She was a singer-songwriter, Kev, very popular with the Britons in early Roman occupation times.

Wrote "The Long and Winding Woad"

It's them Indo-European herders to blame
.................................................................

Nomadic Societies and Indo-European Migrations


1. Introduction

Indo-European herders pushed into Europe during the classical age. In northern Europe, the Slavs, Celts, and Germans produced agricultural societies but lagged behind the Sub-Saharan kingdoms. Pastoral nomads inhabited the vast steppes and plains of central Asia and traversed the Sahara, tending their herds. Wealth depended the size of the herd and military power. The nomads were organized in clans, with kinship ties central and women playing varied roles. While they raided and sometimes conquered settled civilizations, they often had to adapt themselves to the advances of sedentary peoples. The Indo-Europeans are the earliest nomads we know about, who both raided and settled Europe, Asia Minor, and the Indian subcontinent.

2. The Celts and the Germans

The Celtic peoples, who were Indo-Europeans, once inhabited much of Western Europe, organized in small regional kingdoms based on agriculture and hunting. Most fell under Roman rule. Much of northwestern Europe was populated by Germans, whose cultures resembled that of the Celts. The Germans formed warrior societies dedicated to individual chiefs. Women were responsible for agricultural and household tasks. Marriage required a bride-price paid to the bride, and matrilineal relationships were particularly strong. The cultural influence of the Romans resulted in improvements in agricultural techniques and cloth manufacturing. During much of their history, the Germans were loosely organized into tribes governed by a king or tribal council. After 200 C.E., some Germanic tribes began to join into larger confederations, again under the influence of their contacts with the Romans. The power of kings began to increase. Germanic religion was animistic and featured animal sacrifice. The Germanic invasions of the Roman Empire brought these northern peoples into historical prominence. The growing political consolidation of Germanic tribes prepared northern Europe for the development of civilization after the fall of Rome.

What's your point, Wolfie?

Reading between the lines then, it appears Wolfgang is backing 666 for POTY 2012... take note, ViewFrom

The point being made by this article is that those people seeking to stoke things up are precisely those who HAVEN'T just been given one effing card to play - it is the likes of Rio Ferdinand and the Society of Black Lawyers who see something here that they can use for their own ends.
......................................

I think that's a fair comment, Vidal. It's interesting to read about Peter Herbert, the guy fronting the SBL, who made the complaint. He grew up in a tough environment, but through dint of effort is now has an entre into a profession, known to be a bastion of the establishment. In many ways, he is hardly representative of the people he is seeking to defend. It is also interesting to note on his personal website that he possesses an O.B.E and is proud of the fact. So he has no problem with an archaic bauble celebrating Britain's former Empire.

But Herbert's spectacular own goal shouldn't detract from the fact that racism exists & that there are plenty of more important causes to support. In fact, to be fair to Herbert, he is devoting his time free of charge to a teenage football club who have made an accusation of racial abuse.

I think it should be remembered that football reflects society, and shouldn't be held at fault for society's problems.

In many ways, there is much wrong with football yet English football is one of the few professions, where young black working class men can be successful role models (Jason Roberts), assume positions of responsibility, such as becoming a captain of both club & country (Paul Ince). Yes, there is room for improvement but across the board - as 2Wellies suggested.

I remember watching a programme on BBC4 about the white working class, written by Michael Collins, who pointed out that whilst a great deal of racism occurs on tough council estates, it is actually the white working class who 'race-mix' more with other groups because these groups tend to be thrown together by economic circumstance.So I would argue that English football is probably one of the few genuine areas where black, white & players of different ethnic backgrounds mix as equals. On the pitch at least. Off it, there is room for more coaches, directors, even referees It'd be interesting to hear if Uriah Rennie ever suffered abuse. In fact, I think he once described Paulo Wanchope as the rudest player he ever encountered.

If the FA is a reactionary organisation, it seems to be towards anything to do with change & that doesn't just mean race. It didn't want Brian Clough to manage England because he was deemed too radical. In that respect, the FA represents dear old Blighty as hidebound as ever, stratified by class & vested interests (Sir Dave Richards likes everyone to call him 'Sir' ). We knew, for instance, our football had to change since the 70s, but only now have we managed to build the new training facility at Burton. The same goes for social housing. We've known for decades that more needs to be built, but no government, of whatever hue, has ever taken responsibility.

You've said a mouthful there, Capn.

I think the best chance for football and for society when it comes to race relations is the engagement of all parties. This doesn't appear to be what the SBL want: they want an adversarial approach against "The Establishment", an us-and-them where black fight against the rest to get their due.

If an accusation is made, the FA should investigate, as they have done. Having concluded there is no evidence, what are they supposed to do? According to the SBL, where there is accusation, there is guilt, and by not pursuing this the FA is racist.

Why did nobody, neither the player nor Chelsea, complain to the police? We all know, as does the SBL, that the reason for this is that the player was in fact mistaken about what he thought he heard Clattenburg say, but if there really IS a case to answer, the SBL should be haranguing Mikel for letting down his fellow black players by not pursuing it further. Why isn't the SBL doing this? We all know the answer.

Mikel and Chelsea should either publicly apologise to Clattenburg for wrongly accusing him of racism, or go to the police. The SBL should come out and say the same if it wants any credibility, but it has a stance of supporting the race it represents no matter what the individual circumstance. It is widening the gap between black and white, not closing it. It WANTS race to continue to be an issue.

* * * Breaking News * * *

The SBL have opened a class action for incompetence on behalf of all black players against all referees, again citing irrefutable anecdotal evidence that they are all 'not fit to wear the shirt' as overheard at every ground, every week.

Vidal,

I agree, but we also seem to operate 'a trial by media' as well. Is this case not all that dissimilar from what has happened to Lord McAlpine? Someone has made an accusation, but nobody has seen fit to actually ask the people in question beforehand, jumping to conclusions, without thinking that a witness' s evidence might be unreliable.

I did say Herbert has scored a spectacular own goal, and in many ways, his actions have proved counterproductive to the very cause he espouses. In fact, you could argue that he has not relied on facts as a good lawyer usually does & whether he really is the right person to address this issue. For a start, why should a referee who has overseen at least five hundred games suddenly use such language? Why now? Is it any coincidence that the club & players making the allegation are the ones associated with a high-profile case where they were the ones found guilty?

The whole saga is detracting from real issues and is probably now about saving face and fear of losing credibility.

Are we allowed to just not like someone ?
Although I'm part German I dislike many Germans - does that make me a racist.

"I dislike many Germans" = OK
"I dislike any Germans" = racist

Which part of you is German? Is it the bumhole?

Now THAT'S probably racist.

Reading between the lines then, it appears Wolfgang is backing 666 for POTY 2012... take note, ViewFrom
_______________________________________
Noted

"I dislike many Germans" = OK
"I dislike any Germans" = racist

---------------------------------------------------------
Wrong. It depends on why he doesn't like them.

You called it right , Vidal, not a surprise as you are a wise chap.

Thought you had it right on another thread. On TalkSport (OK, not the font of all wisdom), it was rumoured that Clattenburg said that he 'couldn't give a monkeys'. Now such a colloquial phrase could be liable to misinterpretation if English is not your first language as in the case of Ramires who overheard it.

I agree that Chelsea should have sorted the matter 'in-house' first without making an official complaint. Someone with a bit of responsibility, Bruce Buck, should have investigated, asked Clattenburg perhaps to confirm what he might have said and it could have all been cleared up as a misunderstanding.

Instead, it turned into a media witch-hunt and Chelsea stood accused themselves of making an allegation because they lost a high-profile game in controversial circumstances.

Peter Herbert's intervention did not help matters.