Bernado Silva charged by FA over Mendy tweet

[Brin]

Manchester City's Bernardo Silva has been charged with misconduct by the Football Association over a tweet he sent to team-mate Benjamin Mendy. Silva compared Mendy to the character on a packet of Conguitos - a sweet brand available in Spain and Portugal.

The Portugal player, 25, is alleged to have committed an "aggravated breach" of FA rules as it included reference "expressed or implied, to race and/or colour and/or ethnic origin". Silva has until 9 October to respond.

Sterling defends Silva over Mendy tweet
Silva is an "exceptional person" - Guardiola
The post was published at 12:44 BST on 22 September but was deleted at 13:30, although Silva later tweeted: "Can't even joke with a friend these days."

The FA subsequently contacted City for their observations, while Silva has written to the governing body to say he regrets the fact his social media post may have unintentionally caused offence.Anti-discrimination charity Kick It Out criticised the post and urged the FA to act, adding that "racist stereotypes are never acceptable as 'banter'".

In a statement on Wednesday, the FA said Silva's activity is alleged to have been "insulting and/or improper and/or brought the game into disrepute".Silva has been repeatedly defended by Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola, who said it would be a "mistake" to punish his playmaker for the tweet.

England forward Raheem Sterling supported Silva against accusations of racism, saying it was "a situation between two friends".

Mendy has also written in support of Silva, saying he did not take offence at the tweet.

France defender Mendy and Silva are close friends and played together at Monaco before both joined City in 2017. A previous video of Silva joking with Mendy has also been passed on to the FA.


There will be the PC brigade on here waiting to dive all over this but, this was private banter between two mates of which the alleged offended person did not see this as "insulting, improper or racially aggravating'' and has written to the FA to that effect.

It's about time this all stopped as it is clearly getting out of hand.

[frogmiller]

[frogmiller]

I suppose that this is the nearest thing that the Brits had. Could you see mates having a laugh over this? At one time years ago maybe but today and on social media you wouldn't get away with it.

[caytonmiller]

World's gone mad

[the_idiotb_stardson]

As i said before no-one is safe.

when you go on facebook, what's app, forums etc you are basically submitting evidence against yourself.

The internet "collects" the evidence against us all.

When we are in the way, or a problem or they need to make an example of someone, all that is needed is to mine the memory bank of evidence.

We should all be terrified of this madness. All of us now have submitted enough evidence to be prosecuted if not now then sometime in the future when the goal posts shift again.

What term will be offensive tomorrow?

If you used that term 20 years ago on a facebook post you are in danger of being rubbed out.


I honestly can't understand why Socialists are still protesting about the world They won the revolution. No riots, no barricades. It was silent and invisible and this is how they silence their enemies and demonstrate their power to the rest of us.

[frogmiller]

As i said before no-one is safe.

when you go on facebook, what's app, forums etc you are basically submitting evidence against yourself.

The internet "collects" the evidence against us all.

I often watch Dragons Den the BBC2 show. There was recently a guy on there who was selling a service to remove your internet activity. He'd already started the company in the US and was wanting funding to open it up in the UK. He was saying that not having an internet trail is as bad as having a bad one. They basically go through all of your old tweets, posts and meassages and either delete them or hide them amongst other stuff so that anyone who wants to check you out only find the good stuff you write. Employment HR departments for big firms apparently check people out before you're considered for a job.
Imagine what mine looks like after the Nazi comments that will show up. They really don't have any idea of what context they were written just that they were written.

[mikemiller]

As i said before no-one is safe.

when you go on facebook, what's app, forums etc you are basically submitting evidence against yourself.

The internet "collects" the evidence against us all.

When we are in the way, or a problem or they need to make an example of someone, all that is needed is to mine the memory bank of evidence.

We should all be terrified of this madness. All of us now have submitted enough evidence to be prosecuted if not now then sometime in the future when the goal posts shift again.

If true, how come nobody is stopping you from writing the usual, often deliberately offensive, rubbish? Your theory doesn't quite fit reality

[ragingpup]

The problem for the footy authorities here is that if, let's say, they use 'common sense' and let it pass, (because they might agree with us that it is not intended to be offensive, just funny post aimed at a work colleague), then they face the problem that another person could post an actually offensive, racist image against someone, but when challenged, can simply say "well that person did it and you didn't take action".

Id personally like them to judge each case on merit and use 'common sense' but can see the difficulty in them having to prove intent. As a result it can get messy and hard to prove, allowing genuine ****s to get away with posting genuinely offensive stuff that no one on this post would want to see happen. So I guess I understand why they take a rather 'black and white' view on it.

[Ronners]

The problem for the footy authorities here is that if, let's say, they use 'common sense' and let it pass, (because they might agree with us that it is not intended to be offensive, just funny post aimed at a work colleague), then they face the problem that another person could post an actually offensive, racist image against someone, but when challenged, can simply say "well that person did it and you didn't take action".

Id personally like them to judge each case on merit and use 'common sense' but can see the difficulty in them having to prove intent. As a result it can get messy and hard to prove, allowing genuine ****s to get away with posting genuinely offensive stuff that no one on this post would want to see happen. So I guess I understand why they take a rather 'black and white' view on it.

Surely it can only be deemed offensive if the person it was sent to deems it offensive raging? In this case the person it was sent to has said he didn't deem it offensive, so if the powers that be see a tweet or something on social media that they might deem racist, or evenue just offensive, shouldn't they contact the person it was sent to first and foremost?.

[the_idiotb_stardson]

If true, how come nobody is stopping you from writing the usual, often deliberately offensive, rubbish? Your theory doesn't quite fit reality

Then you obviously haven't read the theories of Marxist Antonio Gramsci.

You might not yet have done this module on your sociology course yet, so please forgive me if I am being a bit harsh.