OnlyBarnet.com - Barnet FC Fans Forum

RichardM wrote:

becbee wrote:I'd say that the match should have been briefly stopped and those making the chants should have been escorted out by the stewards. That way it wouldn't have had chance to continue for 7-8 minutes.
Presumably had these Nethanderals commented on her ethnicity they'd have been immediately ejected but sexism wasn't treated with the same degree of importance? Yet both are unacceptable prejudice.
Although we are talking about Stevenage, the club where the stewards told the female Grimsby supporters to show them their bras and wanted to check the underwiring. Does anybody know what the outcome of that was?

Nothing happened as far as I know because there was little truth in the various claims made by the Grimsby fans. The CCTV cameras apparently proved this and the stewards acted as they should have.

MCB wrote:Good honest non-gender specific abuse of a female official - just your normal everyday football banter, definitely non-sexist

8. There is no dispute that what happened at the match on 9 March 2019 (supported by
video evidence) was:
(1) The designated fourth official was Ms Lisa Rashid.
(2) Around the 18th minute of the game, one of the (male) assistant referees was
unable to continue and Ms Rashid had to take his place.
(3) As Ms Rashid was preparing to come on the pitch, a group of around 75 to 100
standing spectators on that side of the ground started offensive chanting.
(4) Those spectators were home supporters. Bury FC fans were placed in the South
Stand, well away from the offending section of the crowd.
(5) The offensive chanting continued for some 7 or 8 minutes overall and included
specific chants:
“We’d shag the lino” (as Ms Rashid put on her communication system in
preparation to take over as Assistant Referee)
“Get your tits out for the lads” (as Ms Rashid ran across the pitch to take
up her position)
“If you’d all shag the lino clap your hands” (after Ms Rashid had taken up
her position on the East side and play had restarted)

becbee wrote:

RichardM wrote:

becbee wrote:I'd say that the match should have been briefly stopped and those making the chants should have been escorted out by the stewards. That way it wouldn't have had chance to continue for 7-8 minutes.
Presumably had these Nethanderals commented on her ethnicity they'd have been immediately ejected but sexism wasn't treated with the same degree of importance? Yet both are unacceptable prejudice.
Although we are talking about Stevenage, the club where the stewards told the female Grimsby supporters to show them their bras and wanted to check the underwiring. Does anybody know what the outcome of that was?

Nothing happened as far as I know because there was little truth in the various claims made by the Grimsby fans. The CCTV cameras apparently proved this and the stewards acted as they should have.

I can't see why the Grimsby fans would have made such a ridiculous thing up but I suppose we'll never know what really happened.

StephenM wrote:

becbee wrote:

RichardM wrote:

becbee wrote:I'd say that the match should have been briefly stopped and those making the chants should have been escorted out by the stewards. That way it wouldn't have had chance to continue for 7-8 minutes.
Presumably had these Nethanderals commented on her ethnicity they'd have been immediately ejected but sexism wasn't treated with the same degree of importance? Yet both are unacceptable prejudice.
Although we are talking about Stevenage, the club where the stewards told the female Grimsby supporters to show them their bras and wanted to check the underwiring. Does anybody know what the outcome of that was?

Nothing happened as far as I know because there was little truth in the various claims made by the Grimsby fans. The CCTV cameras apparently proved this and the stewards acted as they should have.

I can't see why the Grimsby fans would have made such a ridiculous thing up but I suppose we'll never know what really happened.

Only because we don't have access to the CCTV, however those that do have access have deemed no case to answer. It seems it's the kind of accusation that some will believe whatever the facts, probably because of the nature of the claim.

MCB wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sport ... ender.html

becbee wrote:

MCB wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sport ... ender.html

Nobody, not even someone who has "previous" is going to make such a crass comment. Maybe you should have also checked Stevenage O.S. before posting Daily Mail nonsense.

https://www.stevenagefc.com/news/2019/s ... mber-2019/

MCB wrote:

becbee wrote:

MCB wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sport ... ender.html

Nobody, not even someone who has "previous" is going to make such a crass comment. Maybe you should have also checked Stevenage O.S. before posting Daily Mail nonsense.

https://www.stevenagefc.com/news/2019/s ... mber-2019/

I'm confused. The "previous" is that an investigation concluded, on a balance of probabilities that he made comments that were "discriminatory on the grounds of race" against Eniola Aluko and Drew Spence, therefore wouldn't make a comment that was deemed racist as it is crass? How does that work?

I did also post without comment....