Tiger - 'Stevie is not a racist'

by Redrage Tue 08 Nov 2011, 12:18 am

First topic message reminder :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/golf/15620375.stm

WARNING: This story contains language some may find offensive.

Tiger Woods has revealed he was hurt by Steve Williams's race comment but insisted his former caddie "is certainly not a racist".

Woods added: "It was a wrong thing to say. We're moving forward. It was hurtful certainly, but life goes forward.

"It is a comment that shouldn't have been made and he certainly wishes he didn't make it."

Woods said he had spoken to Williams about the remark, but declined to reveal exactly what they discussed.

"We talked about it this morning, we met face-to-face, we talked it through and we have agreed it was the wrong thing to say," former world number one Woods said.

"He did apologise."

Woods said he had "no doubts" in his belief that Williams did not hold racist views.

The caddie has apologised for his remarks and European Tour chief George O'Grady and US PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem have decided to take no action.

Williams, who now carries Adam Scott's bag, made the comments when he was awarded a light-hearted accolade for "the best celebration of the year" in Shanghai on Friday.

When he was asked to elaborate on his celebration when Scott won a world championship in August Williams said the aim was "to shove it right up that black bumhole".

Williams, who was sacked by Woods in July, apologised on Saturday. He said: "I now realise how my comments could be construed as racist. That was not my intent. I apologise to Tiger and anyone else I have offended."

Williams later told Newstalk ZB radio station in his home country of New Zealand that his comment had been "blown out of all proportion".

He said: "It was kind of like a locker room environment, everyone was having a good time.

"My comments were by no means the worst that were passed. There were a lot of profanities and other kinds of remarks but just because I make a remark regarding my former employee (sic) it gets blown out of all proportion. It's absolutely ridiculous.

"You make one comment in a room, having a bit of fun, how does that make you a racist?

"It's making a mountain out of a molehill and I'm not worried about it one bit."

Williams caddied for Woods from 1999 until earlier this year and shared in 13 of the former world number one's 14 major victories. It is estimated he earned $12m (£7.5m) working for Woods.

Woods was speaking about the incident for the first time at a press conference to discuss this week's Australian Open.

by Maverick Thu 10 Nov 2011, 11:42 am

Ray not sure what you mean there, no-one laid into simba needlessly, he was openly calling people idiots and most found that offensive and responded to that. As for people showing a lack of awareness again just because someones opinion is different does not mean they are unaware of things it simply means they have a different view.

Also with regards to Macs comments, he was openly missing the point of what many of us were saying and sensationalised it with some posts to which again we somply responded thats a far cry from laying into someone IMO

by McLaren Thu 10 Nov 2011, 12:06 pm

I may be alone but simba makes comments as valid as most on here yet is made out to be some sort of WUM. The way some of you treat him is no more than bullying.

Simba, please don't be put off by some peoples lack of respect as I hope you continue to post on V2.

by Davie Thu 10 Nov 2011, 12:08 pm

Not much chance of that

by Maverick Thu 10 Nov 2011, 12:09 pm

McLaren wrote:I may be alone but simba makes comments as valid as most on here yet is made out to be some sort of WUM. The way some of you treat him is no more than bullying.

Simba, please don't be put off by some peoples lack of respect as I hope you continue to post on V2.

Mac again missing the point, Simbas posting is not the issue its the fact he personally insults people that offends which to can be classed as bullying but I guess your double standards allow that mac

by super_realist Thu 10 Nov 2011, 12:10 pm

Mac, you probably are alone. Simba does make the occasional valid point, but he appears to often be one eyed and deliberately provocative.

by pedro Thu 10 Nov 2011, 12:40 pm

Doesn't Simba get more attention than he deserves?

by MustPuttBetter Thu 10 Nov 2011, 12:50 pm

I've said this many times before - Simba's posts are more than welcome (by me anyway) and he does make some good points. However, at times he comes out with the most condescending rubbish i've ever read

by Maverick Thu 10 Nov 2011, 1:01 pm

MustPuttBetter wrote:I've said this many times before - Simba's posts are more than welcome (by me anyway) and he does make some good points. However, at times he comes out with the most condescending rubbish i've ever read

I don't think anyone could argue against him making some valid points and others that can cause healthy debate.

However its the condescedning tone and insults he tends to band around when people disagree with him, which is a shame because it's good to have both sides of an argument and this is what the issue people have is and is why I cannot agree with Macs comment that he is bullied

by MustPuttBetter Thu 10 Nov 2011, 1:07 pm

Maverick wrote:However its the condescedning tone and insults he tends to band around when people disagree with him, which is a shame because it's good to have both sides of an argument and this is what the issue people have is and is why I cannot agree with Macs comment that he is bullied

Exactly, and if you're going to act that way that's fine but you've got to expect it back, or at least to be told to get lost. That's not bullying and to be fair to Simba i've never heard him say he's being bullied. Mac needs a cause to fight for on a day to day basis and today it's Simba.....

by McLaren Thu 10 Nov 2011, 1:20 pm

Davie

Do you mean to say he is banned?

by Maverick Thu 10 Nov 2011, 1:21 pm

Mac needs a cause to fight for on a day to day basis and today it's Simba.....

and there is the crux of it...

by SetupDeterminesTheMotion Thu 10 Nov 2011, 1:26 pm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2059482/Patrick-Swayzes-niece-marries-Neo-Nazi-thug-linked-Obama-assassination-plot.html

is this guy a racist ?

by Davie Thu 10 Nov 2011, 1:28 pm

McLaren wrote:Davie

Do you mean to say he is banned?

Not being a member of the inner circle any more I can't answer that for certain. It is my belief though that he may have fallen foul of the administrators

by super_realist Thu 10 Nov 2011, 1:32 pm

Not sure he has been banned. He was on yesterday lamenting that the man on the poster on his bedroom ceiling is at 58 in the OWGR.

by Davie Thu 10 Nov 2011, 1:34 pm

He hasn't logged on since Monday when he got the dreaded "you have a PM" message

by raycastleunited Thu 10 Nov 2011, 1:35 pm

Guys,

As someone who wasn't involved in the heated discussions, but has read them from a neutral point of view, I felt that certain posters were ganging up on Simba.

You guys may view him as provocative or a WUM, but I just saw a guy trying to make a point but struggling because he is not as eloquent as some of you.

But that's my view, you don't have to accept it.

by super_realist Thu 10 Nov 2011, 1:35 pm

Davie, I stand corrected.

Ray, as someone who has been on the wrong end of Simba's rants, I can honestly say that I don't think anyone responds to him anywhere near as aggressively and deliberately confrontational as the way in which he chooses to post.
I think he's treated with the disdain that his manner deserves.

by **navyblueshorts** Thu 10 Nov 2011, 1:49 pm

raycastleunited wrote:Guys,

As someone who wasn't involved in the heated discussions, but has read them from a neutral point of view, I felt that certain posters were ganging up on Simba.

You guys may view him as provocative or a WUM, but I just saw a guy trying to make a point but struggling because he is not as eloquent as some of you.

But that's my view, you don't have to accept it.

Ray

Simba was a recidivist WUM on the old 606 which often got too offensively personal. He hasn't changed recently it would seem. Could it perhaps be that there's no 'ganging up' but rather there are a lot of like-minded people here who find him OTT?

by 1GrumpyGolfer Thu 10 Nov 2011, 2:07 pm

Ray, I was a little late to the name calling thread and when I tried to catch up reading half of the posts didn't make sense when you read through them. I think this was down to two things: mods, rightly, getting involved and a poster somehow changing their posts without the post edited footer appearing.

I caught Simba over the weekend somehow altering his posts and made comments to that effect. Some of his comments were quite provocative or deliberately agitative, they drew a reaction and it wasn't just from me. When he was called out on this the provocative piece of the text was then modified to be more reasonable and so after the fact it would appear posters are attacking, bullying or out to get him.

He does have some reasonable points, at times, and brings a different viewpoint but to alter your statements to fit the facts does not fit in with good debate.

by McLaren Thu 10 Nov 2011, 2:33 pm

Where is the thread where simba committed all the aforementioned offences?

by **navyblueshorts** Thu 10 Nov 2011, 2:56 pm

McLaren wrote:Where is the thread where simba committed all the aforementioned offences?

Several of Simba's (and S_Rs) posts were deleted and archived. They're still in Modland. Simba shot his bolt by sending a pretty offensive PM to one of the Admin; read into that what you will.

by 1GrumpyGolfer Thu 10 Nov 2011, 2:57 pm

Mac - the first time I noticed this was on the Mav's WGC HSBC thread. On page 2 towards the bottom Simba made reference to the number of times Donald has won a PGA Tour strokeplay event. This was a one line sentence that became a more reasonably worded 2 line sentence.

I made reference to posts changing on page 3, the Donald wins was the clearest example, there may have been posts that changed on that thread.

There was another thread, I believe it was with the name calling, where Kwini made reference to Simba editing the script again. I may have misunderstood Kwini's comment but I took that to be Simba changing his posts as this was the thread where posts and comments do not flow in a logical sense.

by super_realist Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:03 pm

navyblueshorts wrote:
McLaren wrote:Where is the thread where simba committed all the aforementioned offences?
Several of Simba's (and S_Rs) posts were deleted and archived. They're still in Modland. Simba shot his bolt by sending a pretty offensive PM to one of the Admin; read into that what you will.

For the record I don't believe I replied with anything other than a robust defence in response to Simba's posts, i've certainly not had any warnings from the Mods (on this occasion Wink

) in relation to my conduct to suggest otherwise.

by Diggers Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:03 pm

1GrumpyGolfer wrote:Mac - the first time I noticed this was on the Mav's WGC HSBC thread. On page 2 towards the bottom Simba made reference to the number of times Donald has won a PGA Tour strokeplay event. This was a one line sentence that became a more reasonably worded 2 line sentence.

I made reference to posts changing on page 3, the Donald wins was the clearest example, there may have been posts that changed on that thread.

There was another thread, I believe it was with the name calling, where Kwini made reference to Simba editing the script again. I may have misunderstood Kwini's comment but I took that to be Simba changing his posts as this was the thread where posts and comments do not flow in a logical sense.

Isnt the edit facility there to enable you to alter your posts ? Ive done it before, written something and decided to reword it.

by 1GrumpyGolfer Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:06 pm

Mac - It was the same thread that Kwini commented on Simba, page 4.

Digs, yes, the edit facility allows you to do that but it adds a footer that says Last edited by and when so people know that it has changed. In the post I am referring to that footer is not there.

by McLaren Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:08 pm

Oh dear what a poor unfortunate fellow simba is, what with all the unnecessary agro he brings upon himself. I feel he is just a little misunderstood or a little odd and I hope he does not take the ban to heart.

by **navyblueshorts** Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:10 pm

Diggers wrote:Isnt the edit facility there to enable you to alter your posts ? Ive done it before, written something and decided to reword it.

It is but the implication here is surely that Simba was retrospectively editing to avoid the opprobrium being fired his way and/or make out he wasn't such a bad guy after all. I bet your re-wording didn't alter the gist of what you were saying?

by **navyblueshorts** Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:12 pm

McLaren wrote:Oh dear what a poor unfortunate fellow simba is, what with all the unnecessary agro he brings upon himself...

Er, no. Not having seen his very clear, impossible to misinterpret PM.

by MustPuttBetter Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:12 pm

Maybe Digs but surely it's not within the spirit of the thread to make things look different after the event??

Fair enough if he added a note saying 'edited to make me look less of a plum'!

by 1GrumpyGolfer Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:19 pm

Re: Tiger - 'Stevie is not a racist'
by navyblueshorts Today at 10:10 am

.Diggers wrote:
Isnt the edit facility there to enable you to alter your posts ? Ive done it before, written something and decided to reword it.
It is but the implication here is surely that Simba was retrospectively editing to avoid the opprobrium being fired his way and/or make out he wasn't such a bad guy after all. I bet your re-wording didn't alter the gist of what you were saying?.

This is exactly the point I was trying to make in a very awkward manner, thanks Navy.

Also and crucially, in my opinion, the fact that the post changed and was displayed without the highlight that it was changed is just plain wrong.

If that footer was there it would have allowed me to acknowledge it in that instance and also allow others to take the debate with a grain of salt.

by 1GrumpyGolfer Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:21 pm

I just cannot get this quote thing right.

It's okay to chip in with advice laughing

by Diggers Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:24 pm

If you edit a post it does say on the bottom of the post that you have done so, no mention of plums though. Grumpy, not sure how Simba could have avoided having that there ? Is there an option to delete that text, I assumed it was embedded to deter people from altering for the reasons you mention?
NBS, must admit I usually only go back to edit my appalling spelling but I did once change a post completely as I realised I didnt want to be bothered having the debate/slanging match with the person the post was meant for. It was only about 5 minutes after Id posted the original though and was pretty late at night as I remember.

by Davie Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:26 pm

I may be wrong as as I'm no longer in a position to try it, but it's my memory that if a member edits a post it always displays the footer stating that the post has been edited. If an admin (not sure about mods) edits it, it doesn't necessarily leave a trace unless the admin wants it to.

EDIT: OK maybe I'm wrong. I just edited this and no footer is added

by super_realist Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:28 pm

Davie, if you edit before anyone else posts, there is no edit bar visible, however if someone else replies before you can edit, then the edit bar will appear.

by MustPuttBetter Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:29 pm

I think if you edit sharp-ish after the post (ie for spelling) it doesn't add the footer.
After a period of time (10 mins?) it's automatically added

Although i've just tested that and it did add it
Who knows?!

by Diggers Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:29 pm

Davie wrote:I may be wrong as as I'm no longer in a position to try it, but it's my memory that if a member edits a post it always displays the footer stating that the post has been edited. If an admin (not sure about mods) edits it, it doesn't necessarily leave a trace unless the admin wants it to.

EDIT: OK maybe I'm wrong. I just edited this and no footer is added

I thought that as well Davie and I know its been that way in the past as I have seen the text in the posts Ive changed, however Ive also just done the same without it showing. Maybe its changed ?

by 1GrumpyGolfer Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:30 pm

Exactly, I can't work out how he managed to do that without that note appearing but it did happen.

If you can do it I believe the method should be kept secret so that the edit feature doesn't get abused and spoil threads.

by Maverick Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:31 pm

navyblueshorts wrote:
McLaren wrote:Oh dear what a poor unfortunate fellow simba is, what with all the unnecessary agro he brings upon himself...
Er, no. Not having seen his very clear, impossible to misinterpret PM.

I too was actually privy to that PM won't mention how though as that would be inappropriate but in all honesty what he wrote in response to what was reasonably worded PM was what can only be described a vile personal abuse whether to be banned as a result of a PM instead of open forum is another debate for another day but I can see why it was done...

by MustPuttBetter Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:32 pm

For me, it's completely and utterly immoral to change your post if the intention is to change the context or reasoning of what you're saying.

Spelling obviously is different and sometimes i've edited if i've thought of one more tihng i wanted to add but never to change the context.

Even if you change your mind i think we're all man enough to just post again saying 'you know what, i've changed my mind'.
Where's the problem in that?

by Maverick Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:35 pm

Maverick wrote:
navyblueshorts wrote:
McLaren wrote:Oh dear what a poor unfortunate fellow simba is, what with all the unnecessary agro he brings upon himself...
Er, no. Not having seen his very clear, impossible to misinterpret PM.

I too was actually privy to that PM won't mention how though as that would be inappropriate but in all honesty what he wrote in response to what was reasonably worded PM was what can only be described a vile personal abuse whether to be banned as a result of a PM instead of open forum is another debate for another day but I can see why it was done...

To test the water I clicked the edit to the above thread and made a small change and no footnote is applied...... Read into that what you will

by 1GrumpyGolfer Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:36 pm

So maybe Simba was quick enough to edit in this case but it was still seen by a few people that were discussing that thread at the time. So if I typed really fast and posted before he changed it, then the edit bar would have appeared?

I'm confused now, my opinion is you shouldn't be able to change the post, once published, without the edit bar appearing.

by 1GrumpyGolfer Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:40 pm

Agree, whole heartedly with MPB and that's why I drew attention to it. How can you hold a reasonable debate with someone if that happens?

by gaelgowfer Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:40 pm

When he first started posting on here he did say he was going to stir things up or words to that effect.

He's now found out that what he could get away with on the BBC site, he can't get away with on here.

He's a silly billy!

by Diggers Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:43 pm

1GrumpyGolfer wrote:Agree, whole heartedly with MPB and that's why I drew attention to it. How can you hold a reasonable debate with someone if that happens?

I think Id have to see the original thread and the altered one.....I know the point is you cant but you know what I mean. If he has completely changed the context then yeah thats not good, if he was merely softened the tone of his original post I dont personally have a problem with that. Especially as he usually gets hammered by about 20 people for being inflamatory whenever he posts.

by Hibbz Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:45 pm

1GrumpyGolfer wrote:So maybe Simba was quick enough to edit in this case but it was still seen by a few people that were discussing that thread at the time. So if I typed really fast and posted before he changed it, then the edit bar would have appeared?

I'm confused now, my opinion is you shouldn't be able to change the post, once published, without the edit bar appearing.

I agree with this and with what mustputtbetter said. It becomes impossible to "win" a debate if someone can just go back and change their original standpoint and that to me is a big part of the fun of a forum.

I'm also slightly concerned that PM's are being "bandied" about to all and sundry.

by McLaren Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:47 pm

Lets hope simba is not as stubborn as LJ and can make an apology allowing his hopefully peaceful return to the forum.

by MustPuttBetter Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:49 pm

Depends Digs

If he's written it in an inflammatory way to which 20 people have responded negatively, if he then goes back and changes it so he can turn around and say "I don't know what you're all talking about", that can't be good?

Why not just repost saying "I realise I came across wrongly"?

by Diggers Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:53 pm

MustPuttBetter wrote:Depends Digs

If he's written it in an inflammatory way to which 20 people have responded negatively, if he then goes back and changes it so he can turn around and say "I don't know what you're all talking about", that can't be good?

Why not just repost saying "I realise I came across wrongly"?

Yeah, he could do that and probably should and would if he was a "normal" board member. He is however usually on the end of a fair old hammering when he posts (most of it of his own making) so maybe tahst why he doesnt feel that he wants to do that.

by 1GrumpyGolfer Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:58 pm

Digs, the time I clearly noticed it seemed a bit of both, the context and tone both changed. Other posts seemed different too but I couldn't tell you exactly what changed.

by MustPuttBetter Thu 10 Nov 2011, 3:59 pm

Maybe

I should say I disagreed with Simba big time on the racist thread and said as much at the time but on the strength of that, or similar, disagreements I wouldn't want to see him banned.

I don't know what he said in his PM though

by Sponsored content