The Barclays Premier League Thread 2013/14

[MDK]

I'm pro-verb

[Colly]

I'm Antti Niemi.

[brenchill]

The salute is suppose to be "anti-establishment" but the guy who created it sees the "establishment" in France as Jewish people.

His suspension could be anything up to 12 games according to reporters.

[Nerf]

He won't get as many as Suarez

[Starvinho]

Vidic has had an appeal for his red card against Chelsea rejected by the FA. His three match ban stands.

[Baddar]

He should appeal that.

[EddieG]

Doesn't a failed appeal mean an extra match ban?

[Matt]

Doesn't a failed appeal mean an extra match ban?

only if it's frivolous.

[brenchill]

They should quit while they're ahead. They are lucky Rafael wasn't sent off as well.

[Baddar]

Doesn't a failed appeal mean an extra match ban?

only if it's frivolous.

Which I don't think it was, really - I think the general opinion is that Vidic should've been booked, and Rafael's is the one that should have been punished by a red.

[Lineker]

Anyone who thinks that the quenelle is not anti-semetic is a bit of a silly pony. Lukaku has now waded in, saying 'it is not a big deal' - Everton have distanced themselves from those comments.

In other news...

Three men have been charged with racial aggravation in connection with chanting the word "yid" at two football matches.

Gary Whybrow, 31, of west London, Sam Parsons, 24, of Amersham, and Peter Ditchman, 52, of Bishop's Stortford, were charged with using threatening, abusive or insulting words.

The word, meaning Jew, was allegedly used at Tottenham Hotspur matches against FC Sheriff and West Ham United.

The three men are due before Hendon Magistrates' Court on 4 February.

"The alleged offences were racially aggravated within the terms of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998", the Metropolitan Police said.

Mr Ditchman is also charged with possession of cocaine on 6 October, the same day as the Tottenham Hotspur v West Ham United match.

In a statement, the Tottenham Hotspur Supporters Trust (THST) said it was "saddened, but certainly not surprised, at today's decision by the Crown Prosecution Service to deem the use of the Y-word in any context as a prosecutable offence".

"Since the first Spurs fan was arrested at White Hart Lane on 6 October, THST has worked closely with our legal team to establish a defence to these charges, which will now be tested in a court of law.

"It remains our firm belief that, when used in a footballing context by Tottenham Hotspur supporters, there is no intent or desire to offend any member of the Jewish community."

so stupid

[Mad Jack]

Sorry, isn't is just a teeny tiny huge piece of hypocrisy to criticise an alleged anti-Semitic gesture and then call the prosecution of people using anti-Semitic slurs stupid?

Unless I'm totally missing the tone of your last comment...

[Lineker]

Spurs fans chanting Yids is not racist. Simple as. We've had this this debate in here numerous times and it can be boiled down to fuck David Baddiel.

[METALMAN]

The charges are deserved. You can't forbid one cross-section of the population for using a word and allow the rest to say it. Spurs fans have no right to use the word then complain when others use it. It's all or nothing.

I mean, it's obviously very unlikely that the Spurs fans are using it for anti-Semitic reasons, but I don't want to live in a society where part of the population is allowed to use a word that is forbidden to the rest.

That's fairly elementary reasoning.

[Colly]

I don't even think the 'its a defense against anti-semetic chants' has any merit these days given that only seems to happen at West Ham, while Spurs fans will chant that at every ground in the league.

I like David Baddiel...

[Lineker]

Pfft, you guys just don't get it :/

[Matt]

The charges are deserved. You can't forbid one cross-section of the population for using a word and allow the rest to say it. Spurs fans have no right to use the word then complain when others use it. It's all or nothing.

I mean, it's obviously very unlikely that the Spurs fans are using it for anti-Semitic reasons, but I don't want to live in a society where part of the population is allowed to use a word that is forbidden to the rest.

That's fairly elementary reasoning.

so black guys should get in trouble for saying the N word?

[METALMAN]

If the use of the word is forbidden then yes, they should. There's plenty of evidence to show that linguistic reclamation doesn't actually work.

[Plubby]

The charges are deserved. You can't forbid one cross-section of the population for using a word and allow the rest to say it. Spurs fans have no right to use the word then complain when others use it. It's all or nothing.

I mean, it's obviously very unlikely that the Spurs fans are using it for anti-Semitic reasons, but I don't want to live in a society where part of the population is allowed to use a word that is forbidden to the rest.

That's fairly elementary reasoning.

That's asinine. Stop trolling. It is still OK for black people to call each other N(egrito) - you can't tell a group of people you aren't a part of what they are and are not allowed to be offended by.

[METALMAN]

It's not trolling.

In a civilised legal system, all of society, regardless of background, must be treated equally. My god it's so simple I don't understand why you don't get it. My point isn't about what is offensive. You've dragged that concept up from nowhere My point is that people have to be treated equally.

If you want stuff about what is offensive, read "The Q Word" by David Thomas. Or "A Queer Revoution" by Robin Brontsema. It's a highly contested area and it's not one I feel confident in wading into. But you are being foolish by calling me "asinine" for having an opinion that is widely accepted as being highly plausible.

What I'm saying is not trolling. I'm agreeing with the CPS for heaven's sake. A body which, in most cases, has a very reasonable and sensible code. A code that is under constant scientific and academic review.