Ange in or out?

[Junior19]

Doesn't really work as an analogy imv - using insulting/strong language while discussing someones performance as a sportsman is not the same as just outright writing abusive posts about them and certainly not the same as sending someone direct abuse, a very warped view to conflate that all together.

To me it is the same. If you can't say it straight to the persons face, you shouldn't write it either. Not anonymously, under pseudonym or in any way, shape or form.

I agree that there are differences between sending direct abuse and "venting ones feelings on a board", but the problem is that the one enables the other. Normalizing that kind of vitrol and that kind of language in the common space brings us down a road we really don't want to go.

The internet has changed all of this in an incomprehensible way. Where our previous generations made snide remarks to their colleagues on the factory or at the office after the game, and had a max range of 10-15 people who were willing to listen, and could influence one or two in a lightyear if they were lucky, we can reach the world. All of us!

 

[thfcsteff]

Online abuse directly aimed at people via their social media accounts is clearly different to people on message boards discussing them among eachother.

...until 'friends' or 'collegues' start to let people know they're getting repeatedly battered in online forums. You know those 'helpful' folks who love to make sure people are 'fully informed'...

Nobody believes there shouldn't be freedom to criticise and share strong opinions. But you said it is 'different when talking about people than to them.'
If you don't say someone directly that you think they're (for want of a poor phrase) a 'slag' but it becomes the topic of conversation among a whole group of people, I'd say that is as abusive in its own right.

I suspect you are trying to keep your opinion here focussed on sports? In this case, Spurs? Again, I am trying to clarify your exact meaning because I know people who have been very, very affected by both online abuse and repeated negative comments on public forums.

 

[thfcsteff]

To me it is the same. If you can't say it straight to the persons face, you shouldn't write it either. Not anonymously, under pseudonym or in any way, shape or form.

I agree that there are differences between sending direct abuse and "venting ones feelings on a board", but the problem is that the one enables the other. Normalizing that kind of vitrol and that kind of language in the common space brings us down a road we really don't want to go.

The internet has changed all of this in an incomprehensible way. Where our previous generations made snide remarks to their colleagues on the factory or at the office after the , and had a max range of 10-15 people who were willing to listen, and could influence one or two in a lightyear if they were lucky, we can reach the world. All of us!

I agree. Sadly, I know people whose mental health has suffered as a result of this. It's far more common (sadly) than people believe.

 

[harr1984]

I can't believe with all that is out there now about mental health, and the constant news about people committing suicide because of things posted online about them that we are needing to have this conversation....

 

[thfcsteff]

I can't believe with all that is out there now about mental health, and the constant news about people committing suicide because of things posted online about them that we are needing to have this conversation....

I certainly think online makes it easier to get lost in a rant. I am guilty. In truth I know nothing of Mourinho as a man, yet I have been spectacularly (and most likely ignorantly and unfairly) rude about him on this forum. Similarly Conte. I would like to think I'd have the stones to share my opinions in person; who knows if the moment came? I'd back myself yet the chance of a hypocrite's turn is most humanly possible.

I think I know what Bill was saying, yet I agree with you and others as words matter wherever they're said or written and shared.

These exchanges are a reminder to myself to try and be a better person in the couple of examples above where I do not cover myself in glory...

 

[billyiddo]

...until 'friends' or 'collegues' start to let people know they're getting repeatedly battered in online forums. You know those 'helpful' folks who love to make sure people are 'fully informed'...

Nobody believes there shouldn't be freedom to criticise and share strong opinions. But you said it is 'different when talking about people than to them.'
If you don't say someone directly that you think they're (for want of a poor phrase) a 'slag' but it becomes the topic of conversation among a whole group of people, I'd say that is as abusive in its own right.

I suspect you are trying to keep your opinion here focussed on sports? In this case, Spurs? Again, I am trying to clarify your exact meaning because I know people who have been very, very affected by both online abuse and repeated negative comments on public forums.

The difference here for me is that the 'abuse' is just tacked on to criticism of the job he is doing rather than being the subject matter itself. I'd imagine Ange would be more concerned about the fact that he is receiving such widespread criticism of the job he is doing than a few unsavoury comments that pad out the posts.

I treat posting online to having a chat among friends - though probably toned down a bit from some WhatsApp or pub chats - with that in mind i don't find anything to be beyond the pale on here, generally, posts that do tend to get reported and dealt with or pulled up directly in the same way you would if you heard something discriminatory IRL

 

[Muttley]

I want to be clear though. Ange hasn't helped himself in all of his many public appearances. Perhaps I was one of the first posters to call him out on his persona in front of the cameras. He has talked down at the journo's and fans from day 1 and acts like he is the messiah and as if none of us know what we're talking about. He talks about how he's doing things differently which is also an insult to the prior managers who have major trophies on their CVs.

There has never been an ounce of public humility about him having to learn in this new environment. All we've heard is just daft narrative after daft narrative and a whole load of evading the actual football question. I've talked a lot about him preferring to be the philosopher and the life coach, rather than the football coach. I think now we're all seeing that he is the emperor with no clothes when it comes to operating in this environment.

So all of the above isn't abuse. It's opinion. I just don't want him at the club anymore as he's not up to the task. I do want him to de-stress and reenergise though. It's been a really tough gig and probably a very steep learning experience for him that could help him in future roles. That is, if he has the humility to accept the things he didn't do so well.

 

[Daisuk]

Their confidence is destroyed at this stage, they have no belief in what they are doing. As a result making silly mistakes and taking wrong choices. When players reach that stage the only thing the manager should be doing is getting back to basics, keep the team solid and the play as simple as possible. But Ange won't change and still insists on doing things that aren't working.

Absolutely. Like we did in Frankfurt. No faffing about at the back.

 

[harr1984]

Their confidence is destroyed at this stage, they have no belief in what they are doing. As a result making silly mistakes and taking wrong choices. When players reach that stage the only thing the manager should be doing is getting back to basics, keep the team solid and the play as simple as possible. But Ange won't change and still insists on doing things that aren't working.

The weird thing is when Ange has done a more pragmatic setup we have performed quite well, so it is not that he is incapable. Frankfurt being the most recent example, but there have been a few others that escape me now. I remember the Emirates Marketing Project home game last season which we narrowly lost but were unlucky to as one example. But in subsequent games he then reverts to type....