What's new

Raheem Sterling: Manchester City winger is targeted by racism, says Ian Wright

IfiHadTheWings

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2013
3,636
11,481
It's Ian Wright. Hardly the brightest, bless him. Along with Robbie Savage, it's a mystery to me why anyone would pay for this guy's "insights" into the game.

He should follow the Sky Sports pundit model: state the bleeding obvious while jumping on the bandwagon of the week. Works wonders for our Jamie, Neville, Gobby-Scouse and the rest of them.

He bloody well is not my Jamie:cautious:
 

Spurrific

Well-Known Member
Jun 2, 2011
13,501
57,356
It all started with the rumours of him having hundreds of different kids with hundreds of different women. That, in itself, is a (stupid) racist stereotype - and I don't think it's ever been verified as being even partly true at all.

He seems like a decent guy to me, other than the muggy tattoo. I'm not sure whether the media is being racist, or if it has just found an easy target.
 

heelspurs

Le filet mignon est un bastion de rosbif
Jul 25, 2012
4,270
5,105
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45177178

Now usually I like Ian Wright (even though ex-goner) and his infectious passion for England in particular, but think he's wrong to bring race into it here.

Personally for me, Sterling pisses me off as he is so crap for England and yet suddenly a World Beater when playing for City again this season.

Yes I know City probably have a better quality players around him, but that doesn't excuse some of the opportunities he completely fluffed during the World Cup.

And the media probably did play a part as have been hammering him in recent times but he's never been that much kop for England really tbh even before they started sectioning him out more (and likes of Rooney, Terry, going back further Gazza, have all had their own share really).
Question: Are you actually open to listening, considering, and perhaps understanding how it is 'racist'? You offer your opinion but it is in a rather closed-off way that doesn't suggest you are willing to reconsider it based on information presented to you.

The way you bring up Ian Wright is kinda weird. You can like someone and disagree with their opinion. You have to consider that Ian Wright has sensibilities that you do not (I am making the assumption presumption that you are 'white English' and I have many reasons to support that assumption presumption not the least of which is general English demographics and specific footie demos).

The idea of 'racist' has gotten jumbled with the academic definition and the colloquial definition. Utilizing either I am not sure what they have done could be proven 'racist' as they have plausible deniability that they are just reporting on a celebrity footballer. But like the snide footballer that gets away with a dirty play and is described as knowing exactly what they were doing these reporters/papers do as well. They are blowing up 'dog whistles' to those disaffected and disenfranchised peoples that are inclined to feel resentment towards a young black man with money. As such, perhaps you can't hear them but there is a significant proportion of the population that can and it plays into that anger.

Ian Wright understands these whistles intrinsically. You do not. He has become sensitized to it from the very day that he could see clearly and recognize the differential treatment that he and his friends and family received in a racist country.

And though a very brave act, being a black man and claiming 'racism' is always fraught with danger. You will receive backlash from those less than tolerant/real racists that are hiding their racism, backlash from those without the sensibility to recognize it, even backlash from black folks that know it is racist but would prefer those claims be reserved for more 'open and shut' cases, etc.

I fall into the latter category as I know it is racist but I also know that this is a no win type of situation as they are cowards using plausible deniability and weasel words to whistle to ignorant masses that will not be swayed whether due to defiance, volition, apathy, or whatever.

I guess you have to ask exactly what camp you would like to be in? If you are open-minded and would like to understand why it is racist there has already been ample info presented for you to consider (the f365 article is a good'n). If you are hell bent on sticking with your opinion then I have to question why exactly you felt the need to post your take on this in a discussion forum.
 
Last edited:

punkisback

Well-Known Member
Apr 10, 2004
4,410
7,278
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45177178

Now usually I like Ian Wright (even though ex-goner) and his infectious passion for England in particular, but think he's wrong to bring race into it here.

Personally for me, Sterling pisses me off as he is so crap for England and yet suddenly a World Beater when playing for City again this season.

Yes I know City probably have a better quality players around him, but that doesn't excuse some of the opportunities he completely fluffed during the World Cup.

And the media probably did play a part as have been hammering him in recent times but he's never been that much kop for England really tbh even before they started sectioning him out more (and likes of Rooney, Terry, going back further Gazza, have all had their own share really).
Rooney and Gazza had it yes, but that prat Terry deserves all he got. If anything he got off lightly.
 

DJS

A hoonter must hoont
Dec 9, 2006
31,261
21,760
Question: Are you actually open to listening, considering, and perhaps understanding how it is 'racist'? You offer your opinion but it is in a rather closed-off way that doesn't suggest you are willing to reconsider it based on information presented to you.

The way you bring up Ian Wright is kinda weird. You can like someone and disagree with their opinion. You have to consider that Ian Wright has sensibilities that you do not (I am making the assumption presumption that you are 'white English' and I have many reasons to support that assumption presumption not the least of which is general English demographics and specific footie demos).

The idea of 'racist' has gotten jumbled with the academic definition and the colloquial definition. Utilizing either I am not sure what they have done could be proven 'racist' as they have plausible deniability that they are just reporting on a celebrity footballer. But like the snide footballer that gets away with a dirty play and is described as knowing exactly what they were doing these reporters/papers do as well. They are blowing up 'dog whistles' to those disaffected and disenfranchised peoples that are inclined to feel resentment towards a young black man with money. As such, perhaps you can't hear them but there is a significant proportion of the population that can and it plays into that anger.

Ian Wright understands these whistles intrinsically. You do not. He has become sensitized to it from the very day that he could see clearly and recognize the differential treatment that he and his friends and family received in a racist country.

And though a very brave act, being a black man and claiming 'racism' is always fraught with danger. You will receive backlash from those less than tolerant/real racists that are hiding their racism, backlash from those without the sensibility to recognize it, even backlash from black folks that know it is racist but would prefer those claims be reserved for more 'open and shut' cases, etc.

I fall into the latter category as I know it is racist but I also know that this is a no win type of situation as they are cowards using plausible deniability and weasel words to whistle to ignorant masses that will not be swayed whether due to defiance, volition, apathy, or whatever.

I guess you have to ask exactly what camp you would like to be in? If you are open-minded and would like to understand why it is racist there has already been ample info presented for you to consider (the f365 article is a good'n). If you are hell bent on sticking with your opinion then I have to question why exactly you felt the need to post your take on this in a discussion forum.

Because I wanted to know what other people thought.

I’m very open minded thanks and like to hear different peoples opinions and takes on things.
 

beats1

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2010
30,006
29,551
Some interesting replies, which is what I was interested to see what other people made of it.

I still don't personally agree that it's racism as likes of David Beckham have received similar hounding and I don't feel colour needs to be bought into it.

They've also enjoyed hounding Wayne Rooney (although admittedly he deserves it lol).

Yes you could accuse the press of unfairly treating him but just because he's black it's racist?

That's what our press do sadly, they lock onto someone and hound them.
When was those players said to have like 16 kids, be a bad father who beats his girlfriend and even more stereotypes of him

Just look at this article by the Sun, named Ster it up, it asks how many kids does he have and just stupid questions that arent relevant at all

https://www.thesun.co.uk/world-cup-...ng-kids-england-paige-milian-manchester-city/
 

heelspurs

Le filet mignon est un bastion de rosbif
Jul 25, 2012
4,270
5,105
Because I wanted to know what other people thought.

I’m very open minded thanks and like to hear different peoples opinions and takes on things.
Sooooo that's all you got from my post huh? Consider me unconvinced of your true desire to hear other people's thoughts on this matter and your open mindedness ie ability to modify your previously held beliefs in light of new information.

I got a little challenge/thought experiment for you Mr Open-Mindedness, why don't you come up with an cogent argument/possible explanation as to why or how a reasonable person could believe the underlying motives behind the press' work could be racist? Can you conceive of such a possible explanation? You don't have to agree with it but it will be really telling of your true position if it is not convincing. It has been said that the true measure of person's intellect is the ability to evaluate two diametrically opposed beliefs simultaneously. This exercise requires a certain level of intellectual honesty that mere claimants of open-mindedness do not possess.

I'm betting my left nut you won't take me up on that challenge. I would be very impressed if you did but I have zero expectation that you will. Or you could do like most and find some small point in my post with which to take issue and deflect away. Or ignore my post. That'll get you there too. But we both know that now you are pretty much painted into an intellectual corner at this point. What's really exciting is that we are all going to gain further insight into you right now.
 

IfiHadTheWings

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2013
3,636
11,481
Sooooo that's all you got from my post huh? Consider me unconvinced of your true desire to hear other people's thoughts on this matter and your open mindedness ie ability to modify your previously held beliefs in light of new information.

I got a little challenge/thought experiment for you Mr Open-Mindedness, why don't you come up with an cogent argument/possible explanation as to why or how a reasonable person could believe the underlying motives behind the press' work could be racist? Can you conceive of such a possible explanation? You don't have to agree with it but it will be really telling of your true position if it is not convincing. It has been said that the true measure of person's intellect is the ability to evaluate two diametrically opposed beliefs simultaneously. This exercise requires a certain level of intellectual honesty that mere claimants of open-mindedness do not possess.

I'm betting my left nut you won't take me up on that challenge. I would be very impressed if you did but I have zero expectation that you will. Or you could do like most and find some small point in my post with which to take issue and deflect away. Or ignore my post. That'll get you there too. But we both know that now you are pretty much painted into an intellectual corner at this point. What's really exciting is that we are all going to gain further insight into you right now.


Just popped in to ask you how windy it is up there on that high horse? :cautious:
 

DJS

A hoonter must hoont
Dec 9, 2006
31,261
21,760
Sooooo that's all you got from my post huh? Consider me unconvinced of your true desire to hear other people's thoughts on this matter and your open mindedness ie ability to modify your previously held beliefs in light of new information.

I got a little challenge/thought experiment for you Mr Open-Mindedness, why don't you come up with an cogent argument/possible explanation as to why or how a reasonable person could believe the underlying motives behind the press' work could be racist? Can you conceive of such a possible explanation? You don't have to agree with it but it will be really telling of your true position if it is not convincing. It has been said that the true measure of person's intellect is the ability to evaluate two diametrically opposed beliefs simultaneously. This exercise requires a certain level of intellectual honesty that mere claimants of open-mindedness do not possess.

I'm betting my left nut you won't take me up on that challenge. I would be very impressed if you did but I have zero expectation that you will. Or you could do like most and find some small point in my post with which to take issue and deflect away. Or ignore my post. That'll get you there too. But we both know that now you are pretty much painted into an intellectual corner at this point. What's really exciting is that we are all going to gain further insight into you right now.

I find you very condescending, no need for it really.

I’m able to discuss with other people without feeling the need to belittle or put their views down.

And I don’t give a shit if you’re unconvinced either.

Guess this is the answer you probably wanted so you can write another long-winded post to show how intellectually superior you are compared to me, well I’ve given you what you want so type away. (y)
 

Hakkz

Svensk hetsporre
Jul 6, 2012
8,196
17,270
I find you very condescending, no need for it really.

I’m able to discuss with other people without feeling the need to belittle or put their views down.

And I don’t give a shit if you’re unconvinced either.

Guess this is the answer you probably wanted so you can write another long-winded post to show how intellectually superior you are compared to me, well I’ve given you what you want so type away. (y)

Just ignore it. His post would have made Michael Eric Dyson proud.
 

dontcallme

SC Supporter
Mar 18, 2005
33,985
81,903
@DJS is truly one of the nicest guys on this forum, no need to be attacking his character.

I think he has misinterpreted the article and possibly hasn’t looked into the baseless crap Sterling puts up with from the media but that’s not because he has a bad character.
 

DJS

A hoonter must hoont
Dec 9, 2006
31,261
21,760
@DJS is truly one of the nicest guys on this forum, no need to be attacking his character.

I think he has misinterpreted the article and possibly hasn’t looked into the baseless crap Sterling puts up with from the media but that’s not because he has a bad character.

Thanks mate I appreciate your post.

I like to hear different opinions, but there is no need to have to start being so attacking to other people, which some in this forum do far too frequently.
 

Geyzer Soze

Fearlessly the idiot faced the crowd
Aug 16, 2010
26,056
63,361
The thing with Danny is that he runs his mouth all over the press. He welcomes the opportunity to speak out in the media about matters. He's not like Sterling who keeps his mouth closed
But not his Zipp

(Sorry. Is that racist? Impossible to tell these days)
 

Maxtremist

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2014
1,530
3,300
As a young (ish) black male, growing up experiencing little bits of racism (whether direct or institutional etc...) the treatment of Sterling does ring of racism.
Not always direct, but just that they've found him an easy target essentially.

His character is attacked seemingly more than any other premier league player/England player, especially in comparison to what he actually does. He's not going on crazy Balotelli antics, he's not like Grealish was in his younger years, so he's not even doing that much to get targeted and yet often does.

His performances for England leave a little to be desired, sure, but a lot of what's said about him goes beyond his performances on the pitch (as has been mentioned above). He gets picked out more than most and I feel like a lot of that is due to his skin colour. Not only because of that but part of it. Like no-one is saying the ONLY reason Sterling gets this treatment because he's black, just that that's part of why he gets brought up and criticised so consistently as opposed to others.
 

al_pacino

woo
Feb 2, 2005
4,569
4,105
I was listening to the show when Wright was talking about this and I agree that race plays a role in the press that Sterling gets, it's shit like this that I don't read these types of news paper. I honestly don't get why you spend years training after school and University to get to the point where you write front page stories about someone buying some clothes form Primark (I got a nice jacket from there last summer £15, bargain).

What annoyed me about the show was that there was barely no comment about his form for England. 2 goals in 44 is terrible as have been most of his performances. I think Andy Townsend did compare it to the likes of Stephen Gerrard who never reproduced his club form for country but it never got discussed and rarely did during the world cup.
 

mancman

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2006
363
688
I do love listening to Ian Wright with is passionate support for England but I feel he is wrong. Simply put 44 full international caps 2 goals! I wished so badly for Raheem to do well in Russia but facts don't lie. For a striker 2 goals in 44 matches is pretty poor. Also I really hate the racist labelling. Would I be racist when criticising Sol Campbell (my favourite player at the time) when he joined Arsenal. Clearly not. If Harry joined Arsenal last week I would have gone ballistic. What Raheem needs to do is start hitting the back of the net and all the criticism will vanish.
 

Maxtremist

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2014
1,530
3,300
I do love listening to Ian Wright with is passionate support for England but I feel he is wrong. Simply put 44 full international caps 2 goals! I wished so badly for Raheem to do well in Russia but facts don't lie. For a striker 2 goals in 44 matches is pretty poor. Also I really hate the racist labelling. Would I be racist when criticising Sol Campbell (my favourite player at the time) when he joined Arsenal. Clearly not. If Harry joined Arsenal last week I would have gone ballistic. What Raheem needs to do is start hitting the back of the net and all the criticism will vanish.

Here's the thing, if it was JUST people criticising Sterling for his football then that would be fair. He has underperformed for England, no-one is really denying that. There's a potential argument to be made that he does help the team as he stretches defences and all that but he has underperformed for England and deserves criticism there.

What Ian Wright and others are alluding to though is the constant criticism for Sterling. From him getting the tattoo to him and being a father to him buying clothes from primark to him buying his mother a house etc... so much of his life and character away from the football pitch is brought up and that's where we see the levels of racism. No other footballers seem to be criticised that much or talked about and targeted that much for their lives without doing anything wrong like Sterling does.

Sterling is too tight because he buys clothes from Primark sometimes, cause he's eating something from Greggs, cause he's taking a cheap EasyJet flight, but then he's a scoundrel for buying his mother a nice house and sink and has bought a nice car. He gets an insane amount of unfair treatment by the media which is not respresentive of how he acts off the pitch and that is what Ian Wright and others (myself very much included) are calling racist.

TLDR: Criticising his football, fine. Fully deserved. The constant character assassination side of things? Racist undertones at the very least.
 

DJS

A hoonter must hoont
Dec 9, 2006
31,261
21,760
I actually admire him for buying clothes from primark lol, nothing wrong with being thrifty and saving money where you can!
 
Top