Palace fans causing disorder

[Palacesince64]

No one decides who supports their club, just a cross section of society.
A group of alleged racists and a bunch of wallies with a drum, could be worse, we could have got lumbered with Jimmy Saville.

…. Or Nigel Farage!

 

[cryrst]

…. Or Nigel Farage!

I do hope so 👍

 

[ex hibitionist]

we should have 'kick a*seholes out of football', trouble is crowds would be reduced drastically, some of us may not be allowed back in 😕

 

[beak]

we should have 'kick a*seholes out of football', trouble is crowds would be reduced drastically, some of us may not be allowed back in 😕

....but we would have a good store of memories.

 

[PalazioVecchio]

we should have 'kick a*seholes out of football', trouble is crowds would be reduced drastically, some of us may not be allowed back in 😕

half the crowd gone, half the other managers gone, and half the players gone.

who is left ? only the angelic nice people like Nigel Pearson & El Haj Djiouf ?

 

[Malcolm Al]

I'd say that virtually everyone is anti racist in the purest sense, except perhaps for a tiny minority of actual racists who no one listens to.

It's more about what type of people advertise being 'anti racist' and their definition of 'racist'.
More often than not, it is used purely to shut down debate, promote liberal/left wing politics and besmirch those who disagree.

For example, being against mass migration or wishing to stop illegal immigration is not racist. It has nothing to do with race per se. Unsurprisingly, many immigrants are of other races, so it's just easy to use that as an excuse to make the accusation.

The whole concept of 'anti racism' is simplistic and often politically motivated. Therefore, it has no place at a football match along with any other type of political statement.

It's student politics with bovver boots. It's rather pathetic virtue signalling at best and leftist activism at worst.

In the late 1970s when the National Front was the current iteration of British fascism I remember the torrent of monkey noises made by Millwall fans every time Vince Hilaire touched the ball and the abuse Rashid Harkouk got. I also remember being handed NF leaflets outside Stamford Bridge. A lot of progress has been made since then much of it driven by initiatives like football's Kick it Out campaign. So, on that basis I disagree with you; anti-racist messages have an important place at football matches.

 

[Rudi Hedman]

In the late 1970s when the National Front was the current iteration of British fascism I remember the torrent of monkey noises made by Millwall fans every time Vince Hilaire touched the ball and the abuse Rashid Harkouk got. I also remember being handed NF leaflets outside Stamford Bridge. A lot of progress has been made since then much of it driven by initiatives like football's Kick it Out campaign. So, on that basis I disagree with you; anti-racist messages have an important place at football matches.

Maybe the HF shouldn’t be bringing in Palestinian flags. Notice they brought them in the home match before Spurs but bottled that particular match.

 

[eaglesdare]

Maybe the HF shouldn’t be bringing in Palestinian flags. Notice they brought them in the home match before Spurs but bottled that particular match.

They brought them in the anniversary weekend of the 7th October terrorist attack at the Liverpool game. It was sickening seeing them.

 

[ex hibitionist]

Maybe the HF shouldn’t be bringing in Palestinian flags. Notice they brought them in the home match before Spurs but bottled that particular match.

wtf!😳 well spotted mate

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

In the late 1970s when the National Front was the current iteration of British fascism I remember the torrent of monkey noises made by Millwall fans every time Vince Hilaire touched the ball and the abuse Rashid Harkouk got. I also remember being handed NF leaflets outside Stamford Bridge. A lot of progress has been made since then much of it driven by initiatives like football's Kick it Out campaign. So, on that basis I disagree with you; anti-racist messages have an important place at football matches.

The 1970? When immigration was a trickle, Islam was something you saw in films and the only British Black people seen in much of the country were Charlie Williams and Kenny Lynch.

And now in 2025 when most footballers are Black, we have a Black Conservative leader and a Black deputy Prime Minister, you think we have a racism problem?

You are tilting at windmills.

 

[Eagleman13]

In the late 1970s when the National Front was the current iteration of British fascism I remember the torrent of monkey noises made by Millwall fans every time Vince Hilaire touched the ball and the abuse Rashid Harkouk got. I also remember being handed NF leaflets outside Stamford Bridge. A lot of progress has been made since then much of it driven by initiatives like football's Kick it Out campaign. So, on that basis I disagree with you; anti-racist messages have an important place at football matches.

Hmm, NF=fascism in the 70's, lol, you obviously weren't born. Millwall=monkey noises, ffs, behave, every club in the country, including ours, did. Was it right, then, yes, now, no. NF leaflets were being handed out at every ground, every shopping centre, every railway, bus & airport. Yes, KIO has made progress, BUT, it has become a political tool by the left, it has served its purpose, because of it, there is now more grief at matches & beyond, ever wondered why? Disagree, no messages of any kind should be 'displayed' at matches, anywhere.

#kickpoliticsoutoffootball

 

[soulboy]

And now in 2025 when most footballers are Black, we have a Black Conservative leader and a Black deputy Prime Minister, you think we have a racism problem?

I put your theory into ChatGPT and got the following:

Why your examples matter​

You’re right to point out that:

• Many top footballers are Black
• The UK has had Black senior politicians, including Conservative leaders and senior ministers
• Black Britons are highly visible in media, sport, business, and public life
  These are clear signs of progress. Compared to the UK of the 1960s–80s, opportunity, representation, and social attitudes have improved dramatically. Anyone claiming “nothing has changed” would be ignoring reality.

Why racism is still an issue​

However, the existence of successful individuals does not automatically mean racism has disappeared. Sociologists often describe this as the difference between representation and outcomes.

Some ongoing issues in the UK include: Disproportionate stop and search rates for Black people

• Overrepresentation in the criminal justice system
• Pay gaps and employment discrimination shown in large-scale studies (e.g. name-blind CV experiments)
• Racial abuse, especially online and in football stadiums (despite Black players’ success)
• Educational disparities affecting certain ethnic groups

These are not about whether Black people can succeed — clearly they can and do — but about whether everyone starts from the same position and is treated equally in everyday systems.

The “exception vs system” point

A common misunderstanding is:

“If some Black people reach the top, racism must be over.”

But sociologically:

• Exceptional success does not cancel out systemic patterns
• One Black Prime Minister (or deputy PM) doesn’t erase discrimination experienced by millions of ordinary people
  The same logic applies globally — Barack Obama’s presidency didn’t mean racism vanished in the US.

 

[Rudi Hedman]

They brought them in the anniversary weekend of the 7th October terrorist attack at the Liverpool game. It was sickening seeing them.

Here, Spurs at home was 3 weeks after but the next home match. No Palestinian flags vs Spurs.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

I put your theory into ChatGPT and got the following:

Why your examples matter​

You’re right to point out that:

• Many top footballers are Black
• The UK has had Black senior politicians, including Conservative leaders and senior ministers
• Black Britons are highly visible in media, sport, business, and public life
  These are clear signs of progress. Compared to the UK of the 1960s–80s, opportunity, representation, and social attitudes have improved dramatically. Anyone claiming “nothing has changed” would be ignoring reality.

Why racism is still an issue​

However, the existence of successful individuals does not automatically mean racism has disappeared. Sociologists often describe this as the difference between representation and outcomes.

Some ongoing issues in the UK include: Disproportionate stop and search rates for Black people

• Overrepresentation in the criminal justice system
• Pay gaps and employment discrimination shown in large-scale studies (e.g. name-blind CV experiments)
• Racial abuse, especially online and in football stadiums (despite Black players’ success)
• Educational disparities affecting certain ethnic groups

These are not about whether Black people can succeed — clearly they can and do — but about whether everyone starts from the same position and is treated equally in everyday systems.

The “exception vs system” point

A common misunderstanding is:




But sociologically:

• Exceptional success does not cancel out systemic patterns
• One Black Prime Minister (or deputy PM) doesn’t erase discrimination experienced by millions of ordinary people
  The same logic applies globally — Barack Obama’s presidency didn’t mean racism vanished in the US.

ChatGPT? Are you serious?

You don't ask a computer to explain complex social issues. That really is laughable.

I would say two things.

I don't understand why any White person would be preoccupied with 'racism'.

Britain is perhaps the least racist country on Earth, and White people are possibly the least racist.

As a White person, I'm far more concerned with the plight of the people close to me and the crime ridden, divided hellhole that Britain has become.

Social issues are only significant to me if they impact me and mine. I will vote accordingly at the next election.

 

[Common Sense Club]

I put your theory into ChatGPT and got the following:

Why your examples matter​

You’re right to point out that:

• Many top footballers are Black
• The UK has had Black senior politicians, including Conservative leaders and senior ministers
• Black Britons are highly visible in media, sport, business, and public life
  These are clear signs of progress. Compared to the UK of the 1960s–80s, opportunity, representation, and social attitudes have improved dramatically. Anyone claiming “nothing has changed” would be ignoring reality.

Why racism is still an issue​

However, the existence of successful individuals does not automatically mean racism has disappeared. Sociologists often describe this as the difference between representation and outcomes.

Some ongoing issues in the UK include: Disproportionate stop and search rates for Black people

• Overrepresentation in the criminal justice system
• Pay gaps and employment discrimination shown in large-scale studies (e.g. name-blind CV experiments)
• Racial abuse, especially online and in football stadiums (despite Black players’ success)
• Educational disparities affecting certain ethnic groups

These are not about whether Black people can succeed — clearly they can and do — but about whether everyone starts from the same position and is treated equally in everyday systems.

The “exception vs system” point

A common misunderstanding is:




But sociologically:

• Exceptional success does not cancel out systemic patterns
• One Black Prime Minister (or deputy PM) doesn’t erase discrimination experienced by millions of ordinary people
  The same logic applies globally — Barack Obama’s presidency didn’t mean racism vanished in the US.

Interesting. But indigenous societies see their environment being distorted by an influx of immigration, and rightly want to preserve their way of life. In that regard we are little different to a group of monkeys whose neighbouring tribe muscle in on on their patch. The difference is that they would tear each other’s faces off to settle the situation. Whilst words may still be offensive it is at least a release of tension but when arrivals fail to integrate and just continue their way of life just in a new country, you can understand the reaction. And whilst black people have been appointed to important positions in industry and particularly politics, I am not aware of many white people who hold high political office in ‘black’ countries. Consequently I am not sure that the UK can be classified as a racist society, but opinions differ.

 

[ex hibitionist]

I agree not only with kicking politics out of football but out of the Hol as well - we've got the politics page for those who are so inclined, I know it's relevant to the fans causing trouble but a football supporters site is not the place for these kinds of opinions, if you're so serious do some community work in deprived areas, help some underprivileged people of whatever demographic you choose, but this is just spleen venting, ego driven hot air. The moderators should intervene.

 

[Rudi Hedman]

I agree not only with kicking politics out of football but out of the Hol as well - we've got the politics page for those who are so inclined, I know it's relevant to the fans causing trouble but a football supporters site is not the place for these kinds of opinions, if you're so serious do some community work in deprived areas, help some underprivileged people of whatever demographic you choose, but this is just spleen venting, ego driven hot air. The moderators should intervene.

I don’t recall politics being brought into Palace talk threads apart from where the HF are the topic. It stays in politics talk threads.

The HF bring politics to Palace matches and when politics they don’t like such as ‘stop the boats’ flags turn up they don’t like it and you get them and their fanboys saying ‘’those views don’t belong at our club.’’ Excuse me? Don’t tell us what to think, or what they decide is the groupthink and only that gets communicated by them. Typical of their type of politics.

 

[Penge Eagle]

In the late 1970s when the National Front was the current iteration of British fascism I remember the torrent of monkey noises made by Millwall fans every time Vince Hilaire touched the ball and the abuse Rashid Harkouk got. I also remember being handed NF leaflets outside Stamford Bridge. A lot of progress has been made since then much of it driven by initiatives like football's Kick it Out campaign. So, on that basis I disagree with you; anti-racist messages have an important place at football matches.

The disappearance of ugly, overt racism was driven as much by policing, banning orders, CCTV, social norms and new generations.

The issue many fans raise now is not opposition to anti-racism itself, but they are sceptical to repetitive centrally organised gestures at every match have any meaningful impact. The message turns into background noise or moral box ticking exercises instead of deterrence and it disconnects from the matchday experience. This is key: incidents are very rare inside the ground compared to online abuse or football at grassroots level.

Anti-racism matters so there is no dispute with the goal. But whether the constant matchday symbolism is the best tool these days is a reasonable question to ask, not a denial of what happened in the past or progress that has been made.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

The disappearance of ugly, overt racism was driven as much by policing, banning orders, CCTV, social norms and new generations.

The issue many fans raise now is not opposition to anti-racism itself, but they are sceptical to repetitive centrally organised gestures at every match have any meaningful impact. The message turns into background noise or moral box ticking exercises instead of deterrence and it disconnects from the matchday experience. This is key: incidents are very rare inside the ground compared to online abuse or football at grassroots level.

Anti-racism matters so there is no dispute with the goal. But whether the constant matchday symbolism is the best tool these days is a reasonable question to ask, not a denial of what happened in the past or progress that has been made.

Perhaps so, but it's my observation that for those who indulge in the abuse of others over differences, one only need be too fat, too tall, too thin, too short, too clever, too rich, too popular or anything else that puts a target on one's back for those who wish to vent their own insecurities or frustrations on others. Race is just another excuse.

I'm told that genuine racism exists, so I accept that, however, most prejudice is created by historical friction, economics, fear of crime and religious and cultural clashes. The race element seems incidental to these overriding factors. Slavery was never limited to one race, but which ever race was the particular victim of slavery was often considered second class or sub human by the perpetrators. It could all be labelled under human behaviour. No one has a monopoly on prejudice.

The problem with the anti racism movement is that it implies that only one race is 'racist' and ignores the complexity of the issue. It also suffers from a large dose of self interest.

 

[Casual]

F*******cking booooooring.
Why is this in Palace Talk?needs to be moved to ‘booooooring, nothing to do with football talk’

Perhaps so, but it's my observation that for those who indulge in the abuse of others over differences, one only need be too fat, too tall, too thin, too short, too clever, too rich, too popular or anything else that puts a target on one's back for those who wish to vent their own insecurities or frustrations on others. Race is just another excuse.

I'm told that genuine racism exists, so I accept that, however, most prejudice is created by historical friction, economics, fear of crime and religious and cultural clashes. The race element seems incidental to these overriding factors. Slavery was never limited to one race, but which ever race was the particular victim of slavery was often considered second class or sub human by the perpetrators. It could all be labelled under human behaviour. No one has a monopoly on prejudice.

The problem with the anti racism movement is that it implies that only one race is 'racist' and ignores the complexity of the issue. It also suffers from a large dose of self interest.