The referee wasn’t trying to be offensive.
Webo, and the players, weren’t wrong for being offended.
I’m fine with that conclusion.
6 Likes
That’s a problem of their own making. We English have the right idea.
Don’t bother learning anyone else’s language, demand everyone speaks ours, lambast the foreigners when they make a mistake or say a foreign word we don’t like.
14 Likes
FWIW.
Emanuel Roşu is an Football journalist in Romania. Did work for Guardian, FourFourTwo, World Soccer, Josimar. Ballon d’Or for ROU.
3 Likes
So the reason for Webo’s sending off in the first place is alleged to be something discriminatory?
Can someone now confirm whether the refs thought they heard Webo say “gypsy” in English, French or Romanian or…and this is necessary by equivalent extension…whether the English word for, example, “ref/referee” (or the French translation) sounds like the Romanian (or any other language’s word, frankly) for “gypsy”?
Hoping that the polyglots can shed some light on this.
5 Likes
In what way? Highlighting the absurdity of what’s being demanded of people?
6 Likes
Yup that’s how I see it.
2 Likes
No I’m not. Hence “alleged”.
I also never disputed that Webo believes he heard “negru” or “negro”.
I’m using language to highlight the absurdity and, frankly, the hypocrisy of arguing discrimination.
Your last sentence suggests that those objecting to the official’s words ARE able to assume what was said, but I can’t engage in the debate using the same assumptions?
Can matters only be discussed from a certain angle/perspective or something? One that you agree with, perchance?
8 Likes
Romanian is a Latin language - so the word for black is ‘negru’. However, a UEFA ref should know better than to refer to players by the colour of their skin.
5 Likes
Romanian, is an indo-european language.
1 Like
Derived from Latin 
2 Likes
Actually thats Daco-Romanian 
2 Likes
All Latin languages are. Romanian sounds like Italian with odd phonemes.
1 Like
You mean the romance languages. But from that, what is the significance to the UEFA ref? Are you saying he is on some sort of constructive notice because of a language etymology?
1 Like
No, just that his reason for saying it was plain and natural enough, the implication that it was a racial slur is simply wrong, but a stupid mistake nonetheless. Probably would have been fine if he had said ‘that Cameroonian’ or something.
edit: right - Romance in English. That ‘c’ always looks weird.
3 Likes
Okay yes agreed, thought you (as well) were losing your better sense. There are so many assumptions being taken as red, in this issue, its almost a pan-west crisis.
Oh yes, Romanesque…last time i checked was a pizza.
1 Like
I actually think that would have been worse. I’ve also seen it suggested he should have used “African”. I’m dubious as to whether either would have been better but it also suggests that he automatically would know Webo’s nationality. What if Webo was a French national but the ref’s calling him African or mistakenly attributes a particular African nationality to him?
Surely safer ground to just go with the most obvious non-discriminatory descriptor that helps identify to his colleague the person who he’s referring to.
3 Likes
Just to eke out the paradox, but how can there actually be a ‘non-discriminatory descriptor’; this is why this is becoming a really dangerous language game. Anytime we address a person, other than in their name, we to some extent discriminate. It is as if some force is actually asking us to deny that racial differences exists; it exists in nature. By the way birds have no trouble with this, they just whistle at each other.
9 Likes
I think African would definitely have been in the same realms, so if the assistant ref did not know Webo was Cameroonian, obviously not an option. Noted simply because he was a long-time Cameroon player, no more harmful to my mind than pointing out Neymar as Brazilian.
1 Like
Yes, I’m approaching it on the basis that descriptors help us to differentiate - they can also be used to discriminate if applied in order to treat differently and not simply to identify.
4 Likes
Yes I thought you were, but from that what I find is always missing - is a factual element to establish a racial harm, a materiality. So for example, it was George Floyd’s death that kicked this round off, but I have still not seen any evidence that the officers actions were racially motivated to do harm. He would have equally harmed a white or Asian man the same way on the evidence I have seen. Or perhaps another criminal of any other racial background with a history of past offending tantamount to that of Floyd.
Im just enjoying a cheese scone…
What we are increasingly seeing though is criminality being attributed to words of differentiation.
5 Likes