"Evident Bias" in Football Commentary

[Spike]

1 minute ago, Mpache said:

I'm sorry if I did sound racist.

You know that wasn't my intention. I was just trying to get my point across.

It's all good,i'm just giving you a hard time 

[Tommy]

1 hour ago, Spike said:

Yeah, he definitely has shit for brains. For crying out loud, he wears a Guevara t-shirt and that guy HATED black people 

Well to be fair, I know many people who wear those Guevara Shirts without actually knowing anything about him. It's more of a stupid fashion trend. 

[Spike]

2 minutes ago, Tommy said:

Well to be fair, I know many people who wear those Guevara Shirts without actually knowing anything about him. It's more of a stupid fashion trend. 

Genius play by the CIA to undermine Guevara's message by putting him on a t-shirt after putting him in a body bag.

[nudge]

1 hour ago, Spike said:

Yeah, he definitely has shit for brains. For crying out loud, he wears a Guevara t-shirt and that guy HATED black people 

Did he though?

[Mpache]

One thing I have noticed is that football training differs on each country's philosophy.

I can't speak a lot for Europe, but I can for South America.

Argentina and Brazil: I put these together because it's hard to categorize them with all the quality footballers they pump out on a consistent basis. While I'd say Brazilians more focus on flair and technique, Argentina strikes me as all rounders as they've never had problem positions, where as Brazil has.

Uruguay and Paraguay: Putting these together because they have the same football mentality. Rather than technique and pace, they are more about power and work ethic. Tactics and always giving it your all, running a good distance each game. It's why in South America they are seen as the 2 warrior nations in football.

Peru and Chile: Technique more than physique and tactics. Some of the best technical players in South America are found here. 

Ecuador: This one has found success thanks to racial stereotypes and the Esmeraldas gene which makes the players fast and powerful. It's actually so bad that it made people think Ecuador is mostly a black country. It works for them, but it's not really fairly divided if we're looking for an equal world. But that's how they are.

Venezuela: This one I think is strength? I'm not 100% sure to be honest.

Bolivia: Same with this one. Think it's just learning to play in altitude.

Colombia: This one is similar to Ecuador but have found success with dividing the black players and the whites so that both sides can play the game. The black players are trained to be strong and powerful and the white players to be technical. Colombia in general is the third or 4th best technical football nation behind Peru, Chile and Argentina.

That's a bit of information. Keep in mind I'm just stating how these players are trained and in no way mean to sound racist. Especially in Colombia and Ecuador, if you're black you are destined to be a pace and power player, and it shouldn't be that way because they can also be technical if they want. Peruvian football proves that, where as our black players are more technique than pace (for the most part). As Spike said, all about developing them right. Especially in a more racially divided continent like South America. 

A lot of players are developed based on genetics, which isn't really fair on the player who wants to be something else, should they have the talent for it. I'd be very interested to hear a player speak out on the matter should a study on this ever come forth.

[Spike]

4 minutes ago, nudge said:

Did he though?

Quote

"The blacks, those magnificent examples of the African race who have maintained their racial purity thanks to their lack of an affinity with bathing, have seen their territory invaded by a new kind of slave: the Portuguese. And the two ancient races have now begun a hard life together, fraught with bickering and squabbles. Discrimination and poverty unite them in the daily fight for survival but their different ways of approaching life separate them completely: The black is indolent and a dreamer; spending his meager wage on frivolity or drink; the European has a tradition of work and saving, which has pursued him as far as this corner of America and drives him to advance himself, even independently of his own individual aspirations."

 

[Spike]

1 minute ago, Mpache said:

One thing I have noticed is that football training differs on each country's philosophy.

I can't speak a lot for Europe, but I can for South America.

Argentina and Brazil: I put these together because it's hard to categorize them with all the quality footballers they pump out on a consistent basis. While I'd say Brazilians more focus on flair and technique, Argentina strikes me as all rounders as they've never had problem positions, where as Brazil has.

Uruguay and Paraguay: Putting these together because they have the same football mentality. Rather than technique and pace, they are more about power and work ethic. Tactics and always giving it your all, running a good distance each game. It's why in South America they are seen as the 2 warrior nations in football.

 

Uruguay and Argentoma are the same. Fantastic forwards and creative players, failing that resrot to murderball. 

[nudge]

35 minutes ago, Spike said:

"The blacks, those magnificent examples of the African race who have maintained their racial purity thanks to their lack of an affinity with bathing, have seen their territory invaded by a new kind of slave: the Portuguese. And the two ancient races have now begun a hard life together, fraught with bickering and squabbles. Discrimination and poverty unite them in the daily fight for survival but their different ways of approaching life separate them completely: The black is indolent and a dreamer; spending his meager wage on frivolity or drink; the European has a tradition of work and saving, which has pursued him as far as this corner of America and drives him to advance himself, even independently of his own individual aspirations."

Yes, written in the Motorcycle Diaries during his early adulthood, when he was just starting his South American adventure. I think it's safe to say that at that point, he was indeed a privileged boy with prejudices against blacks typical for Argentinians of his class and ancestry at that time. Did later experiences change his initial beliefs? Would definitely say so, considering it was the transformative journey for him, in all aspects.

Contrasted with this in later life:

1959, speech at the Central University of Las Villas in Santa Clara:

"So what must I say about the university's fundamental duty, its article number one, in this new Cuba? What I must say is that the university should color itself black and color itself mulatto—not just as regards students but also professors. It should paint itself the color of workers and peasants. It should paint itself the color of the people, because the university is the patrimony of no one but the people of Cuba. If this people, whose representatives occupy all the government posts, rose up in arms and broke through the dikes of reaction, it was not because those dikes lacked flexibility. Nor did reaction lack the basic intelligence to be flexible in order to slow the people's advance. Nevertheless, the people triumphed—a triumph that makes them feel even a bit spoiled—and they are conscious of their own power, that they are unstoppable. Today the people stand at the door of the university, and it is the university that must be flexible. It must color itself black, mulatto, worker, peasant, or else be left without doors. And then the people will tear it apart and paint it with the colors they see fit."

"And to the professors, my colleagues, I have something similar to say to you: You must color yourselves black, mulatto, worker and peasant. You must go to the people. You must live and breathe as one with the people, which is to say, you must feel the needs of Cuba as a whole. When we achieve this, no one will be the loser. All of us will have won, and Cuba will be able to continue its march toward the future on a stronger footing."

 

1964, address to United Nations:

"The final hour of colonialism has struck, and millions of inhabitants of Africa, Asia and Latin America rise to meet a new life and demand their unrestricted right to self-determination."

"We speak out to put the world on guard against what is happening in South Africa. The brutal policy of apartheid is applied before the eyes of the nations of the world. The peoples of Africa are compelled to endure the fact that on the African continent the superiority of one race over another remains official policy, and that in the name of this racial superiority murder is committed with impunity. Can the United Nations do nothing to stop this?"

"Those who kill their own children and discriminate daily against them because of the color of their skin; those who let the murderers of blacks remain free, protecting them, and furthermore punishing the black population because they demand their legitimate rights as free men — how can those who do this consider themselves guardians of freedom? The government of the United States is not the champion of freedom, but rather the perpetrator of exploitation and oppression against the peoples of the world and against a large part of its own population."

 

 

[Azeem]

It is generally accepted that what a person said or wrote in his latter life is considered as his/her final stance even if it contradicts what was said earlier and never refuted directly 

[Smiley Culture]

Commentators and pundits generally talk complete rubbish in general, not just with unconscious racial bias. Everywhere is a tough place to go, that’s my favourite, it’s a translation of “I haven’t researched any of this”. 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Mpache said:

Bale is also fast and powerful, while Pogba is technical and intelligent. Of course this doesn't apply to everyone, but thanks to genetics, most black players are fast and powerful and whites are technical and intelligent. The coaches are the ones with the bias most likely as they are the ones who decide what a player can be. 

The commentators are really just saying what they see.

So you are saying white footballers are more intelligent?

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Eco said:

Saying genetics is the reason black people are faster and white people are smarter is 100% racist and 100% untrue.

@Mpache gonna say this its harsh but true. Some of the things you say are bollocks as eco just pointed out. I don't believe someone  without  aspergers would say some of the things you do. You need to go very careful  what you say. You're a nice guy but absolutely infuriating  some times.  

[Spike]

10 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

So you are saying white footballers are more intelligent?

 

5 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

@Mpache gonna say this its harsh but true. Some of the things you say are bollocks as eco just pointed out. I don't believe someone  without  aspergers would say some of the things you do. You need to go very careful  what you say. You're a nice guy but absolutely infuriating  some times.  

You missed that boat by a few hours.

[Guest]

Just now, Spike said:

 

You missed that boat by a few hours.

Only just read it mate. 

[Mpache]

14 minutes ago, Spike said:

 

You missed that boat by a few hours.

He’s also missed the point by many sharpens.

[Mpache]

22 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

@Mpache gonna say this its harsh but true. Some of the things you say are bollocks as eco just pointed out. I don't believe someone  without  aspergers would say some of the things you do. You need to go very careful  what you say. You're a nice guy but absolutely infuriating  some times.  

I won’t say it’s harsh. I don’t listen to a word he says, given he (and apparently you) don’t read the full point by choice.

[Devil-Dick Willie]

10 hours ago, Stan said:

They literally did a study of 80 televised games.

More than just 'entirely theory'.

20 games each from Serie A, Ligue 1, La Liga & Premier League. English language commentary. 

2074 statement analysed on 643 unique players.

Study found that 'commentators were 6.59x more likely to comment on strength of player with darker skin tone' and '3.38x more likely to comment on speed of player with darker skin tone' than lighter skinned players.

When it came to intelligence/work ethic, more than 60% praise aimed at players with lighter skin tone.

Researchers found that 'differencess are most stark when commentators are discussing physical characteristics/athletic abilities' 

Sorry, but this kind of flippant comment does not help in the slightest. Not once has the research implied that anyone or any commentator is/has been racist. You can infer your own conclusions but if you actually read the article it doesn't say that racist language is used. Just that specific kinds of language are more attributed to players depending on their skin tone in both ways.

 

I study exercise science. 
A vast majority of the time black athletes have significantly more type 2 (fast twitch) muscle fibers than white athletes in the same sport. This means they're stronger and more powerful (and that power translates to short distance speed) A commentator wouldn't be doing his job if he didn't praise fast, strong players for their speed and strength, no matter their skin tone.  
The work ethic part of the study is interesting, but a 60/40 split is actually quite narrow and well within an acceptable range given the very small sample size. 

People who study actually real sciences often get frustrated by the social scientists, because biology doesn't give a fuck. People all around the world have overwhelming differences in physical attributes. And that's something to celebrate. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Mpache said:

I won’t say it’s harsh. I don’t listen to a word he says, given he (and apparently you) don’t read the full point by choice.

You just word things so wrong though  you need to be more careful. You literally  said black players were less intelligent than white 

[Devil-Dick Willie]

7 hours ago, Cicero said:

Not sure if this has any relevance, but cross fitters are arguably considered the most athletic individuals on the planet. And all the top competitors are white. 

There is so much wrong with that. You've ignored the HUGE socioeconomic barriers for crossfitters. 

[Mpache]

4 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

You just word things so wrong though  you need to be more careful. You literally  said black players were less intelligent than white 

Yes, to which I apologized and said that wasn’t my intention. If you’re going to quote me, read my full point before jumping to conclusions.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Devil-Dick Willie said:

There is so much wrong with that. You've ignored the HUGE socioeconomic barriers for crossfitters. 

What are those barriers? It's a genuine question I don't know anything about it.

[Devil-Dick Willie]

Just now, Gunnersauraus said:

What are those barriers? It's a genuine question I don't know anything about it.

Crossfit gyms are expensive, and very 'white centric' Overwhelmingly white clients. Usually middle class and higher to afford the $50+ per week plus memberships. Not at all saying it's intentionally restrictive for racial reasons. 
 

Then, once you're a well rounded athlete, training at a crossfit gym for years, it's also expensive as fuck to get your foot in the door, compete in the events to get ranked, and eventually qualify for regional and national events. AND THEN you need to get your own sponsors, because it just keeps getting more prohibitively priced as you go up. And to cap it all off, it pays fuck all for 90% of the people who do actually qualify for the crossfit games. 

Crossfit is closer to powerlifting or bodybuilding. An expensive as fuck hobby for the 99%, rather than an avenue to revenue. 

[Rucksackfranzose]

@Mpache I'm jealous. To find a way to unnecassarily mention Peru in a thread about racial bias of English-language football commentary is impressive.

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, Mpache said:

Yes, to which I apologized and said that wasn’t my intention. If you’re going to quote me, read my full point before jumping to conclusions.

Fair enough 

[Spike]

1 hour ago, Devil-Dick Willie said:

I study exercise science. 
A vast majority of the time black athletes have significantly more type 2 (fast twitch) muscle fibers than white athletes in the same sport. This means they're stronger and more powerful (and that power translates to short distance speed) A commentator wouldn't be doing his job if he didn't praise fast, strong players for their speed and strength, no matter their skin tone.  
The work ethic part of the study is interesting, but a 60/40 split is actually quite narrow and well within an acceptable range given the very small sample size. 

People who study actually real sciences often get frustrated by the social scientists, because biology doesn't give a fuck. People all around the world have overwhelming differences in physical attributes. And that's something to celebrate. 

You're 100% right but what people get caught up in is the correlation between skin colour and physical attributes. I'm no geneticist but I'm positive the genes that control melanin production are different that influence muscular make-up. Correlation isn't causation, black people might have more type 2 fibres but that isn't because of their skin colour. But what people do is make assumptions based on that information.

At the end of the day the semantics rule the world, black people have more type 2 fibres than average but that isn't because of their skin colour...  fuck me it's a touchy thing to word properly

It's not like a person gets stronger when they tan ffs