Aleksandar Tonev

what is it then? being black is a physical appearance so if calling somebody a black * isn't singling them out for a physical appearance then please enlighten me to what it is

 

It's racism.

In all honesty I think it is woeful that we have one or two Celtic supporters on here essentially defending racism.

They're not (just) saying, "Oh, Tonev may not have said it" - they're saying, "calling someone a black * isn't racism".

It absolutely is and if you think otherwise you need to have a word with yourself.

 

he would gain an advantage because if he was to say to the ref that he was being racist and Tonev was sent off for it then that is an obvious advantage that logan has gained he has in effect a free run of the wing.

because nothing was done about it in the game it may be difficult to immediately see what he would gain from it but it is undeniable that Logan could have gained an advantage from this if Tonev was sent off for it.

At the moment nobody knows what really happened so im not defending Tonev just trying to point out to people that in the same way Tonev could have done this Logan could have been falsely accusing him of this during the game to gain an advantage and now the games over its not like he can just go ' aye i made it up to try get Tonev sent off but it didnae work so you can just drop it now.' then he will be sanctioned

 

So you're claiming Logan is "crying racism" or "playing the racist card"?

Listen to yourself. You're actually defending and justifying racism.

 

which is what!!!? Racism is singling somebody out for a physical appearance

and don't start making up * about me defending racism if you actually read my posts you will se that i have said over and over i do not condone it in any way what im trying to say is that any other form of abuse is no better and should be viewed the same

 

What player has ever been sent off on another one's say so? I'm also pretty sure the referee was only made aware of the claims after the game. Logan doesn't gain an advantage, and was never going to, that much is fairly obvious.

 

did you just choose to ignore that bit again aye?

 

the match report states that he complained to the referee during the game and to the aberdeen captain during the game who in turn talked to the referee about it

 

I read your posts. You're suggesting that the phrase "black *" is nothing more than distinguishing people according to physical appearance and therefore is not a big deal.

You are very much in the minority in this view.

 

Even if that is the case, Logan will have known that Tonev wouldn't have been sent off. As I said, what player has even been sent off on another one's say so.

 

You are absolutely defending racism by saying "black *" is nothing more than an innocent differentiation of people based on obvious physical markers.

 

wee *, big *, skinny *, black *, fat *, ugly cow, smelly *

all the same to me

 

And how often do you use the term "black *" yourself then?

Not very often relative to the other terms, I'd guess.

 

so clearly you havent read my posts and like people on here are jumping to conclusions let me clear this up for you

i am not condoning racism

i am not saying tonev has or has not done this

and i am not saying it isnt a big deal

i am saying that there is 2 sides to every story and Logan could be in the wrong here you and everybody else do not know

i am saying that any form of abuse should be viewed on the same level this doesnt mean they shouldnt be made a big deal of. its the total opposite im saying they should all be made a big deal of not just one or two

and do you honestly think i give a * if nobody agrees with me or everybody agrees with me? i cant talk for but im not one for just following the crowd

 

But you said the same for Leigh Griffiths when there was a video of him singing the song. If that's not evidence I don't know what is.

 

listen to yourself your defending every kind of abuse except racism.....

 

clutching at straws are we?

 

Again, I have read your posts.

"black *" is a racist term and you are defending it by saying "sure, it doesn't matter, it's just based on physical appearance, it's totally innocent really".

True, although you have stated that you think Logan might be trying to play an advantage rather than actually having been subject to racist abuse.

True.

You're spent far more posts saying how Tonev might be in the right and how Logan might be in the wrong, so it's clear you're on Tonev's side, right down to justifying the term he is alleged to have said.

Again, you've stated "black *" is essentially harmless in your view.

This is irrelevant to the topic at hand.

 

Occasionally, in Glasgow its used and black * meaning a smelly/dirty/junkie/homeless *.

I dont discriminate on the use of insults aimed at physical appearance.

 

How am I clutching at straws?