‘Thick’ Rashford racism theory debunked by Garnacho evidence

There’s been quite the reaction to the suggestion that Man Utd fans are racist for turning on Marcus Rashford.
Send your mails on any football subject to theeditor@football365.com
Marcus Rashford has had every chance
I just read Daniel from Cambridge’s email about Rashford being forced out of United. Is he watching the same sport as the rest of us?
Rashford got dropped for – checks note – ONE game. This bears repeating, a single game of football. What did he do? He decided to do an unsanctioned interview saying he wants to leave the club. That was a very poor decision in hindsight and foresight.
He brought this on himself. Garnacho was dropped for the same game as Rashford and he’s back in the team. He was not advertised as being on the market and yet has two big clubs trying to sign him.
There’s been a lot of mismanagement at United over the years (and I absolutely love it as a rival fan) but this isn’t one of them. Actions have consequences and this is 100% a consequence of Rashford’s actions. Being a good person off the pitch shouldn’t shield him from it.
Deva Path (why the hell are Chelsea interested in Garnacho? We have too many average wingers already, we don’t need another)
MORE MARCUS RASHFORD COVERAGE ON F365…
👉 Marcus Rashford ‘spotted’ at work as ‘medical booked’ amid Ruben Amorim ‘knife’
👉 Barcelona find ‘solution’ to sign Marcus Rashford with Man Utd star ‘chosen’ for three reasons
👉 Marcus Rashford being ‘forced out’ of Man Utd for ‘survival’ of club?
…I haven’t written into the mailbox in about ten years, so I can only assume that the mail from Daniel, Cambridge was clickbait to tempt me out of retirement, because I refuse to believe anyone could be as thick as the mail demonstrates Daniel must be. Let’s take a look shall we…
Firstly, he’s black, so any criticism must be racism. Yawn. Those of us with two braincells will remember that Rashford and Garnacho were dropped in unison with the implication being neither had trained well. So yes, you’ve had plenty of mention of attitude problems from Garnacho. And any comment on all the other black players in the side? Try and at least make sense Daniel. It’s just a boring, lazy and harms the spotlight when this really happens in football.
We’ve no evidence he doesn’t train well… If only Daniel, there was some kind of training proxy played out in the public, perhaps in front of a collection of fans and cameras to allow fans and spectators to view for themselves the application and effort put in by Rashford. Wouldn’t that be something, eh? Demonstrating, a lack of tracking back, closing down, making runs and effort? See where I’m going with this? Catching on yet to my point Daniel?
Rashford can’t exactly tell his side the media, nor would he want to. Apart from the time, straight after the initial dropping, when he, erm, decided he wanted to tell his side to the media and did so.
Ah yes, so it’s all a horrible strategy to force out poor Marcus. And what better way to entice another club to pay us tens of millions of pounds and pay Rashford £300k plus per week than to tell everyone he can’t be bothered to train properly and make it look like we’re desperate to get rid of him. Genius.
You keep comparing Rashford to Antony and today, on the 30th January, say you keep seeing Antony getting game time as some kind of proof that Rashford is being held to a higher standard. You might need to get a more up to newspaper because Antony has been in Betis for at least a week. Clearly Amorim couldn’t wait to get rid of him.
Marcus Rashford has never ever been called a beast, a unit or a monster by a single United fan. United fans are not, and let me be clear, and in no way being led to dis-satisfaction of a young black player because of a racial element, whatsoever. He is not being stereotyped or judged because of the colour of his skin. The fans have eyes, they watch matches, and they see what his effort and output levels are. Your pathetic insinuation is the only shameful behaviour here.
That will probably do for now. But honestly, you couldn’t have got more wrong.
AS Camden
…Real obvious why all of the players mentioned get sh*t levelled at them and only Rashford get’s the lack of effort accusation…… Effort, he doesn’t put any in, the others do. All sh*te but still they try. It’s obvious just use your eyes. Garnacho has poor end product but works none stop and is 20, so you get some leeway. Antony, well he runs at least…
I’ve watched every game Rashford has ever played btw, and it’s obvious he doesn’t try like he used to. He also says what the f**k he wants in the media, recent case in point ‘feeling bored, maybe I’ll try somewhere new, idk’, the other day with Henry Winter.
Sancho, was sh*t, never tried, walked around, and stayed up all night playing video games… evidence, again eyes and his own time-stamped evidence he posts online.
Pogba, tried sometimes and is only remembered so poorly because of his actions, costing loads and leaving for free twice. He constantly flirted with leaving and bitched and posted cryptic messages about leaving…..all cost loads, were meant to deliver, lead by example and try… and they didn’t.
Pretty bad examples to pick for a race conspiracy tbh. Needs improvement.
Moses
…Daniel, whilst I agree Rashford has been a long serving and important player for United who has undoubtedly faced significant racist abuse from a minority of supposed ‘fans’, as well as racially coded bias from some parts of the media, there are some glaring fallacies in your argument that I’d like to address.
Starting where you finished, saying we should only speak if we have something nice to say whilst also calling any United fan who is fed up with Rashford’s form and attitude a ‘shameful racist’ is quite conceited of you. Maybe you let emotion get the better of you on that one so let’s get back to Rashford.
Your point that black players are treated differently in the media appears correct to me in general but saying there are no examples of white players having “off field disciplinary or attitude problems” is plain wrong and two minutes on google would have shown you that. Dennis Wise and Joey Barton for violence, Bosnich and Mutu for drug abuse are the most obvious examples but at United did you consider George Best, Roy Keane, David Beckham, or Ronaldo?
Regarding the specific example of this season Rashford and Garnacho were both publicly reprimanded for attitude problems by Amorim in the same interview explaining why they were not in the squad versus City. The reaction from Garnacho was to change his attitude. He deleted his social media accounts, stop bleaching his hair, and seems to be putting in more effort.
Rashford’s reaction, as the more senior player, was a taped interview with Henry Winter where he did his best to end his relationship with the club. Remember when Ronaldo did something similar and was sold as quickly as possible. That feels like the club treating players consistently to me, regardless of their skin colour.
As for your assertion the club would want the manager to express concern over a player’s attitude and application when their intention is to sell him. What? How would that even make sense? ‘Ruben we want to get rid of Rashford and bank all that lovely profit but please can you reduce his value for us first, it will make the negotiations much harder, thanks, Big Jim’.
I don’t know what club you support but I’m a Untied fan and I love Rashford. Its been brilliant having a local lad come through the academy and be such an influential player for us. However I’ve also watched years and years of relatively poor form interrupted by short purple patches where he’s incredible. I’ve witnessed countless instances of not tracking his man, half hearted pressing, and moping around the pitch when the team needs his talent.
I’ve defended Marcus for years but at some point you have to accept the evidence which has been staring you in the face. He rarely gives his full effort which is all Amorim had asked of him, and its all the more galling because we know what a brilliant attacker Rashford is when he’s full committed. To accuse me, or anyone else who thinks likewise, of racism is simply ridiculous and I hope you’ll recognise how poorly considered your letter was in this regard. Perhaps with a loan looking unlikely Rashford will take the opportunity to apply his talent in full and fight his way back into the team, it would make me enormously happy if he did but I wont be holding my breath.
Dave, Manchester
MORE MARCUS RASHFORD COVERAGE ON F365…
👉 Marcus Rashford ‘spotted’ at work as ‘medical booked’ amid Ruben Amorim ‘knife’
👉 Barcelona find ‘solution’ to sign Marcus Rashford with Man Utd star ‘chosen’ for three reasons
👉 Marcus Rashford being ‘forced out’ of Man Utd for ‘survival’ of club?
A deeper dive into Man Utd and race
Reading Daniel, Cambridge’s email about race, Rashford and Man Utd struck a chord with me. I thought I’d dive a little deeper into Man Utd’s squad lists – mainly focussing on the last ten years.
Rashford, Sancho, Martial, Antony, Greenwood, Lingard. All are black Man Utd players with supposed attitude problems.
Ravel Morrison and Paul Pogba are two more. They were basically ruined by Man Utd.
I remember Fred, Eric Bailly, Anderson and Lukaku all being described as lazy by the fans and then in the national press.
Chris Smalling was described as “lacking bravery” by Mourinho and vilified by the fans.
AWB was routinely criticised on the basis that he “can’t attack”. Premier league stats this season: Two goals and one assist in 22 games. Better attacking stats than Hojlund, for example.
Type “Casemiro lazy” into google. See what happens. Or “lazy Man Utd players”. This is the sort of thing you’ll find:
‘Mainoo told to ‘be careful’ of picking up habits from lazy Man Utd teammate as ‘more energy’ demanded’
That’ll be the famous workaholic “Spice Boy” Jamie Redknapp attempting to tar Kobbie Mainoo with the “lazy” Casemiro brush. Who else has Redknapp publicly criticised for laziness ? I’ll tell you: Diego Dalot. Hmmm.
(That’s seven black Man Utd wingers with alleged attitude issues. Seven ?!)
The players who seem to throw this term around the most are Roy Keane, Graeme Souness and Wayne Rooney.
Let’s push a little further back. Paul Ince was “a big time Charlie”. His attitude and reputation were damaged by Alex Ferguson.
Andy Cole was allegedly “moody” and “arrogant”. His attitude, ability and reputation were completely slaughtered for some reason. Cole has the fourth most premier league goals ever, and I suspect is the most decorated of all Man Utd’s black players.
Next I looked up “best Man Utd players”. Only Rio Ferdinand seems to make it into the top 30 or so.
The consensus 10 worst players for Man Utd ? Anthony, Sanchez, Di Maria, Sancho, Lukaku, Pogba, Van Der Beek, Depay, Falcao, Zaha.
6 are black. 3 are Latino. 1 Caucasian.
Other lists include names such as Kleberson and Bebe. These unremarkable players were no better or worse than Prunier, Forlan, Liam Miller etc….but there’s a level of mockery surrounding them that endures far longer than it should.
Kleberson. Anderson. Djemba-Djemba.
I’ve got “lazy”, “fat” and “so bad they named him twice” on my bingo card. So do you. Why is that ?
I’ll leave it to sharper minds than my own to explain the socio-racial themes at play here. Perhaps we can all agree that something truly rotten is going on.
I have no idea what the solution is – but Manchester Utd and the media need to do a lot better.
And to be frank; we all do.
Tom E13
New Champions League format fans ahoy…
Just another one on the new CL format, in response to Tsamal. It goes to show that there are still misunderstandings about the new format. Tsamal says that it favours bigger clubs and that there are more matches against “weaker teams” and that “bigger clubs will have more games where they’re the favorites.”
Under the old format, top-seeded teams like Man City played two matches each against pot 2, 3, and 4 teams. Now, they play two additional matches against other pot 1 teams. For instance, Man City faced PSG and Sporting – opponents they wouldn’t have played under the previous system – and lost both games.
Pot 4 teams on the other hand, would previously have played teams in pot 3, 2 and 1. Their additional games are against teams in pot 4. So Brest had games against Sparta Prague and Strum Graz, that they would not have played previously. They won both, helping them to qualify, despite picking up only 7 points from their other 6 games.
In fact the new format is far more equitable and there is actually no benefit to being a top seed. Everyone has an equal chance of a good or a tough draw. According to Opta, Celtic had the kindest draw in the whole competition, despite being a pot 3 team. Aston Villa’s was 5th easiest, despite being in top 4.
All in all the new format is working well and the fact that a few of the bigger boys are not certain of their place in the last 16, goes to show it.
Mike, LFC, Dubai
…Some “interesting” articles, emails and comments on the new Champions League format and the outcome of the league/knockout phase. All they really exposed though was peoples mis-conceptions and mis-understandings plus some odd opinions on how it works and comparisons to the previous format.
I won’t name names (there’s too many) but even F365 kick it off with an incorrect statement. “We now know which half of the draw City are in”, we don’t, it depends on who they are drawn against and then we will know. They compound this by correctly stating that we don’t know which half Liverpool are in!
(Nope; we wrote here that we knew which ‘section’ Man City were in. Which is not the same as ‘half’. But do carry on – Ed)
One comment says that there are teams going through who “have lost half their games”, so just like teams who say won 3 and lost 3 in the old group stages usually finishing 2nd and progressing, even sometimes with 8 points having failed to win 66% of their games.
Another states that the 2nd leg home advantage for teams finishing 9-16 is “arbitrary”, not unlike securing home advantage by winning your group! Some say the either/or scenario is daft but one person correctly points out, positions could be manipulated before or during games with knowledge of certainties.
The “no jeopardy” opinion has also been proved to be wrong, underperforming “big” teams now face 2 additional games to reach even the last 16, under the old format it was extremely rare for the seeded team not to finish 1st or 2nd and be in the last 16. As someone rightly points out, 1 of City, Madrid or Bayern will definitely be eliminated, something that has never happened before.
Whilst the final round of matches did include some certainties, Liverpool and Barca 1 and 2 for example, there were lots of permutations, City actually finished “top” of 4 teams on 11 points, PSG “top” of 5 teams on 13 and Atalanta above 4 other teams on 15, a different result in a single game would have had an impact on all of these and potential opponents kept changing with every goal, had the Brest disallowed goal stood and the game finished a draw, then Real Madrid became a possibility for Liverpool. Under the old format, match day 6 was usually a bore fest with 14 or 15 of the last 16 known, the usual “jeopardy” was in who would be entering the Europa League and who would be going out all together, some teams possibly not trying their best to avoid Thursday nights,
IMO, the new format works, some minor tweeks may improve it, don’t have any in mind, maybe the scraping of the clear route and an open draw for the last 8, but overall it has been far more interesting than before.
Howard (planning my journey into France as we speak, Lisbon route already known) Jones
Fixing the Champions League…
With one simple change.
After the group stage, the teams choose who they play in the order that they finish.
So for the playoff, the 9th placed team (Atalanta) gets to pick their opponents from the teams down to 24th. Maybe they want Brugge, but maybe they want to have a go at Feyenoord?
Then in the R16, the team that finished top (Liverpool) gets to choose who they play, and so on and so forth.
The drama as teams reveal who they want to play would replace the boring draws and the amount of needle in the matches would be brilliant – the underdog has been specifically picked by their opponent – how fired up would they be? A big team having an injury crisis/horrendous loss of form? Maybe it’s worth having a go at them now before they sort themselves out.
Would add drama and excitement without any extra games and would go all the way through to the semis. I think it would be great fun.
Tom, Andover
READ: How the Champions League works including plotted paths
On Levy and deluded Spurs fans
I’m no great admirer of Daniel Levy but I do think he’s been very unfairly criticized in the Mailbox recently, not least by Ross. The thesis seems to be that Levy is a terrible person because he’s hired a succession of managers each of whom has failed to win a trophy. But then he’s also criticized for sacking the very same managers, presumably because they MIGHT have won a trophy if he’d given them a bit longer.
But that’s not my recollection of things. Mourinho, Conte, Villas Boas, even Poch by the end, were doing pretty terribly by the time they got the chop. It seemed far likelier that they had peaked as Spurs managers than that their best days in the TH Stadium dugout were still to come.
Okay, so perhaps the problem then is that Levy hasn’t backed these managers in the transfer market; but as other Mailboxers have pointed out, that’s not really supported by the data. I think it all comes down to Spurs fans indulging in a sort of (entirely forgivable) exceptionalism. Like most supporters, they really believe their club is the best club in the world so if it’s not winning stuff, it must be someone’s fault. But the point is, most clubs don’t win stuff. Most managers fail. So do most chairmen. The sad reality, Spurs fans, is that your club is just the same as everybody else’s.
Matt Pitt