?FLOYD MAYWEATHER is an uppity cotton-picker and I want him to cook me some fried chicken the gangly ****hole!?
Rude, ignorant, arrogant and, yes, racist. That opening statement is all of those things, just like its ?subject? Mayweather. Imagine Manny Pacquiao had uttered those words on video ? or even worse, the N word ? playing up racial stereotypes in an effort to denigrate his rival and keep himself in the public eye. Imagine then that the Filipino days later delivered the most unapologetic so-called apology since Tiger Woods? to his sponsors. He would be castigated and rightly so.
Which begs the question, why is Mayweather, who actually committed similar acts last week, getting off so lightly? I will not dignify his tirade by reprinting large parts of it but suffice to say he called Pacquiao a ?mother****er? who ?can’t speak no English? and apparently wanted Manny to cook him ?cats and dogs? amongst other stereotypically Asian foodstuffs (I?m reliably informed that the eating of cats and dogs, while still prevalent in certain parts of the Philippines, is far from commonplace). I was flabbergasted watching the footage and immediately felt Floyd, someone whom I greatly admire in the ring, had gone way too far.
Then the apologists and excuse-makers began to make themselves heard. Not Floyd?s publicists nor his management team, no, actual fans on forums, message boards and social networking sites came forward to justify the unjustifiable. Floyd was just ?keeping his name out there,? they insisted and ?didn’t mean it?. Mayweather?s official ?apology? seemed to reflect these claims, when he swore he did not have a racist bone in his body. Pointedly he apologised to ?anyone? he ?may have offended? rather than Pacquiao himself.
I have no problem conceding that Mayweather made these comments to keep his name in the public eye and enhance his bad-boy image. But to use that as a way of justifying his remarks would be to spectacularly miss the point. It is not about why he said something, rather what he said and why he chose those particular insults. He could have sent his message just as effectively by restricting the objects of his slurs to Pacquiao?s height and fear of needles. When he focused on these areas it was harmless fun at best and, at worst, a misguided attempt at comedy. But Mayweather must have these ridiculous notions regarding Pacquiao and Filipinos floating around inside him, unless we are saying this was a scripted speech ? unlikely as he was responding to phonecalls. After all, you never hear Woods call Phil Mickelson a cracker or Caroline Wozniaki describe the Williams sisters as a pair of slaves. Yes these sports stars are well-managed but it is most likely these antiquated, racist thoughts would never even occur to them.
Pacquiao?s response was typical of a renowned gentleman and exactly what most of us expected from him. By calling the content of Floyd?s horror movie ?an uneducated message? even HE is giving ?Money? somewhat of a free pass.
But I am not and I hope the BN readers will not either. It?s long been said that Mayweather should fight more and talk less but I?d have no qualms about his copping a ban for this. In Britain he would almost certainly face sanctions for bringing the game into disrepute. Unfortunately, the counter-productive power-sharing situation in US boxing that allows Antonio Margarito to be licensed in one state and not another means there is no omnipotent governing body to suspend or financially penalise Mayweather. It?s a real shame because being hit in the pocket may be the only way to make Mayweather truly ?sorry?.
As I typed into my Facebook status on Saturday, ?Mayweather is an incredible boxer but a seriously flawed human being?. By his own stupidity he has turned the few fans he had left against him. To the ones who continue to defend him, I urge you to think again. It?s our sport?s reputation he’s playing God with. Until next time…
