[ad_1]
After watching, with audio, more than an hour of plays in the match between Flamengo and Bahia last Sunday (20), for the Brazilian Championship, the president of Bahia, Guilherme Bellintani, says he is scared by the level of offenses and lack of mutual respect out there. inside a soccer field.
The match, which could have been marked by the return of the Rio de Janeiro team, took center stage after the denunciation of racism by the flamenco midfielder Gerson, who accuses rival Juan Ramírez of saying “shut up, black.”
“I have no doubt that Gerson’s statement is true, he did hear that. The question is whether Ramirez spoke,” says Bellintani. leaf.
The athlete from the Rio team entered the Sports and Criminal Courts against the Colombian due to racial injury. Ramírez, for his part, denies what happened, says he told his opponents to “play seriously” and that forward Bruno Henrique also called him a “shitty gringo.”
In addition to the two players, coach Mano Menezes, caught on camera calling Gerson’s accusation a “cheater”, as well as the match referee, who in the minutes reported the complaint but did not testify, will be heard in the ongoing investigation. . at the Racial Crimes Police Station.
Bellintani responded to the report by phone, shortly after finishing analyzing the videos. Creator of the Affirmative Action Center of Bahia, he says that the case, if proven, tarnishes the history of the club, which, even leading anti-racist campaigns, is responsible for the episode.
Faced with an accusation of racism and a possible episode of xenophobia, he sees it as a result of years of tolerance in football to this type of verbal aggression. “Within the four lines it is commonplace and outside everyone pretends not to see.”
After this episode, is it time for Bahia to think about a project that goes beyond institutional and extra-field initiatives, but whose objective is to train athletes? Bahia is a forerunner of the anti-racist fight in Brazil as a club, it was a pioneer, one of the most prominent, if not the most, and destiny has given us a challenge of this magnitude. I didn’t want to go through this, it has been the most difficult moment of my tenure, but I think that he stood out in Bahia not by chance, but because we are prepared to face it. We are building a project based on that, within the Affirmative Action Center. Propose changes in the rules that are forceful in the fight against racism on the field, but also a formative work for athletes, employees and club directors. These are two very important jumps.
You said you “wanted luck” that the accusation was against a Bahia player. What does that say about Brazilian soccer, racism and Bahia’s responsibility in this case? It is important to think about what it shows and does not show. What is not shown is still much larger than what is shown. We see more and more cases of racism standing out in society, including soccer, but this is still a drop in the racist ocean of Brazilian society. What is shown today is still the tip of a huge iceberg.
If Ramírez is found guilty, does that taint Bahia’s history? Stain, always, if guilty. Spot Bahia, Brazilian soccer. But I try to look, despite being such a serious situation, the glass is half full. Because if we analyze it, it is not a fact, if it is confirmed, new, but an old fact that is now being shown. The stain of racism in Brazilian soccer already exists. If confirmed, it is only more evident.
What did Ramírez tell you? He’s very shocked, it took him a while to understand the circumstance. In all the conversations, which together last about two hours, he says that he did not say the expression “shut up, nigger.” He is very vehement in the statement that he did not say that and that it is not a common expression of him to say “shut up.” He does not speak Portuguese, he has been in Brazil for 40 days. He explains that the game was tense, with insults and aggressions from both parties, he says they called him “shitty gringo”, but he didn’t say “shut up, black.” It is their version.
If you say they called you “fucking gringo,” isn’t that also a case of justice? It is a very clear xenophobia. So yes, but be careful not to make one complaint appear to be a response to the other. Things as serious as xenophobia and racism, one does not neutralize the other, in the end the game does not give 0 to 0, both lose a landslide. There is no cancellation of one assault for another. Just as I say that Gerson has the right to take the case to the circumstances he wants to take, it is his right [Ramírez] We also take this issue to the consequences, a personal and individual right. If you decide, the club will support you, while continuing to sanction you if the racist act is proven.
What do you think would be the best position for a coach in this case? I’m not a field experience guy. I confess that I just watched over an hour of footage, analyzing videos of hot parts of the game. I was obsessed too much, but too much, I was perplexed by the way people disrespect each other on the field, how football allows and tolerates verbal aggression. There is no excuse for football to be like this, it is an absolutely restricted and limited vision. I am not arguing that everyone is stupid, but what happened in that game shows that Brazilian football tolerates words, shapes, forms and gestures and perhaps many are not surprised. I don’t want to talk exclusively about the coach, because I saw a great salad of aggressiveness. Nobody gives the other the right to say “shut up, nigga.” It’s a crime. No “fucking gringo.” It seems to me that this has been hidden from Brazilian football for years. Inside the four lines it is commonplace and outside everyone pretends not to see.
He said that the removal of coach Mano Menezes occurred before he knew the report of racism and that the facts are not related. But, in Bahia, collusion with racism is grounds for dismissal of a professional, whatever it may be. We are in a great discussion about this and there are very different opinions. I believe, first of all, that this decision does not have to be exclusive to someone white like me. We have debated a lot with people from the Nucleus, with people from the black movement in Salvador. Some understand that disconnecting these people from the club is the right way. Others that, depending on the circumstances, what was said, the culture of that person, the life history, that being in Bahia may be important to strengthen the anti-racist cause; that throwing that person into another instructional reality can make them more racist or at least out of the fight, and that being in an environment that sets out to fight can be a more effective way.
What if it is a racist crime? The same thing. Both collusion and racist action are a social fact that exists in all institutions, absolutely in all. What makes a difference is how visible this becomes and how each institution reacts.
Will Bahia defend his player on the court? First, let’s complete our internal process. We have a serious accusation, a victim’s voice that is very relevant, but far from my understanding that the victim’s voice is the only thing that needs to be analyzed. I have to give my athlete the right to a wide defense and to the opponent. I can’t do a court of inquisition, a public lynching. After the consolidation of this process, including the sanctions and policies implemented as of that, we will establish the behavior of the club in external fields. There is nothing definite.
As Ramírez is a Bahia player and Bahia is a club that claims to be anti-racist, how can we guarantee that there will be an exemption from the club’s position with respect to the athlete? This may be the great challenge as president: to achieve a balance in the decision, that whatever it is will not please everyone, but that it be a decision that at the same time gives a firm and hard response to society, if the case is confirmed . of racial harm. But if we cannot prove or have full confidence that it happened, we must also allow the contradictory hypothesis and then build a solution.
If it is concluded that Gerson misheard, is the club considering doing something? It is not like that, the pains are already too strong for us to deepen them. I have no doubt that Gerson’s statement is true, he heard that. The question is whether Ramírez spoke. Gerson deserves the respect and all the belief that he actually listened, the only question is if Ramírez spoke, because it may be that he heard something that Ramírez did not speak.
In the images, is it not possible to clear this doubt? The images we have already seen do not show that he spoke. No image is able to say what he said, what time he spoke, but neither does it show that he did not speak. There is no conclusive picture even for radio. [algo] nor did he speak. What we have, which is very relevant, is the testimony of the victim.
Faced with this episode, what is Bahía’s responsibility? Everything is happening under the responsibility of Bahia, in the omission, considering that the fact is confirmed. Although we do much more than others, it was shown that it is little. It is also an active responsibility. Bahía is one of the clubs that made the football environment more conducive to complaints of this type, assuming it happened, although it is not yet confirmed. It is not that we were wrong in what we did, but that what we did was not enough to avoid such a circumstance, if it really happened. Bahia is on the right track, but a fact like this shows that there is still little left.
