Bernardo Silva charged by FA

He has been charged by the FA due to his tweet to team-mate Mendy.
He is likely to be banned for 6 games.
His manager says he thinks there was nothing wrong in the tweet as it was just 'banter' between two mates.
Raheem Sterling , who has been the victim of racist abuse and has been rightly praised for standing up to racism, has defended Bernardo.
It seems that Man City fans are outraged about the decision, whilst supporters of rival clubs feel it is correct.
It seems to me that people are happy to see someone who isn't one of their mates hung out to dry and labelled as a horrible racist but will defend their mate in the same circumstances.
Honour in that, you might say, but surely there has to be some level of consistency?
It seems as if it is getting a bit silly to me.

No surprise at all he's been charged. Banter or not, twitter is a public forum and his joke was clearly unacceptable to publish in today's climate. Imagine the fuss if one of our players jokingly likened a team mate to the Robertson's golly online.

It might have been OK privately in the context of his friendship with Mendy but it wasn't OK to post it on twitter.

Strange one this.

I'm not offended by it, and this type of thing happens in private between friends and family all over the country, all the time.

He should know far better to do this on social media though, it was always going to be punished.

I can accept he is in the wrong for all the reasons stated.
Seems that Sterling and Guardiola should be saying "he's a good lad who made an error of judgement. He is not a racist but we understand why he has been charged and accept this is correct." Not " he hasn't done anything wrong".

Absolutely right.

It's hypocritical to say that we should be having zero tolerance on racism, but then say it's fine when it's just banter between friends because we know they mean nothing by it.

Where do you draw the line if not here? If someone was making monkey noises in the stands and then said "it was just banter, he loves it", that clearly wouldn't be accepted.

I personally think it should be up to the recipient of the comments/banter whatever you want to call it, whether he/she was offended by what was said. Not the PC brigade

Waltero wrote: I personally think it should be up to the recipient of the comments/banter whatever you want to call it, whether he/she was offended by what was said. Not the PC brigade

If you post something on a public forum though, everyone who reads it is the recipient. If he'd said it privately to Mendy, or sent him a direct message, then no problem if Mendy wasn't offended.

Tweeting or publicly posting is sharing/telling the joke to all your followers.

Another example of the stupid techno snowflake society we now live in.

In this case the recipient,Mendy, said he wasn't offended, that's the point I was trying to make. Apart from this forum and CUFC Facebook I avoid social media. I know people who have been sacked over things said on it

You would think that these top players are as well steering clear of the whole thing.
Bound to get into trouble eventually.
Even PC king Gary Lineker is in trouble for poking fun at the Haka.

He wouldn't poke fun at a Maori. He'd crap his shorts again

Quite sad that this is where we are as a society these days, bowing down to the tiny minority of people who actually find this sort of thing offensive.

Who are these people who find this tweet offensive? and why are people offended on behalf of others who aren’t offended? For those of us who think the tweet is wrong, why is it wrong? Take a step back, look at the tweet in its own merits and ask yourself why is it wrong? You think it’s wrong but don’t know why.

It’s simply a picture of Mendy when he was young next to a picture of a cartoon looking character who he bears a resemblance to. Pretty much the same as Aguero getting the nickname Kun as he bears a resemblance to a cartoon character called Kum Kum, or when Peter Crouch signed for Stoke and somebody put a picture of Rodney Trotter up on twitter welcoming him to the club. In fact we’ve probably all done it, seen a picture of someone who looks like one of our mates and compared the two in a joke - this is absolutely no different.

John Barnes hits the nail on the head and probably explains it better than I can, perhaps even coming from a black person might make people realise how innocuous the whole thing is.

www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/foo...tweet-was-not-racist

That's the point I was trying to put across earlier. If Mendy didn't mind why should the FA stick it's oar in or any other PC do gooder

I'm not sure anybody has actually said they're offended, that's not why he's being punished.

If you were to go to a fancy dress party this year for Halloween, would you even entertain the idea of going as a minstrel? I imagine the answer for the vast majority of people would be no, because you know that somebody, somewhere would take offence to it (whether you agree with that or not). This is exactly the same; you know better than to do that and in Bernardo Silva's position so should he.

If the answer to that's question's yes, it's because you want to stick it to the lefty loony PC brigade and it simply means you're a dick.

A line has to be drawn somewhere in terms of what defines racism, far better that it is on the more cautious and prudent side of the line than the alternative.

You can thank John Major for political correctness, and the left for snowflakeness........

A friend is a Labour activist and planned to attend a recent meeting, on arrival he found he was excluded as he created an imbalance between male and female at the meeting.

Our over zealous Police force forget we live in Country where free-speech is a right.

Just because some of our left wing friends and associations have detailed hand-books on what is deemed acceptable and what is not, should not affect the rest of us.

Oh, and one way to help stop racism is to ban the words racist and racism !! and use abuser or [censored] idiot.

franksidebottom wrote: Quite sad that this is where we are as a society these days, bowing down to the tiny minority of people who actually find this sort of thing offensive.

Who are these people who find this tweet offensive? and why are people offended on behalf of others who aren’t offended? For those of us who think the tweet is wrong, why is it wrong? Take a step back, look at the tweet in its own merits and ask yourself why is it wrong? You think it’s wrong but don’t know why.

It’s simply a picture of Mendy when he was young next to a picture of a cartoon looking character who he bears a resemblance to. Pretty much the same as Aguero getting the nickname Kun as he bears a resemblance to a cartoon character called Kum Kum, or when Peter Crouch signed for Stoke and somebody put a picture of Rodney Trotter up on twitter welcoming him to the club. In fact we’ve probably all done it, seen a picture of someone who looks like one of our mates and compared the two in a joke - this is absolutely no different.

John Barnes hits the nail on the head and probably explains it better than I can, perhaps even coming from a black person might make people realise how innocuous the whole thing is.

www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/foo...tweet-was-not-racist

Barnes' contrarian argument doesn't hold much water and neither do your comparisons with Crouch and Aguero.

The picture is a racial caricature. On that basis, "it's just a picture and there is a resemblance" (really?!) it would be fine to post a picture likening a black player to a golly, which it clearly wouldn't.

The Crouch/Rodney comparison is not based on race, it's about overall physical similarity between two real people, not between a person and cartoon stereotype where the only (supposedly) common features are brown skin, big lips and wide eyes.

sirjimmyglass wrote: I'm not sure anybody has actually said they're offended, that's not why he's being punished.

If you were to go to a fancy dress party this year for Halloween, would you even entertain the idea of going as a minstrel? I imagine the answer for the vast majority of people would be no, because you know that somebody, somewhere would take offence to it (whether you agree with that or not). This is exactly the same; you know better than to do that and in Bernardo Silva's position so should he.

If the answer to that's question's yes, it's because you want to stick it to the lefty loony PC brigade and it simply means you're a dick.

A line has to be drawn somewhere in terms of what defines racism, far better that it is on the more cautious and prudent side of the line than the alternative.

Not sure why you’ve used a minstrel going to a Halloween party as an example but I get what you’re saying even if I don’t agree with it. Not sure this is in any way linked to going to a fancy dress party as a black person either.

“Someone, somewhere will take offence to it” isn’t a good enough reason to stop someone doing something either!

What is the difference between pointing out Mendy’s resemblance to a cartoon character and pointing out Aguero’s resemblance to one? One is deemed acceptable and the other isn’t. Why?

heilkmoon wrote:

franksidebottom wrote: Quite sad that this is where we are as a society these days, bowing down to the tiny minority of people who actually find this sort of thing offensive.

Who are these people who find this tweet offensive? and why are people offended on behalf of others who aren’t offended? For those of us who think the tweet is wrong, why is it wrong? Take a step back, look at the tweet in its own merits and ask yourself why is it wrong? You think it’s wrong but don’t know why.

It’s simply a picture of Mendy when he was young next to a picture of a cartoon looking character who he bears a resemblance to. Pretty much the same as Aguero getting the nickname Kun as he bears a resemblance to a cartoon character called Kum Kum, or when Peter Crouch signed for Stoke and somebody put a picture of Rodney Trotter up on twitter welcoming him to the club. In fact we’ve probably all done it, seen a picture of someone who looks like one of our mates and compared the two in a joke - this is absolutely no different.

John Barnes hits the nail on the head and probably explains it better than I can, perhaps even coming from a black person might make people realise how innocuous the whole thing is.

www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/foo...tweet-was-not-racist

Barnes' contrarian argument doesn't hold much water and neither do your comparisons with Crouch and Aguero.

The picture is a racial caricature. On that basis, "it's just a picture and there is a resemblance" (really?!) it would be fine to post a picture likening a black player to a golly, which it clearly wouldn't.

The Crouch/Rodney comparison is not based on race, it's about overall physical similarity between two real people, not between a person and cartoon stereotype where the only (supposedly) common features are brown skin, big lips and wide eyes.

Why is it a racial caricature? It’s a cartoon type character which appeared on a packet of biscuits, you’re reading far too much into it. There is a definite resemblance between Mendy and the character hence why Silva posted it, even Mendy acknowledged this, yet you are arguing there’s no resemblance apart from the stereotyped features! Absolute nonsense. I would agree with you if it was say Rashford being compared to the character as he looks nothing like but Mendy actually does.

There’s absolutely no difference between saying Aguero looks like Kum Kum and Mendy looks like the character on the biscuit wrapper.

Bernardo Silva wasn't being racist but he has linked Mendy in the public consciousness to a cartoon character of a big-lipped black boy. It isn't that different from what Danny Baker did. The offence is one of gross thoughtlessness but it still requires some form of punishment otherwise it becomes acceptable.

carwash wrote: Bernardo Silva wasn't being racist but he has linked Mendy in the public consciousness to a cartoon character of a big-lipped black boy. It isn't that different from what Danny Baker did. The offence is one of gross thoughtlessness but it still requires some form of punishment otherwise it becomes acceptable.

If everyone was punished for ''gross thoughtfulness'' there would be a few culprits on here.

franksidebottom wrote:

sirjimmyglass wrote: I'm not sure anybody has actually said they're offended, that's not why he's being punished.

If you were to go to a fancy dress party this year for Halloween, would you even entertain the idea of going as a minstrel? I imagine the answer for the vast majority of people would be no, because you know that somebody, somewhere would take offence to it (whether you agree with that or not). This is exactly the same; you know better than to do that and in Bernardo Silva's position so should he.

If the answer to that's question's yes, it's because you want to stick it to the lefty loony PC brigade and it simply means you're a dick.

A line has to be drawn somewhere in terms of what defines racism, far better that it is on the more cautious and prudent side of the line than the alternative.

Not sure why you’ve used a minstrel going to a Halloween party as an example but I get what you’re saying even if I don’t agree with it. Not sure this is in any way linked to going to a fancy dress party as a black person either.

“Someone, somewhere will take offence to it” isn’t a good enough reason to stop someone doing something either!

What is the difference between pointing out Mendy’s resemblance to a cartoon character and pointing out Aguero’s resemblance to one? One is deemed acceptable and the other isn’t. Why?

I'm not saying the two are alike, I used an extreme example of something that we all know is something that you shouldn't do. You wouldn't do that because you know it would be seen as having racial connotations (again, whether you agree with that or not). A footballer posting a joke on social media for millions of people to see that could in any way be seen as racist is something they should know not to do.

Casual racism is funny until it goes too far and someone gets a banana skin thrown at them. If you have an alternative remedy for society so stop that from ever happening in this country then great, otherwise you have to accept that reactions to things like this will be OTT.

If id posted it on twitter Raheem would no doubt say it was racist but seeing as its one of his mates hes decided it isnt. Thats the double standard for me.

Exactly the point Dancingbear, this whole racism argument is littered with double standards and hypocrisy. It’s okay for a team full of black players to call their sole white teammate “white boy” but it would be totally unacceptable if the roles were reversed. It’s okay to compare a white footballer to a cartoon character but it’s not okay to compare a black footballer with a cartoon character. It’s seemingly acceptable for a black rapper to use the ‘n’ word in a song but there’s be uproar if a white singer did it. I could go on and on with examples just to prove what a nonsense the whole subject is.

The charge/likely ban is basically ineffective if people in general , team-mates and others do not accept it is fair.
Would be more effective if an apology from the player who admitted he was in the wrong and this message was reinforced by his club.
If you compare it to a workplace scenario -
A bloke has a bit of banter with some of his pals at work and then makes a racist joke as a bit of banter.
This upsets a colleague who complains.
It would most likely be resolved if he apologises, admits he was wrong and understands he needs to be careful In the future.
That would be the end of it.
There would also be an understanding that the person who made the complaint would not be treated less favourably in future. If this did happen, or a similar incident occurred , then formal action would ensue.

The problem with the football charge is that there is a suggestion it is not accepted , which becomes a massive problem and does nothing to address the underlying issue.

Someone mentioned John Terry earlier and I understand that outrage about the leniency of his puniahment at least partially contributed to this much tougher stance.

It's the acceptance of wrongdoing which is more important than the ban, for me.

I watched two black men on GMTV last week discussing the incident with Justin Trudeau and his blacking up twenty years ago.

One thought he was a racist, the other didn't.

I thought if they couldn't decide, what chance have I got.

Another absolute nonsense, you’re only allowed to go to a fancy dress party as someone of the same skin colour now, unless of course a black person going as a white person is allowed under the double standards rule of racism.

It’s a fancy dress party FFS!

All racism is awful. But far worse IMHO is the institutional racism in society. The kind that means a white British manager is given more chances or time in football than a black one, for example.

Honestly I may be thick? I really maybe.
I have a friend who is white- he reminds me of Homer Simpson, I’ve said this to him.
I have another friend who is a white, ginger female, she honestly reminds me of Peppermint Patty- again I have stated this? My friend Dan looks like Virgil off thunderbirds (he really really does). He likened me to so called failed footballer Phil Jones? Now then my question is? Are these observations and likenesses racist?
Honestly is it also racist to liken a white person to a cartoon?
I am being serious? The thing for me is did he actually look like the cartoon image? Are people reading in a racist connotation that isn’t there?
Was I racist to liken Chris Billy to Claude Mackalale?
Seriously I honestly am a bit baffled by ‘rules’.
Obviously racism and discrimination is utterly wrong but is it the case that I don’t fully understand this particular issue???

The problem is always context, which people like to ignore. Black characters historically existed as stereotypes in everything from kids films (Dumbo) to Simpsons (not nearly as egregious but Carl). White characters have very rarely been treated this way, and therefore the cases aren't the same, but people just want to spout off about hypocrisy. Raheem isn't in the right, but people trying to turn this into an example of something wrong in the wider world still aren't in the right themselves.

Sent from my COR-L29 using Tapatalk

The way Sterling stood up to actual racism directed towards him by some sections of the media was extremely brave and won my admiration.
In cases like this Bernardo one, we are talking about casual racism, stereotyping as a bit of banter.
We all understand the difference.
I see it that the FA are taking a hard line on casual racism, because that would often be an easy defence ie it was just a joke.
The confuaing bit for me is that Kick It Out are clear on this stance and yet are not being backed up on it when push comes to shove.
This then does little to improve the situation.

Mr Quint wrote: Was I racist to liken Chris Billy to Claude Mackalale?

No, just wrong.

Makelele could only dream of doing as much 'unseen work' as Chris Billy

Mr Quint wrote: Honestly I may be thick? I really maybe.
I have a friend who is white- he reminds me of Homer Simpson, I’ve said this to him.
I have another friend who is a white, ginger female, she honestly reminds me of Peppermint Patty- again I have stated this? My friend Dan looks like Virgil off thunderbirds (he really really does). He likened me to so called failed footballer Phil Jones? Now then my question is? Are these observations and likenesses racist?
Honestly is it also racist to liken a white person to a cartoon?
I am being serious? The thing for me is did he actually look like the cartoon image? Are people reading in a racist connotation that isn’t there?
Was I racist to liken Chris Billy to Claude Mackalale?
Seriously I honestly am a bit baffled by ‘rules’.
Obviously racism and discrimination is utterly wrong but is it the case that I don’t fully understand this particular issue???

I feel sorry for you.

Must be awful looking like Phil Jones

Yeah, if there was one united front it would clear up a lot. I don't think many rational people want bernardo punished harshly but with context it was a pretty stupid thing to do publicly, group chats exist for a reason.

Sent from my COR-L29 using Tapatalk

So how do Michael Jackson impersonators get away with it ?

Wonder how Bo Selecta would get on nowadays. A white ginger bloke dressed up as Mel B would definitely upset someone nowadays.

paddockspark wrote: So how do Michael Jackson impersonators get away with it ?

I don't think they count because he was black and white.

carwash wrote: Bernardo Silva wasn't being racist but he has linked Mendy in the public consciousness to a cartoon character of a big-lipped black boy. It isn't that different from what Danny Baker did. The offence is one of gross thoughtlessness but it still requires some form of punishment otherwise it becomes acceptable.

It sounds to me like your saying its hurtful to a black person to say they look like another black person. Sounds like it's insensitive to remind a black person they are black. Is that not racist?

In Spain, Portugal and Latin America it's commonplace for a person's physical characteristics to be remarked upon.

When I was in Latin America I was routinely called Gringo, (white man), Rubio, (blondie) and Muchacho, (boy). It's par for the course over there. There is no malice intended with these terms.

Terms like 'El Gordo' (fatty) and 'El Flaco', (skinny), as applied to Menotti the former manager of Argentina and even Stan Laurel, are commonplace and are not regarded as offensive in any way. David Silva is known as 'El Chino', the Chinaman in Spain.

Luis Suárez was metaphorically crucified for using a term, 'Negrito' which wouldn't raise an eyebrow in the Latin America. The controversy was probably one of the reasons he left England.

Bluedazblue wrote: In Spain, Portugal and Latin America it's commonplace for a person's physical characteristics to be remarked upon.

When I was in Latin America I was routinely called Gringo, (white man), Rubio, (blondie) and Muchacho, (boy). It's par for the course over there. There is no malice intended with these terms.

Terms like 'El Gordo' (fatty) and 'El Flaco', (skinny), as applied to Menotti the former manager of Argentina and even Stan Laurel, are commonplace and are not regarded as offensive in any way. David Silva is known as 'El Chino', the Chinaman in Spain.

Luis Suárez was metaphorically crucified for using a term, 'Negrito' which wouldn't raise an eyebrow in the Latin America. The controversy was probably one of the reasons he left England.

All of this is correct (I live in Latin America), but it doesn’t mean it is acceptable for Suarez to use the term in England. He should be wise to the culture of his place of work and living.

Some things that are acceptable in England are classed as crimes in other parts of the world. If you are going to go to another country, it is your duty to be aware of the customs of that country.

Bernardo Silva is not a racist, what he did was not racist, but it’s not wise for him to have done that in the UK and in the public domain, where it isn’t commonplace and culturally acceptable, as it may be in Portugal or Spain for example.

deeksme wrote: All racism is awful. But far worse IMHO is the institutional racism in society. The kind that means a white British manager is given more chances or time in football than a black one, for example.

I don't think that's true at all.

Prawncrackhead wrote:

carwash wrote: Bernardo Silva wasn't being racist but he has linked Mendy in the public consciousness to a cartoon character of a big-lipped black boy. It isn't that different from what Danny Baker did. The offence is one of gross thoughtlessness but it still requires some form of punishment otherwise it becomes acceptable.

It sounds to me like your saying its hurtful to a black person to say they look like another black person. Sounds like it's insensitive to remind a black person they are black. Is that not racist?

I never implied anyone was offended or hurt by what Silva did. But the football authorities have worked tirelessly to stamp out racism yet one unthinking tweet by Silva just undermines their work. You can't have footballers being allowed to make racial comparisons then clamp down on fans doing it. It has to be the same rules for everyone.

I don't understand people being offended on other people's behalf.

carwash wrote:

Prawncrackhead wrote:

carwash wrote: Bernardo Silva wasn't being racist but he has linked Mendy in the public consciousness to a cartoon character of a big-lipped black boy. It isn't that different from what Danny Baker did. The offence is one of gross thoughtlessness but it still requires some form of punishment otherwise it becomes acceptable.

It sounds to me like your saying its hurtful to a black person to say they look like another black person. Sounds like it's insensitive to remind a black person they are black. Is that not racist?

I never implied anyone was offended or hurt by what Silva did. But the football authorities have worked tirelessly to stamp out racism yet one unthinking tweet by Silva just undermines their work. You can't have footballers being allowed to make racial comparisons then clamp down on fans doing it. It has to be the same rules for everyone.

That's my point its not a racial comparison, it's a comparison.

carwash wrote:

Prawncrackhead wrote:

carwash wrote: Bernardo Silva wasn't being racist but he has linked Mendy in the public consciousness to a cartoon character of a big-lipped black boy. It isn't that different from what Danny Baker did. The offence is one of gross thoughtlessness but it still requires some form of punishment otherwise it becomes acceptable.

It sounds to me like your saying its hurtful to a black person to say they look like another black person. Sounds like it's insensitive to remind a black person they are black. Is that not racist?

I never implied anyone was offended or hurt by what Silva did. But the football authorities have worked tirelessly to stamp out racism yet one unthinking tweet by Silva just undermines their work. You can't have footballers being allowed to make racial comparisons then clamp down on fans doing it. It has to be the same rules for everyone.

It’s not really true that authorities have worked tirelessly to eradicate racism though is it? As a club you get fined more by UEFA for kicking off late in the Champions League than you do for your fans racially abusing players.

As for the notion of “same rules for everyone”, that’s not really true either though is it? John Terry racially abuses Ferdinand - 4 game ban, fan racially abuses a player - lifetime ban.

The Terry and Suarez incidents were a few years back now.
Since then calls for tougher punishments have been made.
The suggestion is there are problems with racism on social media and in general and therefore they should have zero tolerance on things such as the Bernardo case.
Social media is a problem in general, I think as a minority of idiots aim abuse of various kinds at any high profile figure.
The problem with sorting out racist chanting in crowds is that abuse in general is tolerated in a way it shouldn't be
It shouldn't be OK to call some a jock b or a northern b, ginger t etc really, should it.
A certain CUFC player used to get referred to as a gypsy owing to his appearance.
People used to , at least until recently chant 'get your tits out for the lads if an attractive lady walked along the touchline.
You wouldn't think any of that was OK if someone did it in the street.

Seems that people cross that line into racism , maybe because they are racist, but possibly just as a moment of mindless stupidity.
There needs to be a consistent approach that all players and fans follow.

Football is very tribal and like it or not things get said in football grounds that would never be said anywhere else.

Our own paddock is renonwed for being an itimidating atmosphere.

Of course the abusive knuckle draggers and banana chuckers need banned, but as Roy Keane said, we don't want

to lose the game to the prawn sandwich brigade.

nobbyblue wrote:

deeksme wrote: All racism is awful. But far worse IMHO is the institutional racism in society. The kind that means a white British manager is given more chances or time in football than a black one, for example.

I don't think that's true at all.

Which bit? Because it seems like you're saying either that the sort of misplaced joke from Bernardo Silva or Danny Baker is far worse than institutional racism, or that you don't think institutional racism exists. Apologies if I have the wrong end of the stick. I'm guessing you aren't disagreeing with the first four words of my post