, but he strung us along until his contract ran down. Then he decided to go down the road to our bitter rivals Woolwich, that is why there is a lot of resentment still.