elf

I think this is an important convo... 
 
1)is the term "monkey business" racist? If Vanzier said "fucking monkey business", would that be racist?
2) terms like "indian-giver" are racist, but was used frequently by people recently in non-racist ways. Could the strict moral code you are applying to words be overkill? Should zoos not sell monkey hats because any reference to monkeys is inherently racist?     
3) Saying things like "That is who you are" is not conducive to growing and evolving our understanding. Wording like that creates "us vs. them" dynamics, instead of compassionate, empathetic understanding. 
 
I'm trying to understand because, as I have said before, I said things that were unknowingly homophobic in my youth, that I feel very bad about. I've decided mistakes are fine, but refusal to grow is the sin. Maybe my view is wrong. 

The origins of describing someone as a monkey started in Europe as an attempt to dehumanize a person. Then the term pivoted during enlightment/imperialism period where europe legitimized conquering different parts of the world and rapidly expanded slavery. During the enlightenment period, scientists like Darwin tried to show that nonEuropean people were not human. They viewed different cultures as uncivilized, animal like behaviors,brute, and goofy. It was an argument that has led to alot of crazy things from the 1400s to today; including messed up science experiments (see Belgium's vaccination experiments in africa). This is why calling someone a monkey or saying monkey business is racist. Even if the intent was to describe a person as a clown. The origin comes from a messed up passed. That is why I said monkey is a racist term when used to describe someone or a group of people.

Stroud couldn't get on the field for Austin last year... and was a borderline starer when they were a bad expansion team the year before, scoring one goal.

Stroud was really good at creating chances for us and he is excellent at the press. The issue with him was that he had barlow as his forward who cant finish.  

 
Again, there are no "reports" on the whole "he said something innocuous to the white ref" nonsense.  It was a story posted here with NO evidence by the biggest Vanzeir apologist in this thread that was then picked up on Reddit and Twitter as being an actual story rather than something he pulled out of his ass.
 
There is no such thing as accidental racism.  A racial slur came out of Vanzeir's mouth.  He was facing several Black San Jose players when it happened (NOT the ref, who was off to the right).  Players from both teams had immediate, clearly shocked/angry responses in real time.  Those are the facts that we know.  And those facts are enough to never want to see Vanzeir represent this team again.
 
Struber's case is more involved.  Not only should he have probably subbed Vanzeir out of the game on moral grounds, he owed it to Vanzeir to sub him out just in the interests of player safety.  In a game that had already been chippy, leaving a guy who was just accused of tossing racial slurs in the game was an incredibly stupid move.  Credit to the San Jose players for keeping their composure, but that could have gone a VERY different way.

Stop making assumptions. You dont know what happened. I dont know what happened.

To say there is no accidental racism is a ridiculous statement. There are 100s of words that are similar in different  languages but have very different meanings. It is very easy to offend someone if your not from that culture.

What we know is that vanzier did say something  that is racist or what was said could be interpreted as racist. Now if it was accidental or not.. zero tolerance should mean that you have a heavy penalty  regardless if it was a mistake or not. The penalty issued was weak.

As for the gripe against struber? It doesnt make sense.

Protest is happening tomorrow...

https://twitter.com/...ufRdiO8zRw&s=19

Vanzier should meet with them, explain what happened, and ask for forgiveness. 

I just cant think how protecting him is sending him on a field where a bunch of people just got pissed at him and the atmosphere is still rather emotionally charged. I just cant see a scenario where not taking him off is the right decision especially when he subs out 10 minutes later

Soccer is more than just talent. Players needs to believe and trust their coach.

Subbing him out would have sent a message that struber is throwing vanzier under the bus and caving under pressure without having full information.  

Could it been handled differently? Yes.

Imagine if a customer made terrible allegations against you. One would hope that your boss would back you up without having the complete information.

he inherited him from Dietrich.

I fixed my post...lol

Henry wont tie himself to rbny. He is trying to be the usmnt coach

There's quite a lot of evidence.  Nothing conclusive yet, but I am convinced.  Of course we will see what the investigation uncovers, if anything.

So you are very confident that a guy who is has only been in america for a few weeks, unfamiliar with American culture/race history, and speaks another language said something offensive?

Do we know what he said? No.

Was he speaking in dutch? German? Spanish? English? Who knows.

As someone who speaks multiple languages and have travel around the world..Languages can be tricky and certain words can have totally different meanings in other languages/dialects.  Google filipino desserts and you would see that certain dessert treats have the name of some vulgar spanish words. Or google german slang for bro or mate... if an American heard that word.. he might think he is hearing the n word.

As of right now, a lot of people are just making assumptions on what was said. Not only is that harmful but also reckless. Let's see what the investigation determines. And if he did what was said punish him.

However, making an assumption on what was said is not right.

Might try to cancel my season tickets depending on how the team moves here. Struber not immediately removing him is a disgrace and speaks to his fraudulence as a manager and leader of young men. "My boys my boys" is this mediocre coach's smoke and mirrors.

How is it disgrace? What if he didnt say anything? Are you willing to accuse someone of such things with no evidence? That's crazy.

I think jumping to conclusions without any facts is a disgrace and a disservice. The coach did the right thing by not caving into anyones demands. If there was evidence that such action occurred, then cards would have been issued.

Let the folks who conduct an investigation do their jobs.

I understand the likelihood of figuring out what actually happened in the middle of the match was unlikely, but Im never going to fault the officials for taking the issue seriously and trying to do something about.  The issue is bigger and more important than the 20 minutes lost.

My criticism is that if you cant figure out what is going on in the first minute or two. Then your not going to figure out what happened if you spent an additional 15 to 30 minutes. This isnt theater and the issue should be addressed properly.

You need to grab everyone 1v1 to explain what happened.

The foul made by sj on nealis should have been a red. If the ref did his job, I dont think things would have escalated.

Burke had a solid game.Dnealis also looked good.

Struber coached a great game

I am okay with the roster. I think we have to give then time  and reevaluate in june.

My only change would be to have luq play more in the middle of the field either as the second forward or central attacking midfielder. In the wing position, I dont think he is getting the ball in dangerous positions.  

The marsch fire was the most idiotic thing ever. You just spent soo much money to fit the vision marsch laid out and now you fire him? Speechless.

Leeds does not deserve him.

The blackout rules made sense under the old model. Teams sold the rights to cable stations and in many markets like in Philadelphia, sold the TV rights to over the air broadcasters. The blackouts on ESPN+ protected the local cable station or Over the Air channel that paid for the local rights. This way the local cable channel can sell its access to the local cable company and over the air tv networks would get advertising revenues based on local viewership ratings. You might hate blackouts but the rules made sense. Especially considering these cable channels or OTA channels also paid for the production costs that ESPN+ piggy backed on by simulcasting it to those who lived out of market.
 
This new strategy eliminates local broadcasts and MLS makes more money as a whole. However I can see Seattle, Atlanta, Portland, LAFC/LA Galaxy owners getting pissed off with the rest of the league further down the line when they realize the value of local tv revenue for tv rights sold to a local RSN or local OTA network is higher than dividend they will receive by MLS. There may be pressure after the world cup in 2026 to end this deal early. Especially in the stronger markets. 

The blackout rules only made sense for the cable company who wants to have a monopoly over tv content.

For the avg fan, it was terrible.