Breaking Down the Istanbul-PSG Incident and Why What Happened Was Racist

At around thirteen minutes into the UEFA Champions League final group stage game between PSG vs. Istanbul Basaksehir, something completely out of the ordinary happened. Ten minutes later the game was abandoned, with both sides walking off the field in protest at the fourth official. This article will break down everything that happened (from what we know), and explain why what happened was indeed racist and why this incident deserves the attention it is currently getting as an act of racism.

Subscribe to get access

Read more of this content when you subscribe today. $4.99 per month.

So there it is! Why what happened in PSG-Istanbul Basaksehir was indeed an act of racism and why the players were justified in walking off the pitch and taking a stand. Be sure to share your thoughts on Twitter @mastermindsite or in the comments below. Black Lives Matter and there is no room for racism in football. Not here. Not anywhere. Thanks for reading and see you soon.

You might also enjoy…
-> Issues Facing Women In Sport


4 thoughts on “Breaking Down the Istanbul-PSG Incident and Why What Happened Was Racist

  1. Sorry Rhysl. Your report is loaded with words to try and subliminally persuade the reader as to YOUR personal opinion.
    Being a *mastermind site* and one which includes “sport psychology” as a subset you may (OR MAY NOT) be aware of how to influence people. I am sure that you are.

    In my position as a senior Fire Officer I was trained to do the same with my FF’s.
    To try and improve performance or behaviour or take Fire Safety projects on board willingly.
    Just throwing in a word such as “rightly so” when stating a fact is a perfect example.
    Also filling in the gaps, that are lacking in evidence with, “YOUR assumptions”
    And then you lost my respect completely when you referred to “white privilege*

    You wrote “I am not the best possible person to talk about this, as I am a white male of privileged status”
    OH DEAR!
    Referring to a person’s public, or social standing, success or wealth purely by association to the colour of their skin and gender, IS by very definition, RACIST and SEXIST.
    My management degree and rank in the Fire Service also required me to write “Equal Opportunity policy” carry out investigations and decide on the discipline awards for transgressions.

    Here is what John Barnes had to say. I think he is qualified as a black man. ( Or can I not now refer to the colour of his skin to emphasise a point?)

    John Barnes;>>>>> “It’s NOT racist to describe the offender as the black one!”
    Alongside images of the Istanbul coaching staff, Barnes wrote: “Here is the coaching staff at istanbul… 1 of them is going to be sent off and the ref asks the 4th official which one should he send off…
    “Can anyone tell me how he should identify him as he doesnt know their names, and they aren’t wearing numbers, other than THE BLACK ONE?”
    The former England international added: “It’s NOT racist to describe the offender as the black one!
    “We are telling people to call us black.. he doesn’t know his name there are 6/7 coaches standing together all turkish . 1 is to be sent off , the ref says which one THE BLACK ONE what else can he say to let the ref know?
    “Why can’t you describe a black man as being a black man?”<<<<

    The law itself refers to skin colour as a primary identifying trait.
    Eg. "the perpetrator was identified as a white male aged about 20-25"
    Or; "—————– a black female aged the 50-60 age bracket"

    What next? Campaign to have the police use another phrase?

    A fire safety campaign I was a cofounder of was based on statistics. In the survey the first question was 1. Ethnicity. WHY? Because the fire deaths were disproportionally higher in BAME. So we targeted them and reduced the incidents by 25%.
    Behavioural outcomes quantified or qualified by RACE is——-?
    Answer; *Racial profiling* which is by the Liberals/WOKE definition——–Racist!!!!!!



    1. Hello Mark,
      Thank you for your comment. All I meant by situating myself in the context as “a white male of privileged status” is that I have had a life time of privilege, not only because of my race but for a variety of factors, and that I haven’t had to personally deal with someone being racist towards me because of my skin colour. Therefore, I may not be the best person to decide whether or not it was racist. There are many people of colour, black people included, that think this was an act of racism and many that think it wasn’t. So the debate is there and people are entitled to their opinion. All I was saying was that someone who has had to experience a lifetime of oppression and racism might be able to speak about it more eloquently and have different opinions, and dispaly their thoughts on the matter. Then I displayed my own thoughts. I simply wanted to situate myself within my context and allow the readers to understand the background that I come from when sharing my viewpoint, which I think is valuable and important. As you mention, skin colour and race is an important part of identity, and so I don’t think it is wrong for me to identify myself as white when writing an article about race. Saying this statement is not meant to be an indicator of my wealth or any reference to white privilege in general. It was a reference to my own privilege as a result of not only being white, but the life I’ve lived.

      That said, I fully believe this example in the PSG-Instanbul game was an act of racism, regardless of intention and language, and stand by that.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s