TorquayFans.com | Torquay United Fans Forum

Can't be sung anymore apparently. :no:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/16908588" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not sure this relates to the caravan chant. I was at the match and the long haired Southend striker was encouraging the chanting, not complaining about it, he was having a great time.

Matt.

Well I for one think all this fuss is mad. Hargreaves always had a laugh about this chant. Please don't let football get taken over by the humourless equality & diversity brigade, we have enough of these zealots employed throught the UK. I really, really can't see that this chant is "racist" at all, it is just poking fun at players with long, flowing locks of hair. I have watched with increasing sadness the rise of the PC brigade over the past ten years at work, looking for "isms" in every conversation, every meeting, every letter, every e-mail. They demean racism, which is real, and do the cause of equality no service at all.

This chant shouldn't be sung anymore simply because it's well past it's sell by date and not funny. Whether it is racist or not doesn't enter my calculations. It's old hat, archaic and dull so don't sing it! If it IS deemed as racist then i can fully understand why in the context of modern society; however, it is perhaps a little OTT.

Don't mind it not being sung if it is seen as dull or boring, but I don't accept the "context of modern society" argument. This is an excuse for the po-faced PC brigade (like the nonentity Harriet Harperson) to impose their rules and restrictions on old gits like me. Taking the piss out of opposition players at a footie game is perfectly OK, so long as it is not on the basis of their colour or ethnicity. Taking the mickey out of a fat player, a ginger player or one with a daft haircut is OK though, and we must not let the misery mongers stop this.

I agree with you but what i am saying that 'in the context of modern society' the chant about the caravan is implying a derogatory comment about Gypsies / Romanies '/ Travellers and therefore it is singling out someones race / ethnic preference for ridicule. That is not acceptable nowadays whether we think it is right or wrong. For me personally i don't see a problem with it and wouldn't if i were a Gypsy but it is not PC and may offend 1 person in 250 zillion therefore it must be banned.

I've always felt it was a cringeworthy and juvenile chant anyway, I'm with you Andy.

I f**kin hate pikeys me..................

austrianandygull wrote:_ _ it is not PC and may offend 1 person in 250 zillion therefore it must be banned.

That is the argument used by those councils that have banned the use of "Christmas" on the basis that it mikght offend minority faiths (which it doesn't, although it might offend one or two loonies like Abu Qatada) and I don't swallow it. If we go through life worrying that anything we say or do might offend somebody, somewhere, then we would just say nothing at all and there would be no comedy.

I accept that most people might think that the chant is juvenile or past its sell by date, in which case we don't chant it, but I don't want the PC police telling footie fans what to do or not to do. If something is illegal or morally unacceptable then of course it must not be done, but the "it might offend somebody, somewhere" argument would stop normal banter.

In any case, "travellers" are not an ethnic group, they are just people who choose to live in caravans. Romanies are an ethnic group, but they are just part of the "travelling community" (as the PC wallers call travellers, and they have the cheek to call me part of the "settled community", how daft is that?).

gullintwoplaces wrote: That is the argument used by those councils that have banned the use of "Christmas" on the basis that it mikght offend minority faiths (which it doesn't, although it might offend one or two loonies like Abu Qatada) and I don't swallow it. If we go through life worrying that anything we say or do might offend somebody, somewhere, then we would just say nothing at all and there would be no comedy.

I accept that most people might think that the chant is juvenile or past its sell by date, in which case we don't chant it, but I don't want the PC police telling footie fans what to do or not to do. If something is illegal or morally unacceptable then of course it must not be done, but the "it might offend somebody, somewhere" argument would stop normal banter.

In any case, "travellers" are not an ethnic group, they are just people who choose to live in caravans. Romanies are an ethnic group, but they are just part of the "travelling community" (as the PC wallers call travellers, and they have the cheek to call me part of the "settled community", how daft is that?).

Even that is a bit of an anomaly matey. The Roma are still white Europeans (Caucasians) so are in fact no different in ethnicity to myself, just a sub group.
Therefore if I call them fookin theiving gypo's I am not, in fact, being rascist.

gullintwoplaces wrote: That is the argument used by those councils that have banned the use of "Christmas" on the basis that it mikght offend minority faiths (which it doesn't, although it might offend one or two loonies like Abu Qatada)

That's a complete myth. There was a festival in Birmingham that was called 'Winterval', and from that the myth spread that the word Christmas had been banned, when in reality it was just the name of the festival.

No council has ever banned Christmas, or the word Christmas.

EmetEdadsBeard wrote:Even that is a bit of an anomaly matey. The Roma are still white Europeans (Caucasians) so are in fact no different in ethnicity to myself, just a sub group.
Therefore if I call them fookin theiving gypo's I am not, in fact, being rascist.

They do have protection under the race relations act though, so I wouldn't use that defence in court.

Gulliball wrote: They do have protection under the race relations act though, so I wouldn't use that defence in court.

I know matey. Protection to go around pitching up on any bit of land they see fit to, choose who owns it, and then leaving piles og shat all over the place when they move on, the right to drive around nicking anything that isn't nailed down, especially if its metal (the tvv@ts took a radiator off my drive while I was decorating- Id only put it out to drain and get it out of my way), in untaxed, uninsured vans (the filth dont bother with them as they know they wont turn up to court just move on), the right to go into pubs and pick fights with anyone who happens to be in there (never one on one though, they're always mob handed, funny that).
Then they wonder why they're not welcomed with open arms.
As you may have guessed, theres a lot of them here in Donny (highest proportion/head of population in country we're led to believe) and I'm not a fan.

I remember when they turned up at Lancaster Uni, tied horses to the rugby posts and took over the entire playing fields. It was weeks before anything happened, the entire sporting activity of the university was brought to a standstill and the mess/fire damage when they left cost thousands to replace.

It really angered me during the Dale Farm eviction when a group of people who have no respect at all for the law were able to use every bit of legal trickery going to stop the eviction.

Gulliball wrote: It really angered me during the Dale Farm eviction when a group of people who have no respect at all for the law were able to use every bit of legal trickery going to stop the eviction.

A bit like lawyers then