A Troubling Verdict

I've spent the last four or five days biting my lip, taking the jibes, and taking in the quite ludicrous judgement handed down by the FA on Monday night.  I've read, watched and listened to every one come out and regurgitate what they've been told to believe by the judgement, and the accompanying media.  Jumping down the throat of both the player, the club, and those who choose not to be drawn in and manipulated by the decision, the establishment.

Oh, you might say, oh, a typical Liverpool fan who's response is tinged with the reddest of red tinted glasses... the world hates us... the system is corrupt, etc.

But is that really the case? Or is that simply because we, as a large body, have not been taken in by the hypocritical and xenophobic decision laid down by the governing body of this countries football?

The media in this country have such a cripplingly powerful effect over a large proportion of the population, whereby the word of Sky Sports, TalkSport or a journalist is taken at the absolute truth.  The agenda these forms of media have is quite frankly astounding.  Yesterday, a brilliant article was put up on the goal.com website - not usually a site to be associated with high class and knowledgeable writing - that looked at the case of Luis Suarez and took a step back, highlighting the 'ignorance and clumsiness' running through the veins of the case, who's decision making masters have 'an attitude that remains indisputably in the stone age.'

An article that went against the memo, the party line, and looked beyond the truths we were told to believe by the majority.  This article remained unchanged for less than an hour, before, presumably, the editor felt it necessary to add:

'Nevertheless, Suarez has been made to look ignorant and clumsy, too. And whatever his intentions were at Anfield on that day in mid-October, he really should have known better in  the first place.'

This, systematically changed the entire message of the article in two sentences.  Disappointing.

And now, back to the 'case' - although it feels hard to call it so, such was the predetermined outcome weeks before the 'case' was even heard.

Luis Suarez, a Uruguayan, is reported to have said the word 'negrito' or 'negro' to Patrice Evra in response to the Frenchman's jibe of 'sudaca', a strongly derogative term aimed at South Americans.

Now, it is important to understand that the world no longer revolves around the English, in fact, the English on the whole are pretty despised by the rest of the world.  With that said, there's half a chance that there are different cultures and ways of life that exist around the world. So, you'd think, perhaps, that this would be taken in to consideration when deciding the outcome of one of the most infamous cases in recent memory.

In England, the word 'nigger' is unacceptable, there are no two ways about it.  I would not say either of those terms, certainly not in as public an arena as a Premier League football match, but then I am English.  It is within our culture not to say such a term, yet those who do (and there are many, many more than the powers that be will have us believe) have no excuse, and must simply be considered - a racist.

However, in the English language, the English culture, there is no equivalent to the term negrito.  The closest it can be considered to, is pal.  Whilst there may be connotations to those with darker skin, in the Uruguayan culture, this is not considered offensive, rather a friendly colloquial term used as a nickname.  A quick search on the internet will throw up a number of examples, 1950 Uruguayan World Cup winner Obdulio Varela - 'El Negro Jefe' or 'The Black Chief' - racist? I don't think so.  Javier Hernandez referred to a Mexican teamate, Omar Esparza, in similar fashion, 'I liked the goal of the Negrito, I think it's a sign of Chivas' youth'. Whats even more interesting, is that the Manchester United team mates of Evra reportedly use the word as a nickname for the Frenchman.  I struggle to believe Evra runs around Carrington accusing people of racism, but then again, who knows?

Somewhat ironic, perhaps, that in this storm of outrage and disgust, the notion of race as an descriptive term, is seen far more negatively in England than it is in Uruguay.

Interesting.

To ban Suarez for 8 games for something that quite clearly was not said with any racist malice or intent is quite frankly staggering.  The mere fact that Suarez has reportedly admitted saying the word shows that he does not consider it to be racist, or discriminatory at all.  It could be argued that Suarez should have known the sensitivity around the term 'negro' or similar, but who are we, the English, to know how it is to come in to our culture and attempt to adjust - when so many of its nuances would seem quite frankly bizarre to a individual from South America.

Yes, that could be argued and yes, he may have been naive in saying what he did, but was that worthy of having his image and reputation tarnished with the most debilitating and despicable term of being a racist?  No, quite honestly it was not. 

Over recent years, foreign Football Associations have been given pointless fines by UEFA and FIFA in response to clear and disgusting racism (Spain, Macedonia, etc) and the FA have rightly fumed. They have been waiting to show the world how to deal with racism in a ruthless and unforgiven manner. Yet this is the wrong case to do it in. Luis Suarez's destiny was decided at the very outset of the case, the FA wanted to be seen as swinging an iron fist in the face of racism and spineless governing bodies.

But to do so in a situation which very foundations are built upon the loosest ground imaginable, whilst not taking in to account that cultural differences do exist and do provide a reality and conclusion so far from the judgement is quite frankly unreal in this day and age.

The actions of the FA have been at the very least strange, initially waiting over two months for the case to be heard, only interviewing Suarez once with no video footage and not asking for his version of events, whilst Evra was met more than once and shown footage before submitting his final statement.  Strange.  Further to that, where is the written reason for the decision? Whispers yesterday suggested it would be well in to January before Liverpool would receive such details.  Again, strange.

Whats more, it is strange that Evra appears to have got off scot-free with his barbed 'sudaca' comment, widely considered in South American culture to be be far more derogative and hurtful than what Suarez responded with.

The obvious question is why? Why the delay in publishing the written reason for the case? With every passing hour, its fuels the fire that the ruling is holed.

Liverpool Football Club are not defending a racist, despite such individuals as Paul McGrath (who happily defended Ron Atkinson, lets not forget) and a multitude of tabloid hacks saying so. They are defending who they, and their legal team, believe to be an innocent man, wrongly labelled and punished as a racist.

I can't help but believe that the staggering hypocrisy in this country to accept different cultures and nationality, despite the proclamations to the contrary of many in power, underlines the ridiculous nature of this judgement, and following media explosion.  This 'case' has a long, long way to run yet, that is for sure.  The bullish nature of Liverpool FC does not suggest misguided arrogance, it suggests they are certain that a miscarriage of justice has occured, and to quote John Barnes, a player who had to deal with racism more than perhaps any other during the 1980's, a 'witch hunt' is underway against Luis Suarez.

Beginning Work #lunchtimeblog

So, my 6th day of work heralds the arrival of my first #lunchtimeblog - clearly going to be a best seller decent at best lunch time read.

I'm now in to my second week of full time work in the big, wide "real world" that is continuously built up as the biggest and scariest thing ever in life by everything and everyone since you hit about fifteen years old.  Thankfully, I'm still alive and doing the odd seemingly semi-worthwhile thing here as I struggle to get to grips with pretty much everything; the abreviated terms, reguarly used jargon, procedures, etc etc.

I've been told that I won't fully know what I'm doing for three months or so, maybe even as much as a year, which means these opening weeks are the start of a long process to reaching a standard expected of me, and the position itself.  I feel like a massive sponge, full to the brim with water as I look to take on as much as possible, although clearly processing relatively little.

Fortunately, I think, the position is new and thankfully that means I'm not coming in to the organisation in the shadow of someone else.  It means I can develop the role, to a certain extent, to fit me and what I'm good at.

Which is good.

I feel like I've adjusted fairly well to being in an office for 8/9 hours a day.  It goes quicker than a day at River Island (probably because I'm actually doing something...) and it is physically less tiring (because I get to sit down! Haarrrr harrrr maybe, but unless you've worked on your feet all day, don't underestimate how good it is to sit down all day!)  Of course, its mentally more tiring, but again thats good because it means your actually doing something that is challenging and stimulating.

One thing that's going to take some getting used to, however, is waking up early.  I know that 7.30am isn't even that bad compared to some people, but I've not got up routinely at this time since school, and thats 4+ years ago.  So it's bound to take a few weeks.  It's usually about 10am before I tune into the day properly, but I'm sure that will get better as times goes by.

I've already been able to take on some responsibilty and be able to put my stamp on a few things which has been useful and allowed me to gradually settle in to the role. Everyone here is supportive and nice, whilst I have an awesome new computer.

Thankfully, me starting here and the Christmas break is wonderfully timed, and allows me to have three weeks of working life becoming a reality here, before having a little break to recharge.

So far, so good.

Better Connected? Really.

"We're better, connected" - The staggeringly ironic strap line of O2, The "UK's leading provider of mobile phones and broadband."

Now up until recently, I had absolutely no problem with O2, which is unusual in this day and age where people are regularly foaming at the mouth when it comes to their network provider or handset manufacturer.  I thankfully avoided the storm surrounding Blackberry when they had a whole world of issues with downtime causing people to lose their minds, and up until recently, O2 had provided a good service with no issues.

Something I expect when I'm paying hundreds of pounds a year for the privilege.

I succumbed to the iPhone buzz shortly after the 3GS was released in the summer of '09, committing to a two year contract at £36 a month.  I had absolutely no issues with Apple or O2 during this period, and was looking forward to upgrading to the next iPhone model whenever it came out after my contract ended.  Now, the iPhone 4 had been out for some time by this point, so I wasn't particularly keen to commit to 18+ months of something that would soon by superseded by the iPhone 5, or 4S as it ultimately was.

In July, when my contract ran out, I got a call from O2 offering to put me on a rolling contract that kept the same texts and minutes (unlimited and 600) for £16 a month, as I was no longer paying for the phone, simply the sim.  I was told categorically that I could leave this plan whenever I wanted, which I said would be when the new iPhone was released later in the year.

I was delighted with that, and was impressed that O2 would not only get me off my more expensive contract for a cheaper one, but would be happy for me to upgrade back on to a premium contract when it was possible, i.e. once Apple had decided to release the next generation of iPhones.

Needless to say, I didn't think twice about it after that, and looked forward to being in a position to get a new phone.  I let the initial rush for the 4S pass, and went in to the Derby store about a month after release date.  I sat down with the O2 shop assistant, and began the process of getting a new phone.  However, it soon became clear that I was "ineligible for upgrade."

It turned out that O2 offered a similar sim only plan to a number of people in a similar position, and then decided that it was not possible for said people to leave the contract freely when they wanted to.  Clearly, I and many others, had been misled.  I was then told to ring up customer services and get them to remove the ineligibility with regards to my upgrade, and that it should take 24 hours or so to process.

That's fine, I thought, whilst a little frustrating, I accepted it.  With one thing and another, I didn't return to an O2 shop for a couple of weeks (getting a new job, finishing my old job, and the continuous cat and mouse game of finding a store that had the handset that I wanted in stock).  I finally managed to find a store that had it in and drove in this morning.  I went through the same process, and low and behold, the same problem was there - "ineligible for upgrade."

I explained the situation to the shop assistant and he immediately understood, stating "it's happened to quite a few customers." At this point, I knew full well that I wouldn't be getting a handset today.  He rang up the upgrade department, reciting my story, and found that there was indeed a note that backed up my story - yet no changes had been made to make me eligible.

Two things; how on earth does a company like O2 not have a simple button they can press to make me eligible, 2-3 weeks after the initial promise of it'll be done in 24 hours  And secondly, how can a company like O2 tell me, and I'd imagine hundreds of similar customers, that they can do something in terms of agreeing to the sim only plan, only to decide a few months later that no, this wasn't possible and these customers were locked in to a 12 month deal?

It became clear that it was not possible to get a phone in store before the end of this "contract" so I agreed to order the handset over the phone.  Apparently,  it will be here Monday, but I'm not holding my breath.

To be misled not once but twice by one of the biggest companies in the UK is very disappointing.  If I wasn't "locked" in to this 12 month plan I would be very seriously considering switching network.

The lack of alignment between the telephone sales advisors and the shop assistants is incredible.  Surely, you'd expect both departments to be singing off the same hymn sheet for the greater good of the company, but clearly not.  I felt sorry for the shop assistants who have had to deal with the customers face to face who had been misled by the telephone sales advisors, completely hamstrung in their efforts to do anything for us.

For a company who prides them self on being "better connected", the service provided by O2 over the last few weeks has destroyed the good work they had done, by simply doing their job, over the previous two years.