Max Lowe Racial Stereotyping

[OohMartWright]

Ramage made a statement that was clearly wrong.

He has apologised for it, twice in fact.

He has been sacked from a job he obviously loved and will now be left to think long and hard about what he said and why he should not have done so.

That should be the end of the matter.

That this thread is now being used by some to "stick the knife in" and by others to demonstrate their overwhelming virtue is both tedious and regrettable.

[cj9a408]

1 minute ago, OohMartWright said:

Ramage made a statement that was clearly wrong.

He has apologised for it, twice in fact.

He has been sacked from a job he obviously loved and will now be left to think long and hard about what he said and why he should not have done so.

That should be the end of the matter.

That this thread is now being used by some to "stick the knife in" and by others to demonstrate their overwhelming virtue is both tedious and regrettable.

Absolutely agree!

[archram]

Being nearly 80, I was brought up in a society where many of these words were acceptable although now we realise they are racist. Over the years we have become more enlightened and understand how hurtful and damaging racist language can be. I still am aware that sometimes I have to think about the words I use - it’s quite difficult to erase language learnt in childhood.

However, without knowing what age he is, I would assume that Craig Ramage grew up in a time when our use of language was already being questioned. Although he winds himself up til he says the first thing that enters his head, it might have been hoped that he’d thought about and tried to retrain his automatic verbal memory if that’s what appeared to have happened.

[Stive Pesley]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

I mean I buy The Sun sometimes (for the football and horse racing pullouts) and because of that one poster on here has pretty much inferred that makes me a racist?

There is a whole different argument about inferring racism on people because of their indirect actions - and that's really tricky. It's human instinct to try and see both sides in an argument. Clearly Ramage made a racist remark in the heat of the moment when he didn't engage his brain properly, and there is nuance to the situation. You have to look at it, consider it and then conclude - yes it was racist.  He didn't go out and beat up someone of a different race purely because of the colour of their skin, which would have been obvious racism that needed no consideration whatsoever.

I think the simple act of considering the nuance should not be used as a reason to call someone racist. In this case I think considering it and deciding it's NOT racist would be totally the wrong call.

Then we're in the realms of "is defending someone's right to say it's not racist" a racist act in itself?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[G STAR RAM]

15 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

There is a whole different argument about inferring racism on people because of their indirect actions - and that's really tricky. It's human instinct to try and see both sides in an argument. Clearly Ramage made a racist remark in the heat of the moment when he didn't engage his brain properly, and there is nuance to the situation. You have to look at it, consider it and then conclude - yes it was racist.  He didn't go out and beat up someone of a different race purely because of the colour of their skin, which would have been obvious racism that needed no consideration whatsoever.

I think the simple act of considering the nuance should not be used as a reason to call someone racist. In this case I think considering it and deciding it's NOT racist would be totally the wrong call.

Then we're in the realms of "is defending someone's right to say it's not racist" a racist act in itself?

Agreed.

I certainly havent said he is not racist, I dont know the guy or his views.

Is it fair to also say that on the back of one comment its probably not wise to conclude someone is racist and then also go further and say that anyone that tries to discuss his comments are also racist?

Because that is what is being inferred by numerous posters now.

[Tamworthram]

27 minutes ago, OohMartWright said:

Ramage made a statement that was clearly wrong.

He has apologised for it, twice in fact.

He has been sacked from a job he obviously loved and will now be left to think long and hard about what he said and why he should not have done so.

That should be the end of the matter.

That this thread is now being used by some to "stick the knife in" and by others to demonstrate their overwhelming virtue is both tedious and regrettable.

Spot on. I don't like Ramage as a football pundit or whatever you want to call his job, but I take no pleasure from seeing him replaced under these circumstances. 

[Key clubber]

37 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

You can see why Bogle tried to head the ball to Waghorn given how much space he was in when Bogle committed. Their LB just read the play better than Wags and got there first. 

 

After the goal went in, Waghorn falpped his arms in frustration with Bogle's mistake, and Bogle pointed out what his intention was. It didn't last much more than a second.

 

If It didn’t last more than a second I must have been in a time warp. 
I genuinely thought Waghorn was going to lose his cool and actually thought Waghorn walked towards him to remonstrate . 
I may stand corrected but obviously by this time I’d lost my sh#t with more stupid defending by Bogle. 

[rynny]

44 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

You can see why Bogle tried to head the ball to Waghorn given how much space he was in when Bogle committed. Their LB just read the play better than Wags and got there first

I thought I was going mad when I thought that was the case. 

[Hotter]

3 hours ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

This may be the case but he is a broadcaster. One of the key skills of the job is to articulate what you are trying to say.

He's an ex footballer - they're almost all poor articulators!

I am not defending him, I am simply stating that I do not believe for one minute he was intending to be racist and I am also stating that I do not believe for one minute that Lowe would have responded at all had Ramage been praising him. 

In short, I don't "buy" the drama in the slightest but Ramage needs to be more careful and / or professional moving forward.  

[Anag Ram]

2 minutes ago, rynny said:

I thought I was going mad when I thought that was the case. 

The incident was fairly typical of Derby's inability to find their own player with headers. 

Week after week, the opposition calmly head the ball to feet whilst we seem unable to head it with any direction. 

It's also fair to say that their left back was about 30 yards from goal when he got the ball and that we made his path to goal pretty easy. 

Bogle was culpable but only in part. 

[Sasha]

16 hours ago, curb said:

Not all of us voted for him.

I did 

[Sith Happens]

My initial thoughts were that maybe there would be a second chance of sorts, after a lengthy suspension/education process, but on reflection I do think the right decision was arrived at, I am not sure how there could have been a healthy relationship between Derby and Radio Derby if he had remained.

It does make me wonder though how we react to different people. Ramage more than divides opinions, he doesn't seem too popular regardless of this situation, however someone like Eranio is still considered a hero among many Derby fans. I wonder how many people demanding the sacking of ramage cheered when this happened?

Eranio appears to have been afforded a second chance, and retains his position with AC Milan although he did lose his job in the media when he made the statement he did.

“Black players in the defensive line often make these mistakes because they’re not concentrated,” said Eranio. “They are powerful physically, but when it is time to think … they often make this type of error.”

I cant see what the difference is between what he said and what ramage said.

I wonder if ramage, not a club legend, will be afforded the same forgiveness as eranio, a club legend to many, from Derby county fans.

[DarkFruitsRam7]

2 hours ago, DRBee said:

You misunderstand, it was the separation and comparison  of black and Asian I was commenting on , not the references to white people.

Oh fair enough.

That was because @Alpha suggested that the Asian experience is perhaps more difficult than the black experience right now in the UK. I didn’t really express an opinion on it, but just didn’t really refute it.

[Steve How Hard?]

15 minutes ago, Key clubber said:

If It didn’t last more than a second I must have been in a time warp. 
I genuinely thought Waghorn was going to lose his cool and actually thought Waghorn walked towards him to remonstrate . 
I may stand corrected but obviously by this time I’d lost my sh#t with more stupid defending by Bogle. 

Definitely lasted more than a second. They were still at it as Waghorn made his way back to the halfway line. 

[Sith Happens]

1 minute ago, Steve How Hard? said:

Definitely lasted more than a second. They were still at it as Waghorn made his way back to the halfway line. 

If i was bogle i'd have said what about that header you had where it was easier to score than not.....

I dont like to see senior players like that lambasting our younger players.

[Steve How Hard?]

1 minute ago, Paul71 said:

If i was bogle i'd have said what about that header you had where it was easier to score than not.....

I dont like to see senior players like that lambasting our younger players.

To be fair to Waggy, I think he was just refuting Bogles claim that it was his fault. He's got a bad attitude that Bogle................or so I'm told. ?

[ramsbottom]

40 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

There is a whole different argument about inferring racism on people because of their indirect actions - and that's really tricky. It's human instinct to try and see both sides in an argument. Clearly Ramage made a racist remark in the heat of the moment when he didn't engage his brain properly, and there is nuance to the situation. You have to look at it, consider it and then conclude - yes it was racist.  He didn't go out and beat up someone of a different race purely because of the colour of their skin, which would have been obvious racism that needed no consideration whatsoever.

I think the simple act of considering the nuance should not be used as a reason to call someone racist. In this case I think considering it and deciding it's NOT racist would be totally the wrong call.

Then we're in the realms of "is defending someone's right to say it's not racist" a racist act in itself?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

23 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Agreed.

I certainly havent said he is not racist, I dont know the guy or his views.

Is it fair to also say that on the back of one comment its probably not wise to conclude someone is racist and then also go further and say that anyone that tries to discuss his comments are also racist?

Because that is what is being inferred by numerous posters now.

All I have been discussing is how people can not see his comments as anything other than racist.  He's labelled a group of players lazy based on their ethnic backgrounds.  Not sure how users like the below can still say it isn't...

8 minutes ago, Hotter said:

He's an ex footballer - they're almost all poor articulators!

I am not defending him, I am simply stating that I do not believe for one minute he was intending to be racist and I am also stating that I do not believe for one minute that Lowe would have responded at all had Ramage been praising him. 

In short, I don't "buy" the drama in the slightest but Ramage needs to be more careful and / or professional moving forward.  

 

[Zag zig]

1 hour ago, OohMartWright said:

Ramage made a statement that was clearly wrong.

He has apologised for it, twice in fact.

He has been sacked from a job he obviously loved and will now be left to think long and hard about what he said and why he should not have done so.

That should be the end of the matter.

That this thread is now being used by some to "stick the knife in" and by others to demonstrate their overwhelming virtue is both tedious and regrettable.

Well i thought reading the last 10 pages I’d come largely across a diversity debate.

Then I realised some threads don’t discuss football on here, so everyone’s on track still I guess.

[Ghost of Clough]

15 minutes ago, rynny said:

I thought I was going mad when I thought that was the case. 

It was still a wonky under hit header.

Bogle had 4 options.
1. Head to Waghorn to keep play going.
2. Head clear for a throw - with the distance to the sideline, there's a high chance of their winger intercepting and getting an easy cross in.
3. Head clear up the field. Bogle isn't renown for the distance on his headers, so it likely would have fell to their LB anyway.
4. Control the ball and play out - it seemed like a difficult ball to control, and a bad touch would result in the winger going through on goal. Even with a good touch, the winger would be pressing him quickly.

I'm siding with an accurate header to Waghorn as being the best option.

[Ghost of Clough]

7 minutes ago, Steve How Hard? said:

To be fair to Waggy, I think he was just refuting Bogles claim that it was his fault. He's got a bad attitude that Bogle................or so I'm told. ?

Waghorn threw his arms around before Bogle pointed.