Under new proposals put forward by the government to ban racist trolls that abuse players online, it has been decided to ban matches for ten years.
The policy is similar to the assassins throwing racist slogans from the stadium seats to cowardly keyboard warriors who abuse players from behind the screen.
The latter may already face these bans, but so far online trolls have been able to use the social media cloak to avoid such fines.
This is totally wrong and that is why this is the right move by Home Secretary Preity Patel.
In fact, I see no reason why athletes who send the most horrific racial abuse online should not be banned from attending games.
If they choose to use football to create an online cesspit of hate and abuse, they won’t be given any business to watch matches.
It’s solid but it’s fair. This is especially the right thing to do, given how widespread the divisions are in the country. After the quarrel and quarrel over Brexit, Kovid, football somehow brought us all back together last year – even just briefly.
So protecting the sanctity of a beautiful game is vital. That is why we need more robust penalties to deal with the likes of what we have seen since the Euro 2020 final.
When England boys lined up to take their penalties in a nail-biting shootout against Italy last July, people all over the country were choking and waiting for the boys to finally take it home. That means no three misses.
It was heartbreaking to see Bukayo Saka – the only teenager at the time – crying over manager Gareth Southgate’s shoulder. The decent people everywhere felt nothing but compassion and pride in the efforts of the team.
But sadly, Neanderthals among us flew online, angrily smashing their keyboards to make monkey references and throw around the N-word.
Although some of them have sacrificed a few weeks of independence as a result of their imprisonment, I believe that these kinds of people face a much tougher sacrifice: losing the right to attend any games.
Banishing them is the only way to convey the message that racial abuse is not tolerated in sport.
This is a message that millions of regular, law-abiding supporters already understand and approve.
Prior to Kovid, attendance in the English Football League had reached a 60-year high. Only a small proportion of these supporters are racist.
Most of the ordinary people who think the diversity of our teams is a testament to British values. That is why those who are not on the plane need to show a red card.
I know some people would label me as a hypocrite for the severe penalties of racism in football. This is due to my clear criticisms of the Black Lives Matter organization in the past.
I still think this is an unhelpful pressure group with a manifesto ambiguity.
It does not have the answers to address racism in this country.
Gives a strong shot
But unlike opponents who think anyone who criticizes taking a knee approves of racism, I am able to hold two thoughts in my head at the same time.
I want to get rid of racism from sport while criticizing the tactics used to do so.
I would like to see racists banned, harsh punishments for offenders who incite hatred, and social media companies that fail to block and remove accounts that post abuse.
Yesterday, a report published by the Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sports Committee called on the Government to consider withholding public money from the England and Wales Cricket Board and I strongly feel that it should be extended to other sports groups and associations. Leave the ball rooting for racism in dressing rooms and stands.
Tens of millions of public money goes to football alone with grants, and if football institutions fail to properly deal with racism, they will also face financial penalties.
What happened after the Euro 2020 final will make it happen again. That’s the reality. We cannot eradicate racism any more than we can completely eliminate hate.
But when so-called football fans launch racism online, we can be sure that the heavy hand of the law will give them a stronger shot than the wrist.
Former Love Islander-turned-influencer Molly-May Hague is a multi-millionaire after signing a seven-digit deal with haircare business Beauty Works.
The star was recently criticized for comments called “tone deaf,” suggesting that the poor can succeed if they work hard.
The vitriolic reaction is completely beyond. Molly-May is doing exceptionally well for herself but she is ultimately one of an endless supply of vacuum celebrities who offer motivational advice.
It is unfair to target her this way when celebrities are constantly giving unwanted and nonsensical life advice.
In fact, if anything, she should be applauded.
She has not made her fortune online at all. Her 6.2 million Instagram followers have never been treated to endless meaningless busty bikini images.
On top of that, she has recently been an advocate for getting rid of plastic surgery and going natural. She is as innocuous as you are when social media is influential and people should leave her alone and crack up with her.
Tim to expose counterfeits
TORY MP Dr Luke Evans has tabled a bill in Parliament that forces influential people to post their pictures to reveal if their bodies have been edited.
Evans says many people are “embroiled in an arms race for the perfect selfie,” and they’re right.
Young people go unthinkingly to achieve the perfect body. The number of hospital admissions for eating disorders in children has increased by 41 percent in one year and is now 69 percent higher than before the epidemic.
Cosmetic Surgery Inquiries are on the rise.
For a long time, the stars have been reaping the benefit of transmitting their real photos to the severely edited photos.
Anyone who thinks this has no insidious effect on the body image of young people is grossly mistaken.
Some have criticized the bill for “over-controlling” social media and censoring free expression.
As I have seen, it is a matter of right to have all the information about the products you consume.
Stars are paid to post their pictures to promote the products – and they should not miss the scrutiny.
A little nerdy
M&S has changed the name of its Midget Gem sweets so people should not be offended by dwarfism.
An academician who campaigned for the renaming of sweets and the status quo himself, said the term “midget” was a throwback to Victorian freak shows that dehumanized people with dwarfism.
Do we really need to be this nonsense? Because if we go down this road, I can call on the Galaxy Minstrels to be renamed because of the fun looking shows that Blackface is wearing.
Then it will be smarties, except KitKat chunky and thick people in the chopping block for fat-shaming.
I’m all for a more inclusive language but the crime bandwagon is doing a one-off tour to Crazy-Ville.