Isn't the "heartbeat" (rhythm) of our SS called Los Templados?
Damn racist soccer fans.
Damn racist soccer fans.
NY Times Article on U.S. Soccer Fans
- Thread starter Gotham Gator
- Start date
Strange article.
I'd imagine the lack of latino culture in Seattle is mainly due to the fact that Seattle doesnt have that many Latinos as compared to LA or NY etc.
One of the great things about MLS is how diverse its fanbase is and different cities show that in different ways.
So what if Seattle is more along the lines of Europe or if Vancouver feels more English or if Houston is more Latino.
This article is a huge diservice to MLS and Soccer fans in the USA.
I'd imagine the lack of latino culture in Seattle is mainly due to the fact that Seattle doesnt have that many Latinos as compared to LA or NY etc.
One of the great things about MLS is how diverse its fanbase is and different cities show that in different ways.
So what if Seattle is more along the lines of Europe or if Vancouver feels more English or if Houston is more Latino.
This article is a huge diservice to MLS and Soccer fans in the USA.
I could write for ages, but to avoid repeating what others covered I'll focus on Kang's total misstatement and misreading of Bill Buford's "Among the Thugs." I have mentioned this book once or twice before., It is an amazing book. Buford immersed himself in British soccer supporter culture over several years in the 1980s, attended many games and ran with the thugs during multiple riots, fights, etc. It is an astonishing study of mob and crowd psychology. Buford tries to straddle the line between immersing himself and letting himself stand apart, but finds he gets caught up in the lure of the mob more than he can withstand.
Kang recounts a story from the book of the racist grunting of ape/monkey noises that Buford saw at a match when black players touched the ball, sets that up as one of the defining moments of the book, and then criticizes Buford for his "herculean denial" in not realizing and emphasizing how much the racism was central to the behavior he described. What Kang omits is that Buford spends an entire chapter on his simultaneous and related investigation into National Front culture. There's only 10 chapters in the book, so this is a significant investment. Buford clearly wants there to be a connection between the two cultures and in the end he finds it just isn't there. Sure, some National Front members are soccer supporters and run with the thugs, and there's no denying the occasional racist outburst among the supporters, but the two are really separate phenomena. When it comes to the supporters, there is a clear exercise in "othering" outsiders, but racism is a surprisingly small part of it. That Kang wants it to be more reflects on him, not the book or the subcultures that Buford describes.
One other item Kang omits is that the book focuses on 3 or 4 soccer thug group leaders: Sammy, Roy, Banana Bob, Robert the Sneak Thief. Of them, Roy Downes is black. . The most notable thing about his being black is that it is basically irrelevant to his role. His group is like all the others: English, white, working class, young. And they follow him around to matches, altercations, fights and riots. It doesn't negate the racism that is still there but it does tend to complicate it. And again, Buford doesn't ignore the racism that comes up. At one point Roy and a friend are apart from their group, and happen upon another group who supports a different club, and get beat up. And that group yells out racist stuff while they were doing it. Buford puts it out there, but it is one of dozens of stories of random folks being in the wrong place when a group of soccer thugs were in a frenzy and got beaten up. There is the group, and there is everyone else who are outsiders and fair game. If Roy and his friend were white those thugs would have called them different names but they still would have taken a beating. Of course, Kang ignores Roy and the interesting details and nuances that Roy's story provides to the issue of race and soccer hooliganism in the book. Calling people racist is Kang's hammer, and we're left being all nails. Buford deserves better.
Kang recounts a story from the book of the racist grunting of ape/monkey noises that Buford saw at a match when black players touched the ball, sets that up as one of the defining moments of the book, and then criticizes Buford for his "herculean denial" in not realizing and emphasizing how much the racism was central to the behavior he described. What Kang omits is that Buford spends an entire chapter on his simultaneous and related investigation into National Front culture. There's only 10 chapters in the book, so this is a significant investment. Buford clearly wants there to be a connection between the two cultures and in the end he finds it just isn't there. Sure, some National Front members are soccer supporters and run with the thugs, and there's no denying the occasional racist outburst among the supporters, but the two are really separate phenomena. When it comes to the supporters, there is a clear exercise in "othering" outsiders, but racism is a surprisingly small part of it. That Kang wants it to be more reflects on him, not the book or the subcultures that Buford describes.
One other item Kang omits is that the book focuses on 3 or 4 soccer thug group leaders: Sammy, Roy, Banana Bob, Robert the Sneak Thief. Of them, Roy Downes is black. . The most notable thing about his being black is that it is basically irrelevant to his role. His group is like all the others: English, white, working class, young. And they follow him around to matches, altercations, fights and riots. It doesn't negate the racism that is still there but it does tend to complicate it. And again, Buford doesn't ignore the racism that comes up. At one point Roy and a friend are apart from their group, and happen upon another group who supports a different club, and get beat up. And that group yells out racist stuff while they were doing it. Buford puts it out there, but it is one of dozens of stories of random folks being in the wrong place when a group of soccer thugs were in a frenzy and got beaten up. There is the group, and there is everyone else who are outsiders and fair game. If Roy and his friend were white those thugs would have called them different names but they still would have taken a beating. Of course, Kang ignores Roy and the interesting details and nuances that Roy's story provides to the issue of race and soccer hooliganism in the book. Calling people racist is Kang's hammer, and we're left being all nails. Buford deserves better.
Interesting, and I suppose not surprising, to hear that this is not the first time he's written such crap. Which leads to the bigger question. What the fuck is this doing in the NY Times?
Interesting stuff and a great post. The number of things this guy got wrong is too high to be counted.
Since we're piling on, I'll point out that last year, the seats next to mine were occupied at various matches by people who were Colombian, Ecuadorian, Mexican, French, Italian, Spanish, Welsh, Puerto Rican (I think?), & plain old black and white folks (meaning people who struck me as having come from families that were generationally American - I don't even know if that's the politically correct way to describe them or myself, but I think it gets the point across) of both genders.
I had at least a passing conversation with all of them, and often an ongoing one throughout the match. In news that would shock only Kang, it never crossed my mind to line anyone up against a wall.
Based on my experience, I'd say my general approach to in-stadium fandom is Colombian sprinkled with Mexican cynicism (not the puto chants, etc., I very much mean the cynicism).
the article talked about the inability to pull the soccer loving Mexicans into the MLS fold but in NYC something far more remarkable has happened, we count baseball worshipping Dominicans in our fan base. Living my whole life in Inwood (northern tip of Manhattan, bordering Washington Heights) where baseball is king, I've been pleasantly surprised to see more than a few NYCFC shirts among the populous. Quite a few locals come to Tryon Public House to watch away matches as well and I'm friendly with a good number from going to matches and various supporter's clubs.
Soccer in the USA is arguably the most inclusive sport. He should attack lacrosse if he wants to make a case for something.
Don't believe me? Watch the G-D video of our club opening a new playground pitch at a school in Brooklyn. The only white person there was Patricoff.
What an ass.
Don't believe me? Watch the G-D video of our club opening a new playground pitch at a school in Brooklyn. The only white person there was Patricoff.
What an ass.
Not only is this article offensive, hateful, untruthful and, in fact, racist, but it fails to even recite enough self-serving, misplaced evidence to state a case for the pre-conceived premise it attempts to prove. There is a history in Europe of a small group of soccer fans acting inappropriately, I read a book, and I went to one MLS game and heard the fans sing one song, so therefore American soccer fans hate blacks, Muslims and Mexicans. What? He couldn’t even accomplish a competent hack job here. Forget about our reaction, I am certain that no reasonably intelligent unbiased individual reading this could think that there is any merit to his suggestions. Fail.
As our Legal Eagle, could you write a 15 page brief on this and have it to us Monday morning?
JayH - get the retainer upfront.
And the song he references has no racial undertones in it whatsoever.
"Oh, some Europeans sang that song once." "Oh, and some Europeans are also racist." There is no connection.
The song he uses as an example is about as bad as saying "I hope our team kicks their ass."
Outside of me disagreeing with everything he's saying here, this is the part that pisses me off the most. He produces zero argument and zero facts/basis.
And again, if he wasn't so damn lazy there are some examples he could cherry-pick from to build a generalizing, non-representative argument. But he doesn't even do that!
Huh. Maybe I'm the only one. But I rather liked the Times article.
Of course, I'm a massive racist.
Of course, I'm a massive racist.
whoops, looks like you left your computer unlocked and a coworker is having a laugh.....
I heard you sing Hey Baby once. That song can be interpreted as threatening and discriminatory by singling out those who may not be NYC, as well as those who may voluntarily choose not to respond to the question of whether or not they are, in fact, NYC. Henceforth, you approve of black men being pushed from European subway trains.
Here is another article the author wrote......
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/10/magazine/the-unbearable-whiteness-of-baseball.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/10/magazine/the-unbearable-whiteness-of-baseball.html
Similar threads
