This is a blog I wrote nearly five years ago after the 2007 Champions league final. It doesn't really have anything to do with current events, but I think the treatment of Liverpool and it's fans at the moment has some similarities. Also, the comments I made back then about how people who sing "justice for the 39" to us don't really care about getting justice for them, is similar to the way people are using the racism incidents as an insult to Liverpool fans, or a means to sell newspapers, but they don't actually have any interest in eradicating it from the game.
Justice for the 39. That's what it all comes back to, in fact thats what it always comes back to when your a Liverpool fan. When you're following a club with a history such as ours its hard to go anywhere or do anything without certain incidents being brought up.
Uefa have compiled a dossier labelling the fans of Liverpool Football Club as the "worst fans in Europe". On the surface this is a harsh accusation as the dossier has supposedly been compiled over the past four years, however, this dossier clearly has bitter roots dating back to 1985.
Head of Uefa Michele Platini was a European cup winner in 1985 with Juventus, in the final Juventus opponents were Liverpool. When Liverpool fans charged at Juventus fans in the "neutral" section of the Heysel stadium in Brussels thousands of Italians were forced back against a wall forcing it to collapse. 39 Juventus fans were killed.
It is understandable why Platini should dislike Liverpool. Obviously, like many a Manchester United fan he wants "justice for the 39", or does he? The simple answer is no. What has Platini done to get justice for those thirty nine supporters who died? Nothing. The real reason he dislikes Liverpool Football Club and in particular its supporters is that they denied him the chance to lift the European cup as the presentation of the trophy was cancelled for fear of crowed trouble. This is a very selfish attitude considering thirty nine people lost their lives.
Similarly, do those Manchester United fans and other English supporters who mock our fans with cries of "justice for the thirty nine" really shout this because they want justice? No, they dont give a shit about families who lost loved ones, they wont be showing their support to Juventus. They, like Platini, selfishly do this out of their own bitterness about being kicked out oof Europe. Liverpool fans accept this, but dont bring the lives of people you dont give a flying fuck about into the equation.
On the contrary, we are a club who have had to deal with death on a large scale. This has, perhaps, brought our supporters closer together. More importantly, however, made us understand the situations of those people who lost loved ones at the Heysel more than any other cunt who decides to shout "justice for the thirty nine" in our direction. Unlike Platini, unlike supporterrs from other clubs, Liverpool have lead the fight for Justice. "In memory and friendship" was the message displayed by 12,000 kopites in the match against Juventus two years ago, and this message also resides in the trophy rooms of anfield and the delle alpi, representing the bond that both clubs have formed through our own suffering. There is also a friendship group set up by Liverpool FC, who's most prominent memebr is Peter Hooton from the Farm, who help form bonds with the familes of the thirty nine supporters who died by bringing them over to Liverpool and showing them round Anfield.
So those fans who proclaim "justice for the 96? what about justice for the 39" shoud do some research before they insult us. Of course we have to take the abuse, because like i mentioned before our history will always be brought up. Also, Michele Platini should forget his own selfish campaign against the people of Liverpool, he stood on the pitch at anfield two years ago and accepted a plaque off ian rush, but what does he care about those 39 lost lives?
But he hates us, what can we do. Trouble in Athens was exactly what he wanted. When Uefa's cock up comes to the fore he can simply turn round and say it was our fault, after all we do have a history of it dont we? However the reality is the majority of Liverpool fans our miles ahead of the rest due to past experience. We've travelled to troublesome places such as galatasary where two leeds fans were killed and had no incidents, and been to Rome were Man utd clashed with riot police and had relatively little trouble and none involving the police. Uefa claim that over the past four years there have been 25 recorded incidents of trouble regarding Liverpool fans in Europe, now surely if that was the case it is them who should be learning from their mistakes. To quote the Liverrpool Echo, "If you were told that there'd been 25 burglaries in your street then would you leave the front door wide open and turn the alarm off?" Why play the champions league final in a city with a shite police force and an athletics stadium with no turnstiles if you knew the team playing had the "worst supporters in Europe". It stinks of incompetence, but not as much as the dossier itself being produced to cover Uefas tracks. It is, of course, a work of fiction. The day before the final William Gaillard, chief spokesman for Uefa, claimed that he was not worried about trouble because both Liverpool and AC Milan fans have an excellent record. Now he claims over the past four years we've beeen the worst. The fact of the matter is that Uefa fucked up.
So are we supposed to accept this sweeping generalisation Uefa have made, yes we are worse than the Italian fans who left the wife of a police officer widowed, worse than the French fans who held an anti-semitic rally which turned violent and resulted in the death of an officer from the Gendarmerie, worse than the Inter Milan fans who on one occasion launched a scooter from an upper tier of the San Siro and on another caused a Champions League quarter final match to be abandoned by hurling flares on to the pitch, worse than the Man United fans who clashed with riot police in Rome.
It looks like we are, for even though Uefa's organisation has been at fault once again, we are always going to be their scapegoat for we have heysel in our history books. They are pointing the blame in our direction to deflect themselves, and theres nothing we can do about it because people with lack of knowledg on the events in 1985 and the consequences since then see it as us blaming Uefa again. Liverpool fans have accepted responsiblity for Heysel even though it was only partly our fault, and now responsiblity for another Uefa fuck up is being landed on us. Sky sports can keep showing the same 15 second clip over and over again and people will believe that represents the whole of our support, but whether you choose to accept it or not we have learned from our mistakes.
Friday 6 January 2012
Wednesday 4 January 2012
Suarez...
Basically, I've found the 140 characters available to me on twitter not enough to express my opinions in full on the Suarez racism situation, so I have decided writing a blog on the subject is my best option.
A lot of people have been using the argument that Suarez should have known better than to use the term 'negro' in England as it is seen as racist here, whilst in his home country this is just a regular term that doesn't have racial connotations in the slightest. This is something I agree with to an extent, but I believe cultural differences should not be looked over entirely in this case.
I would like to present an example of how cultural differences can lead to a cross wire in certain situations. In 2007 a teacher from Liverpool was arrested in Sudan, Africa, because she allowed her class to name a teddy bear Muhammed. Naming something Muhammed is deemed as an insult to Islam and is therefore a crime in Muslim countries. When this story broke and it was revealed the teacher, Gillian Gibbons, could be sentenced to 40 lashes, naturally there was outrage amongst the people of this country and we wanted something to be done about this by our government, myself included.
Granted, this is on a much larger scale than the Suarez incident, but on this occasion an English woman was living amongst a different culture, she committed a crime against their religion, yet in this country we could see nothing wrong with what she had done. Now take Suarez, a South American living in England, who has said a word that is deemed racist in our culture, yet people in South America can see nothing wrong with what he has done. Can you see where I'm going with this?
When Mrs Gibbons was eventually sentenced to 15 days in prison for what she did, the people of Britain did not turn round and say "well she deserved it, she should of learned that you can't do that in Muslim countries" did we. She appealed the case with the backing of the government, with then foreign secretary David Miliband expressing "in the strongest terms" the UK's concern at her detention. Mr Miliband went on to say he was "extremely disappointed" the charges had not been dismissed and repeated his view that it had been an "innocent misunderstanding by a dedicated teacher".
Again, I repeat that this is on a much larger scale than the Suarez situation, but surely some parallels can be drawn? Personally I feel both incidents garnered greater punishment than what was deserved. Combating racism is all about tolerance and understanding, so shouldn't we look at this as possibly being an "innocent misunderstanding" the same way we would if it was in English person in this situation in a foreign country.
Sometimes I think things have gone too far the wrong way when it comes to battling prejudice. When my 92 year old gran calls black people "darkies" I don't agree to it, but I know she's not racist, I just understand that she grew up in a time and culture were this was acceptable. The same way Alan Hansen had to apologise for using the term "coloured" on television, it's a word that's just always been acceptable to him. To be honest, I can't imagine anyone would actually find him using that word offensive. Sometimes you just have to tolerate things like this, try and educate people as best you can, but accept the fact they're not racist or prejudice.
So if that member of the BNP wants to tell me I'm a racist because I'm not backing a decision made by the FA, well he can just go ahead and do that. Personally, I'll take my views and opinions that have been formed over many years of education and experience, and I'll stick to them thanks.
here is the story mentioned in the blog, just in case anyone isn't familiar with it http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7119399.stm
A lot of people have been using the argument that Suarez should have known better than to use the term 'negro' in England as it is seen as racist here, whilst in his home country this is just a regular term that doesn't have racial connotations in the slightest. This is something I agree with to an extent, but I believe cultural differences should not be looked over entirely in this case.
I would like to present an example of how cultural differences can lead to a cross wire in certain situations. In 2007 a teacher from Liverpool was arrested in Sudan, Africa, because she allowed her class to name a teddy bear Muhammed. Naming something Muhammed is deemed as an insult to Islam and is therefore a crime in Muslim countries. When this story broke and it was revealed the teacher, Gillian Gibbons, could be sentenced to 40 lashes, naturally there was outrage amongst the people of this country and we wanted something to be done about this by our government, myself included.
Granted, this is on a much larger scale than the Suarez incident, but on this occasion an English woman was living amongst a different culture, she committed a crime against their religion, yet in this country we could see nothing wrong with what she had done. Now take Suarez, a South American living in England, who has said a word that is deemed racist in our culture, yet people in South America can see nothing wrong with what he has done. Can you see where I'm going with this?
When Mrs Gibbons was eventually sentenced to 15 days in prison for what she did, the people of Britain did not turn round and say "well she deserved it, she should of learned that you can't do that in Muslim countries" did we. She appealed the case with the backing of the government, with then foreign secretary David Miliband expressing "in the strongest terms" the UK's concern at her detention. Mr Miliband went on to say he was "extremely disappointed" the charges had not been dismissed and repeated his view that it had been an "innocent misunderstanding by a dedicated teacher".
Again, I repeat that this is on a much larger scale than the Suarez situation, but surely some parallels can be drawn? Personally I feel both incidents garnered greater punishment than what was deserved. Combating racism is all about tolerance and understanding, so shouldn't we look at this as possibly being an "innocent misunderstanding" the same way we would if it was in English person in this situation in a foreign country.
Sometimes I think things have gone too far the wrong way when it comes to battling prejudice. When my 92 year old gran calls black people "darkies" I don't agree to it, but I know she's not racist, I just understand that she grew up in a time and culture were this was acceptable. The same way Alan Hansen had to apologise for using the term "coloured" on television, it's a word that's just always been acceptable to him. To be honest, I can't imagine anyone would actually find him using that word offensive. Sometimes you just have to tolerate things like this, try and educate people as best you can, but accept the fact they're not racist or prejudice.
So if that member of the BNP wants to tell me I'm a racist because I'm not backing a decision made by the FA, well he can just go ahead and do that. Personally, I'll take my views and opinions that have been formed over many years of education and experience, and I'll stick to them thanks.
here is the story mentioned in the blog, just in case anyone isn't familiar with it http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7119399.stm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)