sonofbert2 Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 44 minutes ago, @owlstalk said: It's not discrimination at all It's simply accusing him of acting dishonestly and pulling tricks On the basis of him being foreign and pretending his level of English wasn’t up to understanding properly and all the while he was sitting with an interpreter. The EFL claim was ruled to be unfounded by the panel. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nero Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 The Barrister/EFL comments case could have a whole 18 month tribunal and panel of its own and still people would be arguing whether its a racist comment or not. Keep making the point - the EFL should decide whether they have breached their own Equality Policy. If not, lets move on. But till they do..... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowl Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 1 minute ago, Inspector Lestrade said: We all have different standards, definitions on matters of morals. Just because they meet your standards doesn't necessarily mean they meet the standards of others. You put the argument for your standard and allow others to put forward their standard. Are all standards of equal value though? And if not, then what constitutes racist behaviour is something that ought to be very much up for discussion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nero Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Just now, cowl said: Are all standards of equal value though? And if not, then what constitutes racist behaviour is something that ought to be very much up for discussion. The EFL have their own published standard. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amitten Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 It has no business being used as evidence and was rightly dismissed. This accusation would not have been made to an English owner. The reason the accusation was made was due to English not being DC's first language, which is because he is Thai. This is discrimination and puts him at an unfair disadvantage when compared to say, Mel Morris at Derby. Who appears to be getting away with it. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@owlstalk Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, amitten said: This accusation would not have been made to an English owner. Well OBVIOUSLY not 3 Owlstalk Shop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspector Lestrade Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 1 minute ago, cowl said: Are all standards of equal value though? And if not, then what constitutes racist behaviour is something that ought to be very much up for discussion. When it comes to morals we only have the prevailing acceptance to work on, which in itself is very fluid. It's an ongoing discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowl Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 2 minutes ago, Inspector Lestrade said: When it comes to morals we only have the prevailing acceptance to work on, which in itself is very fluid. It's an ongoing discussion. Exactly, and so therefore not merely a case of everyone stating what their one own standard is and leaving it be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspector Lestrade Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Just now, cowl said: Exactly, and so therefore not merely a case of everyone stating what their one own standard is and leaving it be. What it doesn't need is someone declaring they know what is racist and discriminatory and everyones else is wrong, which is how a prominent posters posts on here are coming across. Especially when they did not attend the meeting (or I assume they didn't). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@owlstalk Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 25 minutes ago, Inspector Lestrade said: We all have different standards, definitions on matters of morals. Just because they meet your standards doesn't necessarily mean they meet the standards of others. It's about definition here though It's definitively NOT racist OR discriminatory So your personal standards or morals literally don't come into it I think people are doing their best to shove and shoehorn racism and discrimination into this scenario when the very definition of both says it's not Personal standards are irrelevant 1 Owlstalk Shop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@owlstalk Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Just now, Inspector Lestrade said: Especially when they did not attend the meeting (or I assume they didn't). Why on earth would anyone have to attend the meeting to determine the definition of something? You're trying way way too hard here Owlstalk Shop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspector Lestrade Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Just now, @owlstalk said: It's about definition here though It's definitively NOT racist OR discriminatory So your personal standards or morals literally don't come into it I think people are doing their best to shove and shoehorn racism and discrimination into this scenario when the very definition says it's not That's my point just because it meets your definition doesn't mean it meets others people definitions. Your personal standards or morals certainly do come in to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@owlstalk Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 6 minutes ago, Inspector Lestrade said: That's my point just because it meets your definition doesn't mean it meets others people definitions. Your personal standards or morals certainly do come in to it. WTF It's not MY definition It's THE definition You can't have any other accurate definition - no matter how much you WANT there to be so you can shoehorn it into something you want to accuse the EFL of 1 Owlstalk Shop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 8 minutes ago, @owlstalk said: It's about definition here though It's definitively NOT racist OR discriminatory So your personal standards or morals literally don't come into it I think people are doing their best to shove and shoehorn racism and discrimination into this scenario when the very definition of both says it's not Personal standards are irrelevant Discriminate: make an unjust or prejudicial distinction in the treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, sex, or age. The EFL do appear to have tried to, without foundation, use the language barrier to discredit the honesty of Chansiri. As this was a false accusation made without proper justification it does appear to be discriminatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heppers Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 7 minutes ago, @owlstalk said: WTF It's not MY definition It's THE definition You can't have any other accurate definition - no matter how much you WANT there to be so you can shoehorn it into something you want to accuse the EFL of Exactly. We have made a mistake. We have been punished. It has not been handled well in terms of timing. Move on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspector Lestrade Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 7 minutes ago, @owlstalk said: WTF It's not MY definition It's THE definition You can't have any other accurate definition - no matter how much you WANT there to be so you can shoehorn it into something you want to accuse the EFL of What the hell is The DEFINITION? Who decided that? I've not accused the ELF of anything in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr. benway Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 I don’t know if I’d call it racist (and I’m as “snowflake” as they come), but it’s pretty xenophobic and undoubtably tone-deaf and unprofessional to insinuate such a thing. But I think the real issue and the one that could cause a lot of trouble for the EFL is defamation of character. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@owlstalk Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Just now, Inspector Lestrade said: What the hell is The DEFINITION? Who decided that? Can't believe I fell for this total trolling attempt Gotta admit I didn't' see it till now Fair play - good trolling! Owlstalk Shop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspector Lestrade Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Just now, @owlstalk said: Can't believe I fell for this total trolling attempt Gotta admit I didn't' see it till now Fair play - good trolling! Oh dear the times you fall back on that old excuse... trolling... very lame, come on you can do better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@owlstalk Posted August 17, 2020 Share Posted August 17, 2020 Just now, Inspector Lestrade said: Oh dear the times you fall back on that old excuse... trolling... very lame, come on you can do better. Nope Not engaging with you now - you're trolling and it's a waste of everyones time to interact - sorry Owlstalk Shop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts