So Ezgjan Alioski will not face disciplinary action for the gross misdeed he committed against a Burnley player in May. And what heinous crime did the FA magnanimously decide not to punish him for? Well, after being called a cry baby by a Burnley player, Alioski 'allegedly' made a cry baby gesture towards Dwight McNeil. The hearing was told that McNeil didn't actually see the gesture but the complaint was made by a team mate who did, and who said it was a gesture that 'could be perceived as discriminatory'.
We know the world is going soft and everyone is offended about something (or nothing) these days, but wouldn't you think the rough, tough examples of manhood we admire out there on the pitch would be thick-skinned enough to know what is banter and what isn't. And, perhaps more significantly, what does it say about the FA, who could have kicked this waste of time and money into touch from the off?
We know the answer, don't we. It's all for show. Just to demonstrate what a PC and fair-minded organisation the FA is. A mentality that explains why the aforesaid organisation forced England's Ben Chilwell and Mason Mount to self-isolate after 'interacting' with Scotland's Billy Gilmour. The fact that the rest of the Scotland squad and backroom staff had been interacting with Billy Gilmour on the pitch, in the dressing room, in training, in hotels, while socialising etc was totally ignored.
It really depresses and angers me to know that we now exist in a warped and soft-centred society where people are so desperate to be seen as doing the right thing, that common sense goes out of the window and the over-sensitivities of the lily-livered ones among us are pandered to. Even more depressing is the fact that most of the rest of us accept this as being just where we are now. Well, if this really is where we are now, God help us and God help the FA and the rest of the cry babies out there.
Cry babies
posted on 23/6/21
Meanwhile they didn't investigate Canos's headbutt on Alioski in the championship a couple of season's ago.
posted on 24/6/21
I actually thought the FA dealt with this properly.
Was pretty swift.
The statement made perfect sense and a fair judgement was given.
posted on 24/6/21
You mean swift by the FA's standards. But part of my point is how did it even get as far as a hearing when, if common sense had prevailed, it should have been dismissed. If the FA – and other organisations – give credence to incidents like this, they're creating a rod for their own back and we'll see even more petty and pointless complaints of this nature. Some, I suspect, with not such a fair outcome.
posted on 24/6/21
Very passionate post, but i think i'm with you on just about everything. I do despair how massively over sensitive things are becoming.
posted on 24/6/21
You title the article "Cry babies". Then proceed to cry about how the world has changed since you were a little boy.
Yes there are things here and there that are over the top and daft. But by and large the world is a better place than it used to be for a lot of people. Stop being so over sensitive about it.
posted on 24/6/21
In fairness in a word where people have chosen that the universally recognised OK symbol is a white power symbol all of a sudden none of this idiocy surprises me.
posted on 24/6/21
I suppose it's down to the situation with referees.
If a player reports an 'incident' that might have been a racist attack, the ref is obliged to log it. The FA are then obliged to investigate it because the ref logged it.
The source of the problem is the problem. Players who are quick to take offence at perceived racist slights are the real issue. Snowflakes in football just trying to use the rules to give other players grief.
If it's something clearly racist abuse then fine, but anything other should be allowed to be binned by referees.
posted on 24/6/21
comment by Wonder Man (U11164)
posted 7 hours ago
You title the article "Cry babies". Then proceed to cry about how the world has changed since you were a little boy.
Yes there are things here and there that are over the top and daft. But by and large the world is a better place than it used to be for a lot of people. Stop being so over sensitive about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------Well as a 65-year-old, I'm more than pleased the world has changed since I was a little boy – at least in most respects. And yes the world is by and large a better place sociologically, if not ecologically, but from your reaction to a well-meaning post, I sense you're the one who's over-sensitive my friend.
posted on 26/6/21
Things appear a lot better now but there is clearly a lot going on under the surface that comes to light when people are either under stress or think they are anonymous. Still too much racism and homophobia and bigotry relating to religions for my liking.
But this case was the worst example of someone being a total divvy. The FA should have thrown the book at the idiot who thought there was anything in it and made the claim - that player should be sent on an awareness course and everyone should go on it every time they claim something so ridiculous.
There are real things to deal with. Then there are soft numpties
posted on 26/6/21
We sadly live in a PC world, can't say boo ! I grew up with Fawlty Towers, Porridge, Fools & Horses, etc...where freedom of speech was aloud. I rest my case.