Meet Shaun Tuck, The Racist Non-League Footballer

Ian

Ian began writing Twohundredpercent in May 2006. He lives in Brighton. He has also written for, amongst others, Pitch Invasion, FC Business Magazine, The Score, When Saturday Comes, Stand Against Modern Football and The Football Supporter. Ian was the first winner of the Socrates Award For Not Being Dead Yet at the 2010 NOPA awards for football bloggers.

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. Joe in Vancouver says:

    A very measured comment on a very difficult subject at a particularly distressing time.

    As I see it countries all around the World have large choices going forward as far as immigration is concerned. Do they welcome anybody without reservation even allowing them to effectively bring their own country’s lifestyle (including possibly totally alien religions) with them? This leads to large communities springing up all over the host country where thousands of people ignore traditions and even laws established over centuries. In the UK this has been allowed on a huge scale since 1947 and maybe the price is now being paid.

    I would love to live in a fairytale World that John Lennon envisaged where there were no countries and no religion. We would all be Citizens of the World being free to go and live where we choose. Think of the massive redundancies among the no longer wanted immigration officials and paper pushers! OK it will never happen but I so wish it would – no patriotism from anyone and no wars.

  2. alanm says:

    It is a small tragic irony in the bigger tragedy of the events in Woolwich that this footballer’s employees so openly support Help for Heroes. I hope they throw the book at him. Maybe a suitably gilded Quran?

    Meanwhile, Joe in Vancouver, it is worthwhile noting that the apparent perpetrator was born, brought up and educated in the UK with a Christian background (on which he turned his back). Immigration is too often held up these days as the cause of all our ills.

  3. Nathan says:

    Interesting article.

    Perhaps we need to redefine the whole concept of private/public communication, certainly in a legal sense after today’s Sally Bercow tweet libel verdict.

    This Tuck twat was (presumably) alone at home posting such abuse on a PC/device where there was no-one to temper or challenge his opinions. But the wonders of modern technology mean that his opinions can potentially be read by everyone on the planet for all eternity.

    It is easy for the vast majority to ignore such powerless and ignorant ranting (although it can easily be monitored in case it ever spills over into actual violence) to avoid giving it more publicity than it deserves.

    I’m assuming that no-one in a free society would want to prevent anyone expressing such opinions privately to a close friend or family member who knew them well and understood the whole of their character. That would be unforceable without mass surveilance anyway.

    Face-to-face communication has evolved over millions of years and comes with its own checks and balances (body language, immediate audience reaction, acceptable behaviour etc.) whereas remote communication is still in its infancy. You can’t just apply the same rules of morality and social conventions to both.

  4. Yasser says:

    Joe from Vancouver – You talk about alien cultures, alien religions, respect for laws, immigration without reservations. You do know how your ancestors (apologies if not) danced on the graves of indigenous people of what is Canada today, so please don’t approach the subject from a supremacist viewpoint.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>