Patrice Evra Hates Thursdays | West Ham on a free?

[Ekeke]

Of course it's not ok and Evra will get the just punishment, but in the heat of the moment he did something stupid, something that every person in the world can relate too. We can't set higher standards for footballers than to the rest of us.

There is a problem with fans thinking they can get away with what ever they want as the think they have anonymity of being in large crowds.

Like I said, it would be understandable to do something minor in the heat of the moment. Pushing a fan, being held back by players, etc. Kicking is simply far too much to be acceptable even in those circumstances.

 

[Ekeke]

Rubbish. So because Evra happens to be good at playing football, he cannot respond to someone giving him racist abuse? No idea what that guy said, but I would probably do the same thing to him if it made Evra react like that. This double standard with fans & players is pure BS - don't give if you are not prepared to take. Evra should be disciplined, obviously, and he's also a rolemodel. Doesn't change the fact that the guy probably deserved a kick in the face - it just makes Pat more of a rolemodel. People need to stop being so soft. Everything is 'unacceptable' these days.

Where did anyone say he cant respond to someone giving him racial abuse? Responding isnt kicking someone in the face. Thats a childs argument and you should grow up just like Evra needs to.

 

[El cangrejo]

Kindly feck off to https://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php

The irony of this is that you’re advocating RAWKesque groupthink conformity.

 

[El cangrejo]

We know Patrice is a passionate, proud man. The insults would have hurt him badly, we know he is a stand up professional.

Nothing more professional than kicking a spectator in the face.

 

[Akshay]

To assume this incident is racist, is borderline racist itself. Some of you Might want to try kicking yourselves in the head.

I've seen this sentiment in a bunch of threads and it never makes any sense to me. Why is it racist to suggest that something is racist?

 

[amolbhatia50k]

I've seen this sentiment in a bunch of threads and it never makes any sense to me. Why is it racist to suggest that something is racist?

It doesn't make any sense. That poster should follow his own instructions and kick himself in the head for suggesting something so daft.

 

[donkeyfish]

It doesn't make any sense. That poster should follow his own instructions and kick himself in the head for suggesting something so daft.

Can't do that, kicking yourself in the head surely is racist towards your own race?

 

[El cangrejo]

I've seen this sentiment in a bunch of threads and it never makes any sense to me. Why is it racist to suggest that something is racist?

It’s not necessary racist but it suggests an odd mindset to assume that when any insult against a black man is racially charged.

I can see how it’s happens with Evra though, as he’s probably most famous for being the victim of racial abuse in the Suárez case. It’s not surprising that the human mind would make that connection.

 

[duffer]

Evra should've head kicked Suarez, not this fan.

 

[duffer]

Looking at the replay, Evra should really use his time off to practice his kicking, that's terrible technique, it barely hurt the guy.

An athlete like Evra should be knocking fools out. He said be ashamed of himself.

 

[kouroux]

Evra has displayed a consistent level of immaturity in the short time he's been at Marseille. This is the culmination of many things (criticism followed by him responding like a child on social followed by criticism followed by him responding etc etc ..) and it's sad to see it in a way but there is no way a pro can justify kicking anyone's face in those circumstances.
It's always hurt me to see the laughing stock he's become in France but at the same time he does everything to be that laughing stock.

 

[Fortitude]

That doesn't follow with what you've said just after. Patrice thought being called shite was provocative enough to warrant a kick to the face. If the victim is always allowed to make that call based on what they consider provocative enough you risk ending up with situations like we have here.

It doesn't have to follow as the two points are, or at least can be, independent of each other. You racially abuse someone who is fit and able (i.e. someone who can choose whether to physically lash out) and your rights are forfeit - what the law says is irrelevant, as we already know hitting anybody under any circumstance except self-defence is wrong in a court of law. The reality is, in real life, people will decide in a split-second what they will do as a victim and the range of reaction can go from very little, to life-threatening dependent on who those offensive words are said to and their actual capability to do something physical about it.

I'm pretty sure there isn't a sane person who thinks if you racially abuse 100 physically capable men, the likelihood of physical confrontation wouldn't be extremely high (and less than acceptable in a court of law) within that number and most people wouldn't be surprised at that unless they live in a Utopian bubble.

As numerous comments in here have shown, the moment people thought the incident was racial in tone, they sided with the victim and shrugged at the outcome being what it was, but outside of it being racial, there are comments - only then - saying what Evra did isn't right. It's transferable to real life and if you're in a place where racism isn't condoned, and someone racially abuses someone else (who is capable of physical retaliation), few in a crowd would be surprised by the escalation, and even fewer would rush to the aid of the initial abuser if he got twatted - in fact, and I've seen it countless times, he's most likely to be jeered and his victim cheered.

The idealism of 'violence is wrong' in a racial situation mostly comes from those who have no idea what it's like to be on the receiving end of it; the lack of empathy or the inability to identify or relate to the victim or his retaliation go hand in hand.

Amongst those who are victims of racial abuse, are capable, but opt not to do anything (walk away or laugh it off etc.) there is a separate debate to be had.

 

[Deleted member 101472]

I've seen this sentiment in a bunch of threads and it never makes any sense to me. Why is it racist to suggest that something is racist?

The word borderline always used? I’m aware how contentious an opinion it is. Let’s jusy call them conclusion jumpers instead

 

[harms]

But who decides what level of verbal provocation is enough to warrant hitting someone?
This doesn't mean I excuse racist behaviour. I think those people are the lowest of the low. But saying that it's okay in some cases for verbal abuse to be answered with vigilante physical assault - that sets a dangerous precedent, and I'm not okay with that.

I have to say that I was truly baffled by that reaction too, since everyone else is defending this logic.

 

[Ramshock]

To assume this incident is racist, is borderline racist itself. Some of you Might want to try kicking yourselves in the head.

Yes because there is NO precedent with fans and black players

 

[Deleted member 101472]

Yes because there is NO precedent with fans and black players

Can you provide evidence of marseille fans directing racist abuse at players?

It really doesn’t take long to take a step back before coming out with something controversial.

 

[Ramshock]

Can you provide evidence of marseille fans directing racist abuse at players?

It really doesn’t take long to take a step back before coming out with something controversial.

That is not the point. It is more than reasonable to assume racial abuse. Rudiger was racially abused by his former teams supporters just recently ffs.

 

[JPRouve]

That is not the point. It is more than reasonable to assume racial abuse. Rudiger was racially abused by his former teams supporters just recently ffs.

You mean Roma?

 

[Ramshock]

You mean Roma?

Si

 

[Deleted member 101472]

That is not the point. It is more than reasonable to assume racial abuse. Rudiger was racially abused by his former teams supporters just recently ffs.

This is why people who jump to conclusions are among my least favourite kind of people.

It’s all getting away from the point though. The only way Evra would have been justified kicking this fan is if the fan had physically attacked him first, which he didn’t.

 

[squiggle]

This thread sickens me. It is exactly like

The irony of this is that you’re advocating RAWKesque groupthink conformity.

This whole thread is like something from RAWK which people here would be quoting and mocking. It's nauseating.

Apparently we can assume anyone's a racist if it gets a favourite of ours off the hook. Frowning upon kicking footballers kicking people in the head is holding them to a higher standard. Frowning upon anyone kicking people in the head is being soft.

I bet every club's supporters would be the same, too. Bugger football, sometimes.

 

[JPRouve]

Si

So a club with an history of racial abuse, in a league where racial abuse is very common. In the case of Marseille it's not common and in the case of Evra the problem is about his performances and his attitude. Now, the only reason I absolutely not dismiss racial abuse is because you can never say never but we know that the problem between Evra and the fans isn't racial.

 

[Ramshock]

So a club with an history of racial abuse, in a league where racial abuse is very common. In the case of Marseille it's not common and in the case of Evra the problem is about his performances and his attitude. Now, the only reason I absolutely not dismiss racial abuse is because you can never say never but we know that the problem between Evra and the fans isn't racial.

"You can never say never" You answered it yourself.

 

[Random Task]

Has Evra released a statement informing us of his side of the story, or are people simply assuming racism is the reason? (that's one wild assumption if that is the case)

 

[Ramshock]

This is why people who jump to conclusions are among my least favourite kind of people.

It’s all getting away from the point though. The only way Evra would have been justified kicking this fan is if the fan had physically attacked him first, which he didn’t.

Its perfectly reasonable to assume it may have been racial. Not much else would instigate such a reaction.

 

[Deleted member 101472]

That is not the point. It is more than reasonable to assume racial abuse. Rudiger was racially abused by his former teams supporters just recently ffs.

Just read this back again and it’s a shocker. You need to change that mindset. With just a tiny bit of research, logic and understanding, you’d see that is was absolutely not reasonable in any way shape or form to assume it was racist.

Using Roma fans as an example to back up your argument is baffling, given the inherent racism that’s ran through that fan base for as long as I can remember.

Marseille fans never once racially abused basille Boli in 4 years at the club so why the feck would they resort to that with Evra. Every club has its idiots but you have to utilize logic with this to get to reasons behind the fans being upset with Evra.

 

[JPRouve]

Its perfectly reasonable to assume it may have been racial. Not much else would instigate such a reaction.

And that's where I have a problem, he already threatened the fans when it wasn't racial, he did it two months ago. So yes something else could instigate it, also knowing that lot they most likely used homophobic slur, which admittedly isn't better.

 

[Fridge chutney]

This thread sickens me. It is exactly like


This whole thread is like something from RAWK which people here would be quoting and mocking. It's nauseating.

Apparently we can assume anyone's a racist if it gets a favourite of ours off the hook. Frowning upon kicking footballers kicking people in the head is holding them to a higher standard. Frowning upon anyone kicking people in the head is being soft.

I bet every club's supporters would be the same, too. Bugger football, sometimes.

Hypothesizing and assuming are different things. "If" is the key word here. There is nothing wrong with people hypothesizing about a bizarre and troubling situation before all facts have been disseminated. And racism is not without precedent. Evra has been the victim of racism before. Racism in also an ongoing problem in football to the extent that groups exist dedicated to fighting it. It does not take a huge leap for people to hypothesize about racism in the context of this incident. This is frankly a psychologically unsurprising train of hypothseses.

And the acceptance on this thread is that Evra most certainly is not off the hook at all. Even under the now debunked racist hypothesis, the majority of posters here seem to be in agreement that the violent act was not justified regardless of what was said.

 

[Ramshock]

And that's where I have a problem, he already threatened the fans when it wasn't racial, he did it two months ago. So yes something else could instigate it, also knowing that lot they most likely used homophobic slur, which admittedly isn't better.

Of course

 

[Ramshock]

Just read this back again and it’s a shocker. You need to change that mindset. With just a tiny bit of research, logic and understanding, you’d see that is was absolutely not reasonable in any way shape or form to assume it was racist.

Using Roma fans as an example to back up your argument is baffling, given the inherent racism that’s ran through that fan base for as long as I can remember.

Marseille fans never once racially abused basille Boli in 4 years at the club so why the feck would they resort to that with Evra. Every club has its idiots but you have to utilize logic with this to get to reasons behind the fans being upset with Evra.

Nah I am not having that. I did not once say it was racial I said in the current climate and with past and recent instances of racial abuse it is reasonable to assume that could have been the provocation he reacted to.

 

[Sparky10Legend]

Noty justifiable in any way shape or form, end of.

Dont go all Rawkish here boys.

 

[Red_toad]

.

The idealism of 'violence is wrong' in a racial situation mostly comes from those who have no idea what it's like to be on the receiving end of it; the lack of empathy or the inability to identify or relate to the victim or his retaliation go hand in hand.
.

Kicking someone in the head should only be something used in self defense, as yet no one has died or suffered horrific injuries from being called names. There's a bizarre idealism going around that it's ok to physically attack someone who's used racist language. I agree with neither, as both are equally as wrong as each other.

Beside that's facts that they were telling him he was a crap player and should retire, so by the looks of it race played not a jot of relevance in this matter. Paddy was out of order and should cop a big fine and ban.

 

[Deleted member 101472]

Nah I am not having that. I did not once say it was racial I said in the current climate and with past and recent instances of racial abuse it is reasonable to assume that could have been the provocation he reacted to.

In which case I encourage you to arm yourself with as many facts as possible before assuming things.

 

[Ramshock]

In which case I encourage you to arm yourself with as many facts as possible before assuming things.

I encourage you to understand I was not referring to myself but people in general. Nice soapbox btw!

 

[Fortitude]

Kicking someone in the head should only be something used in self defense, as yet no one has died or suffered horrific injuries from being called names. There's a bizarre idealism going around that it's ok to physically attack someone who's used racist language. I agree with neither, as both are equally as wrong as each other.

Beside that's facts that they were telling him he was a crap player and should retire, so by the looks of it race played not a jot of relevance in this matter. Paddy was out of order and should cop a big fine and ban.

If you call someone something racist, their choice of retaliation is completely out of your hands. You will see the entire gamut from startled, non-retaliatory to some who will escalate far beyond the point the abuser was expecting. It's not idealism, it's reality. Most people who do it, know it's the most incendiary method to incite someone, and if they're doing it to someone capable of opting for physical confrontation, they're pretty aware things could go south very, very quickly and are likely ready for it to do so. Such is the way of the world.

The second paragraph, my comment is in general, not related to Evra as it's pure speculation as to whether anything of the sort was said to him. If the incident wasn't racial (and I have my doubts that it was) then I agree wholeheartedly that Evra was out of order.

 

[kr0nix]

It doesn't have to follow as the two points are, or at least can be, independent of each other. You racially abuse someone who is fit and able (i.e. someone who can choose whether to physically lash out) and your rights are forfeit - what the law says is irrelevant, as we already know hitting anybody under any circumstance except self-defence is wrong in a court of law. The reality is, in real life, people will decide in a split-second what they will do as a victim and the range of reaction can go from very little, to life-threatening dependent on who those offensive words are said to and their actual capability to do something physical about it.

I'm pretty sure there isn't a sane person who thinks if you racially abuse 100 physically capable men, the likelihood of physical confrontation wouldn't be extremely high (and less than acceptable in a court of law) within that number and most people wouldn't be surprised at that unless they live in a Utopian bubble.

As numerous comments in here have shown, the moment people thought the incident was racial in tone, they sided with the victim and shrugged at the outcome being what it was, but outside of it being racial, there are comments - only then - saying what Evra did isn't right. It's transferable to real life and if you're in a place where racism isn't condoned, and someone racially abuses someone else (who is capable of physical retaliation), few in a crowd would be surprised by the escalation, and even fewer would rush to the aid of the initial abuser if he got twatted - in fact, and I've seen it countless times, he's most likely to be jeered and his victim cheered.

The idealism of 'violence is wrong' in a racial situation mostly comes from those who have no idea what it's like to be on the receiving end of it; the lack of empathy or the inability to identify or relate to the victim or his retaliation go hand in hand.

Amongst those who are victims of racial abuse, are capable, but opt not to do anything (walk away or laugh it off etc.) there is a separate debate to be had.

Are you saying that the reason why people lash out to racial abuse is understandable, if not excusable?

 

[Hernandez - BFA]

A few RAWKish opinions here. We all love Paddy, but let's not paint Evra as the victim here. Irregardless of what the fan said, be it small talk to racism - he should not have reacted with a kick.

It's a moronic thing to do.

 

[Red_toad]

If you call someone something racist, their choice of retaliation is completely out of your hands. You will see the entire gamut from startled, non-retaliatory to some who will escalate far beyond the point the abuser was expecting. It's not idealism, it's reality. Most people who do it, know it's the most incendiary method to incite someone, and if they're doing it to someone capable of opting for physical confrontation, they're pretty aware things could go south very, very quickly and are likely ready for it to do so. Such is the way of the world.

The second paragraph, my comment is in general, not related to Evra as it's pure speculation as to whether anything of the sort was said to him. If the incident wasn't racial (and I have my doubts that it was) then I agree wholeheartedly that Evra was out of order.

As I said no one dies from words, kicking or hitting someone in the head can and does kill. Are people really so offended that they should be allowed to kill someone for it? Both acts are wrong and there are laws to deal with it, with regard to hitting, it's self defense, you can't say it was appropriate to strike someone as they called you a name.

 

[Fortitude]

Are you saying that the reason why people lash out to racial abuse is understandable, if not excusable?

As I said no one dies from words, kicking or hitting someone in the head can and does kill. Are people really so offended that they should be allowed to kill someone for it? Both acts are wrong and there are laws to deal with it, with regard to hitting, it's self defense, you can't say it was appropriate to strike someone as they called you a name.

I think we should conclude this here.

 

[Needham]

It doesn't have to follow as the two points are, or at least can be, independent of each other. You racially abuse someone who is fit and able (i.e. someone who can choose whether to physically lash out) and your rights are forfeit - what the law says is irrelevant, as we already know hitting anybody under any circumstance except self-defence is wrong in a court of law. The reality is, in real life, people will decide in a split-second what they will do as a victim and the range of reaction can go from very little, to life-threatening dependent on who those offensive words are said to and their actual capability to do something physical about it.

I'm pretty sure there isn't a sane person who thinks if you racially abuse 100 physically capable men, the likelihood of physical confrontation wouldn't be extremely high (and less than acceptable in a court of law) within that number and most people wouldn't be surprised at that unless they live in a Utopian bubble.

As numerous comments in here have shown, the moment people thought the incident was racial in tone, they sided with the victim and shrugged at the outcome being what it was, but outside of it being racial, there are comments - only then - saying what Evra did isn't right. It's transferable to real life and if you're in a place where racism isn't condoned, and someone racially abuses someone else (who is capable of physical retaliation), few in a crowd would be surprised by the escalation, and even fewer would rush to the aid of the initial abuser if he got twatted - in fact, and I've seen it countless times, he's most likely to be jeered and his victim cheered.

The idealism of 'violence is wrong' in a racial situation mostly comes from those who have no idea what it's like to be on the receiving end of it; the lack of empathy or the inability to identify or relate to the victim or his retaliation go hand in hand.

Amongst those who are victims of racial abuse, are capable, but opt not to do anything (walk away or laugh it off etc.) there is a separate debate to be had.

Evra had options. He could have pointed the guy out to the police, he could have narrated the exchange in a post match interview, he could have written an article about it, he could, in short, have started a conversation, a process where the outcome would have been a raising of awareness or even consciousness (as is happening now post-Weinstein). He didn't. Instead, the 36 year old father and career millionaire kicked him in the head, undoubtedly spawning imitators in Marseille school playgrounds the next day, the only influence he's had since moving there. Quit twisting your blood trying to exculpate the guy. He is not powerless.
...this all being hypothetical if it indeed wasn't racial.