Talk:Marco Materazzi/Archive 1

message: i do believe that Materazzi is one of the most violent palyer of the game. Remember this AC-Inter game where he elbows one guy just before kicking another in his deepest intimity. Some scenes of his career should be rated above 18. An interesting stat would be the number of red card he got ?Kekel 10:25, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You should also say you failed to give a reason for adding it, as well as you should say that I reverted it because of your poor editing and presentation of the fact.--Panairjdde 17:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

text: http://www.youtube.com/ simply glorifies violence and anything on that site extracts violent acts and presents then for your viewing (dis)pleasure. Those Materazzi incidences are isolated, misrepresented, and taken out of context and simply make him look violent. The same type of editting can be done regarding Zidane, Rooney, or any other player. It proves nothing about the player in question. You could isolate video of Materazzi scoring and suggest he's a major attacking force even though he only has a few goals to his credit.
I don't think the you tube links on this page "glorify" violence, although they do expose it. Still, the commentary on the Sorin incident may have been over the top, I don't think the "assault" allegation was fair. So I have decided not to contest the deletion of the youtube link to this from the main article. But the Zidane provocation incident would appear to me to be very serious indeed and attempts by some commentators to dismiss it as "just an incident", or, even worse, to laugh it off with jokey fantasies, are misguided. Most people, especially competitive sportsmen, have finite tolerance levels and the deliberate playing on these to get the best players in opposing teams sent off is nothing less than disgusting. Viewfinder 15:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I find it very surprising that Materazzi's "uber-hostile" style of play is barely mentioned. Also, this article stinks of POV. Almost sounds like a Materazzi Fansite! Try to tone down the "Materazzi Rocks" style of writing. --59.93.244.237 03:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NOT Regarding Zidane's headbutt

message: Mr. Xombie inserted this statement:
:Later in that game he was involved in an off-the-ball incident; he was headbutted in the chest by Zinedine Zidane, who, according to Zidane, was provoked by Materazzi insulting the French player.[link]
Now, what would you expect from that link? That there is Zidane saying that Materazzi insulted him, of course. I noticed the link and said, "Oh, Zidane finally broke his silence and gave his POV on the matter, let's see", but — surprise! — the link was reporting the already known statement by Zidane's agent, according to whom Zidane does not want to say anything else than the fact that Materazzi told "something very serious". So I changed to:
:Later in that game he was involved in an off-the-ball incident; he was headbutted in the chest by Zinedine Zidane, who, according to Zidane's agent, was provoked by Materazzi saying "something very serious" to the French player.[link]
And what happens next? That Xombie — surprise! — reverts my edit, claiming that "The agent was quoting Zidane, and "something very serious" implies insult." My compliments to Xombie for the way he can twist a source to make appear what he wants, not what the source says!
I demand the text to be amended to show the truth, not Mr. Xombie's POV.--Panairjdde 18:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no POV. If you read the source, the agent is saying what Zidane said, and "something very serious" cannot possibly mean anything else in this context other than an insult. My wording is much more clear and in no way POV. Xombie 18:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My text says exactly what the source reported, so why are you changing it with your version, which is an elaboration and interpretation by yourself?--Panairjdde 20:56, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I side with Panairjdde.  ABart26 10:06, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to abuse of a source - POV 

message: From my talk page:
:If you look at the original context in which I relayed the incident between Zoro and Materazzi, it was not phrased as proof that Materazzi is racist, but rather a highly relevant incident; additionally, it is not rumor, but rather something that Zoro relayed himself as being told by Materazzi (as described in the article). I respect your desire to avoid branding someone a racist; but I feel this incident is important to include if done in a proper way. That is, the mere fact that a newsworthy incident involving someone involved race should not be precluded from being mentioned. --AstroLad 17:21, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was not a matter of racism, rather a matter of opportunity. The bad thing that happened to Zoro was the bad behaviour of the people watching. If you describe all of this, and then report the exchange between Materazzi saying something like "Zoro exagerated" and Z. answering "I don't mind your opinion", that is an irrelevant fact.--Panairjdde 17:28, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zoro incident 

message: The first link down there links to Alessandro Del Piero's FIFA profile. Please correct it.
Sabb0ur 23:56, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The first link to the FIFA official profile is wrong 

message: He was also involved in an incident with Messina player Marco Zoro, from the Ivory Coast. In a game against Inter, Zoro was subjected to monkey chants and other racial attacks throughout the match. Zoro picked up the ball and began to walk off the pitch in disgust. He explained that "[i]t was the classic treatment of black players in Italy - it happens all over the country, Lazio fans being the worst." While Inter players Adriano and Obafemi Martins persuaded him to stay, and club owner Massimo Moratti praised Zoro as "an intelligent man who acted in a brave and intelligent way," Materazzi told Zoro, "stop that, Zoro, you're just trying to make a name for yourself." Zoro later stated that "I didn't even argue with him, I've no intention of lowering myself to that level." 
Why?--Greasysteve13 07:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps because it has little to do with Materazzi?  Grue  10:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The level of relevance is very low. It should not be included. Bruno18 01:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you consider the current world interest about Materazzi links with racism, this is highly relevant. World Cup is already over. All the talks in every news now is about racism in the game, and it is involving Materazzi, this *is* highly relevant.-- 172.177.41.98 13:44, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The following Information keeps being removed: 

message: Zidane has denied that his insults were racist in nature: see video at http://www.eurosport.fr/football/coupedumonde/2006/sport_sto924766.shtml (at about 2 mins. 30 secs.)
Also, from Le Parisien:
Avant l'émission, le journaliste [M. Denisot] interroge Zidane sur les insultes proférées par Materazzi. « Il m'a assuré que ce n'était pas raciste. Mais il n'a pas voulu me donner les mots exacts employés par l'Italien. Simplement que ça concernait sa mère et sa soeur. On peut deviner la suite... » http://www.leparisien.com/home/sports/mondial2006/article.htm?articleid=261030842
He wasnt asked the question... Following 2 sources
1. http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=19&art_id=iol115272613812Z350&set_id=
2. http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?articleid=277278&area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__sport/
There might have been a racist undertone to the comment, but ZZ was evasive and refused to elaborate , however he assented that the quotes were on the line of "terrorist whore" inferred by some lip readers. That he wasnt asked the Q is senical considering the volatile nature, as also the riots a year back.
Zidane gave two different interviews. One to Canal + and one to TF1. I couldn't find the entire Canal + video online, but if you follow the eurosport link above and look for 'video' you'll find the TF1 interview. The question is asked after approx. 2 mins. 30 secs. F4810 12:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don' know, or care. I'm not against using sources. I'm against trying to deduce the nature of Materazzi's insult based on any sources, as such attempts are explicitly prohibited by Wikipedia:No_original_research.
If you have a beef with the sources, i'd say washington post and itv are pretty reliable ones. And if you knew or cared Cyril Touaux has been reporting for quite some time. 05:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

text: No beef with the sources, as I said. The point is that a) the sources say that Zidane said the insult was not racist which is not the same thing that it, in reality, was not, and b) any attempt to reach the conclusion that the insult, therefore, actually wasn't racist is against Wikipedia:No_original_research.
If you scroll and read above, that is the whole point I am trying to make. Exactly in fact. However, others are entitled to a debate 11:07, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Cool. I read the section a little differently, as it is a bit messed up. 82.181.61.48 13:41, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Materazzi's insult against Zidane was not racist in nature

message: "This is not a forum for discussing football rules or racism!
Any such messages will be deleted."
Why not? Who put this up?? 
Football rules and racism go to the very heart of the incident between Materazzi and Zidane. This appears to be an attempt to delete all comment that someone might not like to see. Wallie 07:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't care about Materazzi or football or the World Cup or any of these incidents at all. I have no interest in this discussion whatsoever. This Talk page is specifically for discussing changes to the article; it is not a general forum. See Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#What talk pages may be used for: "Talk pages are not for general chatter; please keep discussions on talk pages on the topic of how to improve the associated article. Talk pages are also not strictly a forum to argue different points of view about controversial issues. They are a forum to discuss how different points of view should be included in the article so that the end result is neutral. Partisan debates do not align with the mission of Wikipedia, and get in the way of the job of writing an encyclopedia." See also WP:ENC: "WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A MESSAGE BOARD" and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not: "Discussion forums. Please try to stay on the task of creating an encyclopedia. You can chat with folks on their user talk pages, and should resolve problems with articles on the relevant talk pages,...", "Wikipedia is not a forum for unregulated free speech." —Centrx→talk • 19:41, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. I would agree with a lot of this. We do need to be able to discuss things before we put them into the actual article, do we not? It is a matter of where to draw the line. Regarding the headbutting incident, football rules and racism should be able to be discussed, but only in relation to that incident. Wallie 10:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not necessarily comfortable with this general eagerness to draw racism into the incident just because it could've been a factor, without having any actual knowledge of that (and even with Zidane speaking to the contrary). Evidence that isn't there cannot support an argument one way or the other. 82.181.61.48 21:04, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion points 

message: It is debatable whether each and every wordly taunt has to be considered a fault. Taunting is routine everywhere on pitches across Europe, albeit some self-appointed overpolite french doesn't realise. It seems like he had neither ever played football himself nor entered a football stadium (not to talk of lip-reading watching a TV match). According to former England star Chris Waddle winding up opponents was common in the game when he played. "It was never an issue when I played, either here in England, playing abroad for England or playing in France for Marseille. Every team in England has its wind-up merchants, some teams have three or four".. Materazzi's lawyer Vigorelli also warned that Fifa could be setting a difficult precedent, citing Francesco Totti's three-game ban for spitting at Denmark's Christian Poulsen during Euro 2004 as an example. "I wonder why Fifa didn't open up a case against Poulsen two years ago in the European Championships in Portugal after the reaction of Totti. This absolutely a similar case" Vigorelli adds: "If they want to attack a player for what he keeps saying on the pitch, they will be very busy in the future because it's quite normal that players shout to each other in a game - especially when it's such a stressful game." [news.bbc.co.uk/solpda/ukfs_sport/hi/newsid_5177000/5177140.stm - 17k - 13 lug 2006 -] Actually art.54 (Offensive behaviour) of Fifa disciplinary code could lead to a match suspension regarding Marco Materazzi. In a couple of days we'll see if it's worth to be enforced according to Fifa disciplinary committee. In case of racial slur, which Zidane openly denied , things would have been far different, as art. 55 of same Fifa disciplinary code claims.
::OK, so winding up is part of sport. It is not sportsmanlike but it has to be accepted. But Materazzi began by shirt pulling and nipple twisting, then followed up with insults. Zidane tried to walk away from them but it seems likely that the insults persisted until the French captain's nerve tolerance snapped. Zidane may have denied racism but he has indicated that the insults were of a domestic nature. The whole episode seems to be compatible with a systematic attempt to get the Frenchman sent off. That is more than a mere "wordly taunt" and FIFA should be very concerned. Viewfinder 21:22, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not defending what Zidane did. I saw it and it was horrible. And, as you say, there were better options available to him. But keeping your head in the face of determined and carefully targeted provocation is not easy. (Deleted irrelevant comments about FIFA. Take them to the FIFA discussion page). Viewfinder 12:20, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well you and I have a different meaning of the word "horrible"... To my mind, the bombing of Dresdan is "horrible", what Zidane did is not. The wind up merchants that Chris Waddle refers to are engaging in a "bit or banter", like "better luck next time, old Chap", a million miles from the racist comments made here. Wallie 14:19, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Have a look at the articles on sledging, which is what the "wind-up" (English) refers to. There are all sorts of examples. As far as what was said, only Materazzi knows what he said, and he recent statements are to put it kindly, "misguided". He said that he never said anything about Zidane's mother. Well the proven evidence [citation needed] - (lip reading by forensic experts, quoted all over the place) states another story. Unfortunately, FIFA will take his word as a "true gentleman of sport". As for the statements that Zidane said were not racist, this is again interpretation. Some media quotes say that Zidane said the comments were racist [citation needed]. In other media quotes, they say they are not racist. Let the words speak for themselves. Anyway, to compare English football banter with this dialogue is not one and the same. Wallie 18:10, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wihtout knowledge of how accurate lip reading by (alleged) forensic experts under given conditions (off the TV screen) can be, such sources should not be cited in an argument. Quotation of sources all over the place does not render them reliable. 82.181.61.48 21:30, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Words and deeds. Offensive behaviour (art. 54, FIFA Disciplinary code)

message: I recently added a sentence on the irony of the incident. By citing that many sports fan and analysts were saying that, it eliminates the bias of the statement. If there's anything wrong with that, please tell me. Siddharthagandhi 21:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irony of Incident 

message: "Materazzi denied[3] that he called Zidane a "dirty terrorist" [4] or "son of a terrorist whore".[5]"
If the FIFA investigation, which ends in a few days, concludes that Materazzi didn't say any of the above insults, then they should be removed from the page. Those comments are media speculation. -Nicklob 14:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Dirty Terrorist" 

message: This section is even longer than the one on Zidane's page. It needs to be edited down, FIFA's made a finding. It's disproportionate to the rest of the page. Dead men's bells 01:39, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing needed. 

message: "He also denied insulting Zidane's mother, saying, "For me, the mother is sacred. You know that." [4] (Materazzi's own mother died when he was 14 years old.)"
There is no evidence to support this in the reference given. I read that Materazzi also said "If I had known his mother was ill I wouldn't have said it". Zidane stated plainly and stressed that Materazzi had insulted both his mother and his sister three times, he is hardly lying about that and if he was we would hear all about Materazzi calling him a liar. 
The only thing in the link remotely like that is: "He has denied, however, some of the more vile insults referring to his wife or sister or calling him a terrorist." So I'm changing the first part of the sentence.
-He definitely said this.  His mother is dead, so I believe him too.  
http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/internationals/article1174042.ece
Check there to confirm, or just to a google search.  ABart26 17:51, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to disagree.  Bastard, as I know it, means a child without a father.  Thus, it couldn't possibly be directed at his mother, if his father had recently died then it would be salient, but I don't know if this is the case.  'Figlio di puttana' would be the equivalent of 'son of a bitch' (lit. son of a whore), 'bastardo,' would be the literal traslation of bastard.  I believe the definition is almost exactly similar.  Though, it is entirely possible that he called him a 'son of a bitch' which he(Zidane) took as directed as an attack on his mother.  ABart26 16:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mother and sister insult 

message: on a less interesting note- I added his height in feet and inches as well.  As an American, when I saw "193 centimeters" that gave me a very vague idea as to what his height actually was.  so I added "(6'4")"  to it.  ABart26 17:51, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  height 

message: Is the nickname "The Animal" really widespread and stable enough to be included in the opening paragraph of the article? The given source says
: A Frenchman known to his fans as "God" went on television to explain why he rammed his shaved head into the chest of an Italian nicknamed "the animal."
which could be quite different from being known as that, which IMO indicates that the nickname is not given just to reflect the current circumstances and may fade into obscurity. (I'm really not familiar with Serie A football and have no idea what the players are nicknamed; this is actually why I'm asking. Has Materazzi been commonly known, as a Serie A player, as "The Animal" or is this just something that's been coined recently and not yet established?) 194.157.147.48 10:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. However, the provided WSJ article does actually not constitute a proof. It merely refers to Materazzi as being nicknamed the animal; it does not state anything along the lines that Materazzi has been known as the animal for years. If true, there surely are reliable sources that state something to that effect? If not, I do recommend an edit on the opening paragraph on the grounds of NPOV and, perhaps, verifiability. (I'm not objecting to including the nickname in the case that it's an established one; I just want proper sources for that). 194.157.147.48 20:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Animal 

message: In Germany, a name came up recently describing the ugly behaviour of demanding yello cards for the oponent in a football match by pretending fouls and so one. Since this behaviour significantly increased at the football championship 2006 in germany and italy was among thos teams who often made use of it to harm their oponent, german Tv mags allready speak of "Materazzism" as a synonym for it. 217.194.34.115 11:41, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you suggesting incorporating some of this into the article, or why do you consider this relevant? Please clarify. This is not a discussion forum on Materazzi, this is discussion forum on the article about Materazzi. There's a difference. 194.157.147.48 11:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Materazzism