Pablo Matera to fight for the survival of his International career?

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Too many things i'll try to be as organized as possible. Just one point before i start: take a look at this page of the thread and see how much of what was written on this page, and what was written specifically, was based on false info. Just that. Moving on.

- What unrated posted was retweeted by several journalists that tend to be somewhat credible, but i am pretty sure they are false, as when confronted with the source they all said they couldn't provide one or did not reply (their history suggest they would have had they had a credible source).
- SF (for Matera) and Bordeaux (Petti) have made a somewhat comparable public statement saying (broad brush) that they a) condemn what they saw in the tweets b) but that they say the conduct of the players since they joined the club has been impeccable and c) some sort of hearing will take place once the players return to the club. I thought this was appropriate. 10 times better than what UAR did.
-

so he said Argentinian's have rights to free speech, but @Cruz_del_Sur said what he did was illegal?

I do not know to be honest. We have laws against discrimination but the problem here is not only that you would need to prove intent (as in that he meant what he said and it wasnt a joke (in very bad taste)) but also that if they condemn him, thewould, quite literally, would have to prosecute every single person who's ever attended a football game, clubs authorities, police at the stadium, politicians, etc.

Apparently his throwing toys out of the cot worked?

No. A lot, if not most of the clubs went out of their way and issued statements condemning UAR for the sanctions.

The Argentinian players threatened to strike, I hope that doesn't mean they are all classist and xenophobic.

I don't think that's what happened here. From what i understand the pressure to lift the sanctions came mostly from the clubs in Argentina, not from the camp in Australia.

Can i ask you an honest question? Let's assume we a person, let's call him John. John is not classist nor xenophobic (nor racist for the matter, just to cover it), by any standard. John reads the news, informs himself and as most non-classist and non-xenophobic people, doesn't like one bit what he read. The then continues to read and finds out about the date of the tweets, also reads Matera's apologies, tons of other players with a reasonable track record who came out to support Matera, and thinks, fine, he did a mistake, long ago but a big one, apologized, and i believe he is changed. John doesn't think the sanctions are fair. He thinks Matera has not only changed before the tweets came to light but that also the embarrassment he has brought upon himself is punishment enough.
Does that mean John is classist and xenophobic just because he holds that view of faith and forgiveness towards Matera?

I am asking this because a lot of the things I see about this and similar issues are of the sort "if you agree/disagree with this you are a racist/classist/xenophobe/antisemitic/etc". Basically, I see a lot of people putting themselves in a pedestal and my question becomes "how can i disagree with you and not be a classist/xenophobe?". I understand how there are some scenarios where that is not possible. If you tell me "how can i hate poor people and not be a classist", sure, that's a no brainer. But that is not the case. The way we reach a conclusion on how Matera's character stands today, has quite a few judgement calls, no matter which side of the fence you standing.

Apologies for using your quote as an example, but i find this issue important and wanted to address it.

My take: I think he was a spoiled kid and the problem were not just his thoughts but his words and actions that reflected those thoughts. I haven't seen words nor actions from him in recent years that remotely suggest that is how he acts. What does he thinks? God knows, and i wouldn't like a sanction system that penalizes people on what they think. Regarding the sanction, i probably would have changed captains but i wouldn't have suspended him. And i would never, as the governing body, backpedalled the way they did. If you make a decision, think it through and stick with it until and if new evidence comes to light.


Continuing...
Saw bits and pieces from an interview to Ledesma, couldn't find the complete thing. He says the tweets were bad, condemns them. Still, he supports Matera as a captain but says they agreed it was in no one's best interest for the 3 of them to play this game.

 

[petite]

lt s a long time since i posted here.
just wana say a few things. the fact that they posted this crap 10 years ago doesent make it any better. they can change yes. did they change? dont think so
many people worried about why the posts surfaced now. I DONT CARE. they are inadmisible and they shoud have surfed before cos matera was playng at the moment for alumni first division team, argentina u20s and pampas Xv , in a tournament in south africa who gently invited us so we can develop our rugby. and this piece of **** Posted "nice lo leave from this country full of ****..ers
You have to feel really confortable with your peers coaches, family and authorities of those 3 teams, 2 of them run by uar to post that with such impunity. so no one said nothing at the time means they are in tune with the posts. all of them. nobody saw it ? its clear atmosphere of racism whera that can go umpunished.
Also i give a holy **** about others doing the same. the president, maradona the vice president. the three of them where way ligther than materas btw not nice but in a totally differnet level.
the idea of others doing wrong so what i did is not so bad is false. the ones bragging about the values are rugbiers nobody else. these are the ******* pumas so they shoud be excluded from the team. (their appologies where so laim!! ) if they actually cared about those values, that are clearly a bunch of crap, they should nt be allowed in the team.
personally i played many years and witnessed many discrimintion situations literraly hundreds whithin the team or from others.
recently i removed my son from the sport as he told me that a guy from the team said "i hate ****...ers." the racism is a clear pattern in arg rugby. think is better than before but still long long way to go. banning this pieces of **** would be a start. won´t happen. reading the social media where most people of rugby are ok with this and start blaming futballers or peronist who digged the past of these poor inocent boys who now "changed" makes me sick
the hole team standing behind them and thretenig the uar of a strike makes it clear that they support the racism expresed by these pices of ****.
petti mocking his maid publicaly! the idea of a 1.95 mts 110 kilo rich guy picking on his woman poor maid is just discusting such is the unbalance of power shown there. these people are obsesed with their maids! bunch of loosers! my god get a life.
im really depressed ill be cheering for australia this week end hope they kick the rich boys ass big time!
just want to appologize to the south african people for this from the maggiority of argentinian people. and to the australian and nz etnic minorities too. kick them asses
and if uar lets this pieces of **** play
hope sanzaar kicks argentina out of the tournament just as S.A wasnt allowed to play during apartheid

 

[Umaga's Witness]

It's quite correct.

The team became one with the suspended players and the federation had to back down.

It is very revealing of a moral crisis in the social group which plays rugby.

Instead of prioritizing self-criticism or questioning its values as a social group, they did something else.

Some prefer to play the victimization card, denounce the hypocrisy of others and not one's own, or charge the government with going delusional complot.

A few comments above I have given historical context on the fiercely unpopular origins of rugby without which the twits of Matera, Petti and Socino cannot be understood.

Still, I remain hopeful that this scandal, as well as the global condemnation, will help us challenge ourselves.

Well if that's the case then frankly I'd rather not see Argentina participate in any of the. KKQoqqo

Too many things i'll try to be as organized as possible. Just one point before i start: take a look at this page of the thread and see how much of what was written on this page, and what was written specifically, was based on false info. Just that. Moving on.

- What unrated posted was retweeted by several journalists that tend to be somewhat credible, but i am pretty sure they are false, as when confronted with the source they all said they couldn't provide one or did not reply (their history suggest they would have had they had a credible source).
- SF (for Matera) and Bordeaux (Petti) have made a somewhat comparable public statement saying (broad brush) that they a) condemn what they saw in the tweets b) but that they say the conduct of the players since they joined the club has been impeccable and c) some sort of hearing will take place once the players return to the club. I thought this was appropriate. 10 times better than what UAR did.
-

I do not know to be honest. We have laws against discrimination but the problem here is not only that you would need to prove intent (as in that he meant what he said and it wasnt a joke (in very bad taste)) but also that if they condemn him, thewould, quite literally, would have to prosecute every single person who's ever attended a football game, clubs authorities, police at the stadium, politicians, etc.


No. A lot, if not most of the clubs went out of their way and issued statements condemning UAR for the sanctions.


I don't think that's what happened here. From what i understand the pressure to lift the sanctions came mostly from the clubs in Argentina, not from the camp in Australia.

Can i ask you an honest question? Let's assume we a person, let's call him John. John is not classist nor xenophobic (nor racist for the matter, just to cover it), by any standard. John reads the news, informs himself and as most non-classist and non-xenophobic people, doesn't like one bit what he read. The then continues to read and finds out about the date of the tweets, also reads Matera's apologies, tons of other players with a reasonable track record who came out to support Matera, and thinks, fine, he did a mistake, long ago but a big one, apologized, and i believe he is changed. John doesn't think the sanctions are fair. He thinks Matera has not only changed before the tweets came to light but that also the embarrassment he has brought upon himself is punishment enough.
Does that mean John is classist and xenophobic just because he holds that view of faith and forgiveness towards Matera?

I am asking this because a lot of the things I see about this and similar issues are of the sort "if you agree/disagree with this you are a racist/classist/xenophobe/antisemitic/etc". Basically, I see a lot of people putting themselves in a pedestal and my question becomes "how can i disagree with you and not be a classist/xenophobe?". I understand how there are some scenarios where that is not possible. If you tell me "how can i hate poor people and not be a classist", sure, that's a no brainer. But that is not the case. The way we reach a conclusion on how Matera's character stands today, has quite a few judgement calls, no matter which side of the fence you standing.

Apologies for using your quote as an example, but i find this issue important and wanted to address it.

My take: I think he was a spoiled kid and the problem were not just his thoughts but his words and actions that reflected those thoughts. I haven't seen words nor actions from him in recent years that remotely suggest that is how he acts. What does he thinks? God knows, and i wouldn't like a sanction system that penalizes people on what they think. Regarding the sanction, i probably would have changed captains but i wouldn't have suspended him. And i would never, as the governing body, backpedalled the way they did. If you make a decision, think it through and stick with it until and if new evidence comes to light.


Continuing...
Saw bits and pieces from an interview to Ledesma, couldn't find the complete thing. He says the tweets were bad, condemns them. Still, he supports Matera as a captain but says they agreed it was in no one's best interest for the 3 of them to play this game.

no, I agree John is not classist or xenophobic, John is just a forgiving person who believes matera has changed. That was exactly why my question you quoted was asking ( on the presumption at the time that the Argentinian players had gone on strike) whether the strike meant the players were xenophobic or classist, the unwritten alternative - which I thought sufficiently obvious not to write - was that they were striking because they thought the treatment was unfair because the tweets were some time ago and dont represent who those players are now.

also, my first reaction to some posts here was similar to your feeling that people are putting themselves on a pedestal, but in the process of drafting a reply to such posts, I realised the posts don't necessarily imply that at all, they could just mean people think that even if he has changed that doesn't exonerate him from punishment, ie If you committed a crime ten years ago and you were caught now then you should still do your time, that sort of argument.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

ie If you committed a crime ten years ago and you were caught now then you should still do your time, that sort of argument.

I dont like that argument. First, using your analogy, most crimes in most jurisdictions have statutes of limitations. Second, what law did he break, exactly, at the time? Was there a specific contract that mentioned this while he was playing for the under 20s?
If i were to go to your employer and showed them irrefutable proof that you cheated on a high school test under the banner "cheating is wrong" and demanded you lost your job, would that be ok? I m exagerating a bit for dramatic purposes but these pretty much the exact same principles at stake.

Some of the things Matera is being acused of (he s guilty, no question) is discriminating against bolivians in a derogatory manner by tweeting. If i dig up someone using the term "argie" on this forum 10 years ago, find his name, his employer and ask for him to be sacked, would you be ok with that too?
I am most definitely not ok with that.

It s not as if he was hiding it or anything. He made several terrible mistakes, no question. What i am questioning is what sort of punishment we should have.
I dont know.
Most people see Matera s tweets and are angry. I am one of those. But i am afrad, no, terrified, about the hastiness with which some people issue sentence without considering what all of this entails.

i think we all agree that discrimination based on things like class is wrong. What i m not so sure is whether we agree on the fact that within that discrimination, there are some ways of it that are worse than others. In fact, i find them incomparable. A pocket knife and a tank are both weapons, but comparing them is nonsensical.
Both someone using the n word in a derogatory manner and someone owning and lynching black slaves would constitute what we call a racist, but it d be silly to make those two thing equivalent.
Just as it is comparing the apartheid to these tweets.

Having said that. I d probably lose the plot if my kid said that to me.

One of the reasons i have doubts about dealing with this with an exemplary harsh punishment , besides the time and congruence, is that i am not sure that helps to solve the problem.

The issue here, at it s very core is not what people say but what people think, but you can punish people based on that. Say you make an extraordinary example out of them. Do you really think this will prevent another classist to continue to be so? I certainly do not. He will just be more careful about how he exposes his views.
Not sure what the alternative should be thou but probably something along the lines of using him as an example in a positive way (if and only if you believe he s changed).

 

[Felipe]

just wana say a few things. the fact that they posted this crap 10 years ago doesent make it any better. they can change yes. did they change? dont think so
many people worried about why the posts surfaced now. I DONT CARE. they are inadmisible and they shoud have surfed before cos matera was playng at the moment for alumni first division team, argentina u20s and pampas Xv , in a tournament in south africa who gently invited us so we can develop our rugby. and this piece of **** Posted "nice lo leave from this country full of ****..ers
You have to feel really confortable with your peers coaches, family and authorities of those 3 teams, 2 of them run by uar to post that with such impunity. so no one said nothing at the time means they are in tune with the posts. all of them. nobody saw it ? its clear atmosphere of racism whera that can go umpunished.

I am 100% in tune with this vision which expresses much better than mine what I wanted to signify: it is a moral crisis in the social group which practices rugby in Argentina.

Rather than face it in a self-critical way, the Argentinian rugby community preferred to victimize itself, expose a plot and put pressure on the UAR to cancel the suspension.

The arguments of Cruz del Sur are the opposite. He enters a labyrinth of arguments which has the sole purpose of avoiding the discussion around the moral crisis in the world of rugby in Argentina.

 

[Felipe]

Well if that's the case then frankly I'd rather not see Argentina participate in any of the. KKQoqqo

For my part, I will continue to watch the All Blacks more than ever. You demonstrated during the tribute to Maradona that even if you are not interested in football, you are above all a team of the people for the people.
We have a lot to learn from you and I'm not just talking about techniques related to playing rugby.
During the last haka, even before the start of the match, you had already inflicted a singular moral defeat on my beloved pumas. The 38-0 was just a natural consequence.
I do not lose hope that these events will help us to change.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

That must have been a fabricated statement then surely? Bizarre situation.

I'm trying to find it TBH.

 

[petite]

I dont like that argument. First, using your analogy, most crimes in most jurisdictions have statutes of limitations. Second, what law did he break, exactly, at the time? Was there a specific contract that mentioned this while he was playing for the under 20s?
If i were to go to your employer and showed them irrefutable proof that you cheated on a high school test under the banner "cheating is wrong" and demanded you lost your job, would that be ok? I m exagerating a bit for dramatic purposes but these pretty much the exact same principles at stake.

Some of the things Matera is being acused of (he s guilty, no question) is discriminating against bolivians in a derogatory manner by tweeting. If i dig up someone using the term "argie" on this forum 10 years ago, find his name, his employer and ask for him to be sacked, would you be ok with that too?
I am most definitely not ok with that.

It s not as if he was hiding it or anything. He made several terrible mistakes, no question. What i am questioning is what sort of punishment we should have.
I dont know.
Most people see Matera s tweets and are angry. I am one of those. But i am afrad, no, terrified, about the hastiness with which some people issue sentence without considering what all of this entails.

i think we all agree that discrimination based on things like class is wrong. What i m not so sure is whether we agree on the fact that within that discrimination, there are some ways of it that are worse than others. In fact, i find them incomparable. A pocket knife and a tank are both weapons, but comparing them is nonsensical.
Both someone using the n word in a derogatory manner and someone owning and lynching black slaves would constitute what we call a racist, but it d be silly to make those two thing equivalent.
Just as it is comparing the apartheid to these tweets.

Having said that. I d probably lose the plot if my kid said that to me.

One of the reasons i have doubts about dealing with this with an exemplary harsh punishment , besides the time and congruence, is that i am not sure that helps to solve the problem.

The issue here, at it s very core is not what people say but what people think, but you can punish people based on that. Say you make an extraordinary example out of them. Do you really think this will prevent another classist to continue to be so? I certainly do not. He will just be more careful about how he exposes his views.
Not sure what the alternative should be thou but probably something along

dear cruz i read your posts for a long time and i do believe in your good intentions. dont think you are a xenofhobe at all.
i think that cos you dont live here anymore you tend to idealize the country and the past.
to compare someone here on the forum calling us argie versus materras tweets is insane. matera is publicaly whishing to go out and run over some ****e.. rs stating he HATES bolivianos that´s a complete diferent level. in every dicrimination act ther´s a disbalance of power, matera is young strong and rich and hes is picking on 5 foot poor boys, working and underpriviledged people. (thats also why you cant turn arround and call a black dude racist cos he insults a white man). or a girl that slaps a guy gender violence. power to acomplish is the difference

calling what matera did mistakes is so wrong! a mistake is something different, an exeption from a beheveor, posting again and again this nazi **** over several years hardly cualifies as a mistake. its a clear pattern of a racist ideology
i used the word apartheid cos they used it the tweets!!! Socino for instance, said apartheid is wrong but we could start to diference normal buses from those with ****.. listening to cumbia. and i ment that if UAR lets this umpunished, then i would like sanzaar to disalow our participation. it would be such a disrespect for south africa after all the help we got for them, fielding a guy who said "good to leave SA a plaace full of ****... "
you also comapre this situation to others like a job. if an employer discovers this kinf of thing in your tweeter you probably get fired. ..never mind if they where posted 8 years ago. asuming that he changed is ridiculous. it can happen i guess, but there´s not hint about it.
then those saying they should be pardoned cos they where just teenagers.. are the same people demanding imputability age to be set at 15.. years old..
the fact that this behaveior woudent be tolerated in a rugby pitch against your teammates or opposition, or against a ref, but its tolerated outside of it speaks volumes.
it is not tolerated among " equals" but it is towords others.
finnally would like to point who the pumas represent as a team. or when matera says im playing for my country. or when the cry during the anthem. they actually hate 60 % of the country they represent

 

[Umaga's Witness]

I dont like that argument. First, using your analogy, most crimes in most jurisdictions have statutes of limitations. Second, what law did he break, exactly, at the time? Was there a specific contract that mentioned this while he was playing for the under 20s?
If i were to go to your employer and showed them irrefutable proof that you cheated on a high school test under the banner "cheating is wrong" and demanded you lost your job, would that be ok? I m exagerating a bit for dramatic purposes but these pretty much the exact same principles at stake.

Some of the things Matera is being acused of (he s guilty, no question) is discriminating against bolivians in a derogatory manner by tweeting. If i dig up someone using the term "argie" on this forum 10 years ago, find his name, his employer and ask for him to be sacked, would you be ok with that too?
I am most definitely not ok with that.

It s not as if he was hiding it or anything. He made several terrible mistakes, no question. What i am questioning is what sort of punishment we should have.
I dont know.
Most people see Matera s tweets and are angry. I am one of those. But i am afrad, no, terrified, about the hastiness with which some people issue sentence without considering what all of this entails.

i think we all agree that discrimination based on things like class is wrong. What i m not so sure is whether we agree on the fact that within that discrimination, there are some ways of it that are worse than others. In fact, i find them incomparable. A pocket knife and a tank are both weapons, but comparing them is nonsensical.
Both someone using the n word in a derogatory manner and someone owning and lynching black slaves would constitute what we call a racist, but it d be silly to make those two thing equivalent.
Just as it is comparing the apartheid to these tweets.

Having said that. I d probably lose the plot if my kid said that to me.

One of the reasons i have doubts about dealing with this with an exemplary harsh punishment , besides the time and congruence, is that i am not sure that helps to solve the problem.

The issue here, at it s very core is not what people say but what people think, but you can punish people based on that. Say you make an extraordinary example out of them. Do you really think this will prevent another classist to continue to be so? I certainly do not. He will just be more careful about how he exposes his views.
Not sure what the alternative should be thou but probably something along the lines of using him as an example in a positive way (if and only if you believe he s changed).

There's a sanction spectrum from cut their heads off, zero tolerance, to complete forgiveness, they did nothing wrong.

I don't think anyone's posts on here have implied a zero tolerance approach.
To me, the sanctions implied in people's posts have all been within a reasonable part of that spectrum, the shades of grey Appropriate for the 'crime'.

if you found similar tweets from me from ten years ago and came to my workplace demanding I be sacked I'd think that was ok, that you were within your rights to have such an opinion, that it was reasonable to have such an opinion, even if I disagreed. I wouldn't think you were putting yourself in a pedestal.

and I said it before, but I'll say it again, I don't think uar's initial reaction was all that different to what other countries would have done in a similar situation. Other countries probably wouldn't have suspended them, but they wouldn't have picked them until they were satisfied they had done enough to convince people they didn't hold those beliefs. And enough for that purpose would be more than some half-assed apologies. And certainly to regain the captaincy a huge effort would be required to demonstrate remorse and to promote equality, and such actions would be expected to continue while they were captain if they regained it.

the other thing to put in context here is I think the opinion that they aren't xenophobic and classist anymore, and the opinion that they probably still are, are both reasonable opinions given the available evidence at this stage. And I absolutely think that it would be inappropriate to hold such views and represent your country, even if you didn't act on those views. Sure, it's not ok to just assume they still hold those views, but it is reasonable given the circumstances to require more convincing that they no longer hold those views.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

i think that cos you dont live here anymore you tend to idealize the country and the past.

I spend half my time there, so why don't we stick to the arguments and leave the rest for another thread.

to compare someone here on the forum calling us argie versus materras tweets is insane.

This is what i can't comprehend about your argument. I cant use an analogy, even though i specifically acknowledged it was extreme and used only to prove a point, but you can compare Matera's tweets to the apartheid.
How does that work? Are you allowed to use extreme examples while i am not?
And the way Socino used apartheid in his tweet is very different from the way you used it.

if an employer discovers this kinf of thing in your tweeter you probably get fired

In countries where you need a fair cause to fire someone, you wouldn't be able to do that. You cannot fire someone for something he did before he started working for the company (unless he specifically lied about it to get in).

asuming that he changed is ridiculous. it can happen i guess, but there´s not hint about it.

See, here is probably where we disagree.
Accepting the possibility of someone changing is ridiculous? Really? And there shouldn't be any hint. The laws of pretty much western democracy put the burden of proof of the one accusing, in this case you.
You need to prove he is a racist and not me that he is not. You believe what he posted 7 years ago is proof enough. I do not. I am not saying he isn't, i am saying I do not know, the evidence i see is old to say the least and i am inclined to give him the benefit of doubt.
Unlike you, i don't consider your argument ridiculous. I understand where you are coming from, i just have a different view.
We've both been civil talking about this so far. Let's try to keep it that way, please (note i said "we", not you!).
Nice to see you back btw.

if you found similar tweets from me from ten years ago and came to my workplace demanding I be sacked I'd think that was ok,

Here we disagree. But that is ok.

the other thing to put in context here is I think the opinion that they aren't xenophobic and classist anymore, and the opinion that they probably still are, are both reasonable opinions given the available evidence at this stage.

Agreed, 100%.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

In countries where you need a fair cause to fire someone, you wouldn't be able to do that. You cannot fire someone for something he did before he started working for the company (unless he specifically lied about it to get in).

I don't think that's correct regarding social media posts. If it hasn't been deleted and is on an active account* it doesn't really matter how long ago it was. I don't think it would result in termination in most cases but there would be a disciplinary process.

* I believe that's the case here rather than pulling old screenshots?

 

[Kiwiwomble]

I don't think that's correct regarding social media posts. If it hasn't been deleted and is on an active account* it doesn't really matter how long ago it was. I don't think it would result in termination in most cases but there would be a disciplinary process.

* I believe that's the case here rather than pulling old screenshots?

Yeah, you can definitely fire someone for something like that, morality clause, distribute etc

that's why it's become so common for employers to ask for your social media details when they interview/employee people

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

I don't think that's correct regarding social media posts. If it hasn't been deleted and is on an active account* it doesn't really matter how long ago it was. I don't think it would result in termination in most cases but there would be a disciplinary process.

As far as i understand you would need to prove it was either a crime at the time and the jurisdiction where it was posted or some sort of breach of contract for that to happen. I dont think you can do that.
Even if that is the case you could argue it was out there for the company to find and they've got their own lack of due diligence to blame for.

Clearly not the worst but the most surprising thing of all this is how little oversight there is from clubs and sponsors. I guarantee you run of the mill financial graduate that applies for an entry-level job in a small size company in Latvia with zero media exposure gets a more thorough check than this.

Any intern could check someone with Matera's soc media activity in an afternoon.

Having said that, imagine you are SF, just signed Matera and find this. What do you think the club would do? Honest question.
Dont hire him or ask him to delete his soc media and start a new account asap?

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

As far as i understand you would need to prove it was either a crime at the time and the jurisdiction where it was posted or some sort of breach of contract for that to happen. I dont think you can do that.
Even if that is the case you could argue it was out there for the company to find and they've got their own lack of due diligence to blame for.

It depends on the social media clause in their contract, I know mine is very strict and something like this could get me into a lot of hot water. Considering UAR let them off so quickly I imagine their clause is inadequate.

Clearly not the worst but the most surprising thing of all this is how little oversight there is from clubs and sponsors. I guarantee you run of the mill financial graduate that applies for an entry-level job in a small size company in Latvia with zero media exposure gets a more thorough check than this.

Any intern could check someone with Matera's soc media activity in an afternoon.

Serious incompetence from so many people here. UAR, Matera, his management agency, any friend or family member who remembers the tweets etc... They should have been gone a long time ago.

Having said that, imagine you are SF, just signed Matera and find this. What do you think the club would do? Honest question.
Dont hire him or ask him to delete his soc media and start a new account asap?

I think it depends on the contract and the value SF place on Matera. If the social media clause is strong enough to render the contract void I'd advise the employer of both options, explain that termination could be somewhat costly with a disciplinary process required and heightened legal fees and let the employer make the decision from there. If the social media clause isn't strong enough to terminate you just have to tell the guy to get rid of the tweets and hope he does.

 

[Goodey]

Did I just read that you wouldn't be fired for this in most jobs?

As a unionised teacher in the UK it is very difficult for me to get sacked, I could get terrible results for years and they only thing that would happen is I might not get a pay rise. I would have to have such a long record of not doing my job in a very basic way before I got sacked for not being good enough. But if I had tweeted about running over black people I would be gone in an instant. Crazy to suggest otherwise.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Yeah my work has social media guidelines that can lead to instant dismissal - last two companies as well.

 

[Goodey]

The more I have seen the circling of the wagons and claims of 'cultural context' on this issue, the less I have thought 'wow, Matera sounds like an awful person' and the more I have found myself thinking 'wow, Argentina sounds like an awful place'.

I'd rather not. I'm pretty sure that most Argentinians think what he said is disgusting and there's no slight against your country if that's admitted. If instead what we're given is 'no, no, this is different if you're Argentine' I'm thinking that... doesn't help? At all?

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

The more I have seen the circling of the wagons and claims of 'cultural context' on this issue, the less I have thought 'wow, Matera sounds like an awful person' and the more I have found myself thinking 'wow, Argentina sounds like an awful place'.

In this aspect, it has been and it probably still is. It'd say we've made some progress but we are light years behind of where we should be.

Let me give you an example. I'd go as far as saying that anyone Matera age or older who's set foot on a football pitch, any 1st/2nd/3rd/4th tier team as a supporter has, at one point or another, sang equivalent things to at least one of the tweets from Matera/Petti/Socino.
Just picture this: football is very popular, and the most popular team in the country has been taunted by opposing fans for having a lot of bolivians, paraguayans and being poor for as long as i can remember. That pretty much describes 70% of lyrics from the songs opposing crowds sang when they faced them.

If you go searching for the way we use "trolo" or "puto" (fag) it is still very present in the way Argentines express themselves.

I would have to have such a long record of not doing my job in a very basic way before I got sacked for not being good enough. But if I had tweeted about running over black people I would be gone in an instant. Crazy to suggest otherwise.

Maybe i wasn't clear. It is incredibly difficult to fire someone for something that happened prior to his signing of the contract unless the contract specifically addresses that explicitly. Particularly if he has no conviction for what he is being accused of.
Does every schoolteacher in the UK have a social media / moral clause that could punish him for things his said prior to his employment contract? I have no idea. I'd be surprised if they do, not because it wouldn't be the right thing to do but because sometimes the landscape of what is right and wrong changes at a faster speed than employment contracts and these, like almost every other contract, generally cannot include other clauses retroactively.

The biggest tell here is that if this were true in most cases, every single player, sponsor and club would be checking this. This unravelling shows that is not the case.
I guarantee you that someone at Nike, Visa or any other sponsor is taking to their legal department and changing the due diligence required to sign in an athlete.

I'd rather not. I'm pretty sure that most Argentinians think what he said is disgusting and there's no slight against your country if that's admitted. If instead what we're given is 'no, no, this is different if you're Argentine' I'm thinking that... doesn't help? At all?

I don't think that is the case and it's a nuance so please bear with me, be open-minded and just listen to what i have to say and give me the benefit of the doubt till you finish reading. That's all.
I can understand your argument if people said "he said A but that means B" if B was a lesser crime than A. That be switching a crime for a lesser one in order to downplay his deed and therefore the punishment he would have to face.
That is not what is happening here. Let me say it again. That is not what i am doing here.

I am changing what you are saying but i am changing it for something that i acknowledge form the get-go that is just as bad. What purpose could i have to take the time to explain the meaning of something to a third party just to end up giving him reasons to be just as upset about what happened? I'm explaining this in an attempt to show that i have nothing to gain and therefore gain credibility on a subject that i know better than all non-argentine posters here: the use of argentine language. Generally i would never to that but i can understand given the info available to you how you could arrive to that conclusion.

In a nuthsell: i am not saying you shouldn't be outraged. I am taking the time to give you the tools to be just as outraged but for the right reasons.
I am trying to choose my words carefully not because i want to excuse matera et al, but because i want you to understand.
I am talking about this bit

But if I had tweeted about running over black people

That is not what he said. I understand how you got that from the tweet but that is not what it means. It means something just as bad, worse if you will, but not that.
"Negro" in that context means poor, uneducated and/or lower social class.

One last thing that might serve to help explain how complicated this can get. I (Argetnine) would never defend Matera (Argentine) for the way he used "negro" in his tweets, but i would go out of my way to defend Cavani (Uruguayan) on how he used "negrito" in his post a week or so ago. Neither of them had anything to do with the colour of someone's skin, but Matera's had crystal clear intent to offend while Cavani's did not.

 

[Yulia]

In this aspect, it has been and it probably still is. It'd say we've made some progress but we are light years behind of where we should be.

Is it towards Bolivians/Paraguayans or towards any other foreigner ("not-Argentinian")? I've been to Argentina in March during my trip to the South America and everyone there was super nice to me, although I'm a foreigner. Really difficult to believe those views are popular in Argentina..but I've been there only a couple of days

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Pfff, that's a complex but fair question. Actually thank you, made me think.
Short answer: it depends. You made me think how to explain this and reconcile it with your experience and it is not an easy task but i will try. Kindly note that the fact i describe something does not mean i think that something is right. Please no strawman arguments. I'm going on a limb and will have to make quite a few hasty generalizations.

I think it is important to note there are probably three groups (broad gen). There are a lot of people who probably do feel that way about, say, paraguayans and there are also a lot of people who do not feel that way, but will sing songs once they enter the stadium. (I am not saying that what the second group is doing is right). Third group is people who dont think that and dont sing.

This is probably counter-intuitive, but let's say Mario insults Juan by calling him "paraguayan" not always because he thinks badly of "paraguayanss" but because he thinks Juan won't like it.
The purpose is to offend, so you use what the other party finds offensive and use it. Not necessarily because you agree with it, but because it triggers the reaction you want from your opponent/enemy .
How many are there of each group? I have no idea.

I was raised with jokes about Spanish people. We called them "gallegos" and it basically meant dumb or stupid. Some say it's amicable. I dont think they were/are.
Do most people in Arg think that of Spanish people? No, but we still use (less now but still) gallego. This applies to a lot of examples. Jokes of Chinese people by switching "r"s for "l"s was quite common to the point that our former president and current vice president has done so on twitter. Times have changed and now it's rare but it wouldn't be rare to hear someone say "chino de mierda" (you ******* Chinese) if they got into an argument at a Chinese supermarket with someone who spoke broken Spanish to them.
We tend to use "insert demonym here" de mierda with almost everyone in particular situations. From germans to bolivians, from Canadians to Vietnamese. And some people do have problems with specific groups but imo it goes back to wanting to offend the person you are arguing/fighting with. I wouldn't know how to explain it, but for the lack of a better word i would say this use is in quite a few cases "circumstantial".
Doesn't make it right, clearly, but it's not the same. Hope this much is clear.

Another distinction you need to make is between foreign residents and tourists. Argentines tend to be quite amicable towards tourists. We are also generally curious and there are not that many Russians so i am not surprised people were nice to you.

There is a very nasty use of a word to describe Brazilians as monkeys in the past, to the point where newspapers would use it to describe brazilians. You dont hear that often any more, at least not publicly.

I'm going to stop here as i like to be able to back up what i write and i cant really to that here. I've gone far enough with generalizations based on my extensive but still biased and anecdotal experiences and evidence.
I just wanted to give you a broad stokes answer to your question.