Guerrilla, not gorilla, warfare: Fired tennis analyst who nearly died to have his day in court

[luvsports!]

There is more on the line here than in a game of tennis!
https://www.theroar.com.au/2018/10/...yst-who-nearly-died-to-have-his-day-in-court/

 

[Moxie]

I don't find the explanation especially plausible, as guerrilla warfare generally implies a more underground style of attack, unconventional tactics. What gorillas do, however, is "charge." But whatever he actually said or meant, it was very careless for a person who has a long career speaking about sports. It can't have been lost on the man that there are football matches where people throw bananas on the pitch as a racist gesture. That there was controversy about Michelle Obama having been compared to a gorilla. At best, he was insensitive and careless. Personally, I think people can be called on the carpet before getting sacked, though.

 

[Ricardo]

Once a toddler from my sons play group pointed at Venus Williams photo and said ‘gorilla!’ The mother, felt a bit embarrassed, quickly replied ‘its Venus Williams’. Then the toddler again yelled ‘gorilla!’ I laughed. For PC anus lickers, they’d love to label the racist toddler even if for them the facial feature has similarities and should be kicked out of the play group, before going to toddlers court for sentence. While I would be charged being accessory to racism since instead of arresting the racist toddler I actually laughed.

 

[Moxie]

Mr. Adler is not a toddler.

 

[mrzz]

@Moxie, if the expression "guerilla tennis" is plausible or not, it does not matter, it matters if it exists or not. It seems to exist. I just googled it, I had 5000 returns (and this excluding the term "Adler" from the results). So if it means just charging, attacking tennis (this is what written on the link), there you have it. I guess that ordinary people could have the courtesy of presumption of innocence.

And, no, he should not think beforehand in every little possible misunderstanding of his words. Yes, there are some fucking retards that throw bananas in football stadiums. I have seen them up close. They are racists. Again, ordinary people could have the courtesy of presumption of innocence. Be sensible is one thing, to police oneself about every possible word that may sound like the one you are choosing, come on...

Hope this guy rips the fuck out of ESPN.

 

[Moxie]

I'm not sure where you get 5000 hits for guerrilla tennis that don't involved Adler. It's also not a term that I recognize being used in regular tennis commentary, and, as you know, I watch a lot of tennis. I did find a video link to Agassi and Sampras on an ad from the 90s. And a NYTimes article about a woman salvaging her crappy little tennis court with tape and twine. I'd be happy for you to show me even a few examples of how "guerrilla tennis" gets used in normal tennis commentary parlance. One thing I will say, though, is that it's not about policing "every possible word." It's about being aware of a few that could get you fired. There really aren't that many. I still say the man should have know better.

 

[Ricardo]

He should’ve known better that we need to live in a way so not to hurt the feelings of those who would feel sorry for themselves no matter what?

 

[mrzz]

I'm not sure where you get 5000 hits for guerrilla tennis that don't involved Adler. It's also not a term that I recognize being used in regular tennis commentary, and, as you know, I watch a lot of tennis. I did find a video link to Agassi and Sampras on an ad from the 90s. And a NYTimes article about a woman salvaging her crappy little tennis court with tape and twine. I'd be happy for you to show me even a few examples of how "guerrilla tennis" gets used in normal tennis commentary parlance. One thing I will say, though, is that it's not about policing "every possible word." It's about being aware of a few that could get you fired. There really aren't that many. I still say the man should have know better.

You can exclude a term from a Google search putting the symbol - in front of It. You can search literal expressions using quotes. So I searched for "guerrilla tennis" -adler . Had 5000+ results. You know I am pretty objective in these cases

Enviado de meu MotoE2(4G-LTE) usando o Tapatalk

 

[Moxie]

You can exclude a term from a Google search putting the symbol - in front of It. You can search literal expressions using quotes. So I searched for "guerrilla tennis" -adler . Had 5000+ results. You know I am pretty objective in these cases

Enviado de meu MotoE2(4G-LTE) usando o Tapatalk

But did you look at them? I did the same (top tip, btw,) and almost every one referred to the Nike ad of that name shot by Spike Jonze. Some were trademark names, some referred to the ESPN issue without Adler's name, I guess, and then pretty quickly they got into French, then German. It's not a common term in tennis broadcasting in English. I stand by that.

 

[mrzz]

I looked superficially. I take your word It is not common. But the search proves It exists. On the other hand, though English is not my mother tongue, what "gorilla effect" could possibly mean in that phrase and context?

Enviado de meu MotoE2(4G-LTE) usando o Tapatalk

 

[luvsports!]

I don't find the explanation especially plausible, as guerrilla warfare generally implies a more underground style of attack, unconventional tactics. What gorillas do, however, is "charge." But whatever he actually said or meant, it was very careless for a person who has a long career speaking about sports. It can't have been lost on the man that there are football matches where people throw bananas on the pitch as a racist gesture. That there was controversy about Michelle Obama having been compared to a gorilla. At best, he was insensitive and careless. Personally, I think people can be called on the carpet before getting sacked, though.

Fair enough. So you think he'll lose?
What do you make of the hypocrisy on ESPN's part though?

 

[Moxie]

I looked superficially. I take your word It is not common. But the search proves It exists. On the other hand, though English is not my mother tongue, what "gorilla effect" could possibly mean in that phrase and context?

Enviado de meu MotoE2(4G-LTE) usando o Tapatalk

I disagree that the search proves it exists. The phrase was coined by an advertising agency for the title of an ad, which featured Agassi and Sampras playing tennis in the streets. (This I have learned from the search you suggested.) That's "guerrilla tennis," and it makes sense. Now, I didn't look at all 4900+ articles, but the first several pages relate it specifically to that ad, or one domain name, and then articles not in English. "Guerrilla tennis" might be what? Hiding behind the umpires chair before popping out and snagging the ball? Certainly charging the net isn't an unfamiliar tactic in tennis, so it wouldn't be considered a "guerrilla" tactic. As to "gorilla effect," I'm not sure where you got that from and I don't know what it could mean.

 

[Moxie]

Fair enough. So you think he'll lose?
What do you make of the hypocrisy on ESPN's part though?

The article you posted has a vast mischaracterization in it:
"Guerrilla tennis is a term that has been used in the sport for decades.

In 1995, all-time greats Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi had starred in one of Nike’s most famous TV adverts, where they closed off a section of New York to set up a court, labelled ‘Guerrilla Tennis’.

This is where you utilise an ultra-aggressive strategy, where you rush to the net to make it more difficult for the opponent."
That ad has nothing to do with "an ultra-aggressive strategy where you rush the net." It's about playing tennis on the fly in an unexpected place. And the term has not been used in tennis for decades. It's not even used in tennis now.

That said, I don't know if Adler will lose his case. That's up to a judge, though I rather think he should win it, particularly based on their ignoring the same phrase used by Steve Harvey. I do understand why certain words and phrases land differently depending on who uses them. I suspect that ESPN overreacted to push-back they got from viewers in the Venus incident, while maybe they didn't, in the Harvey one, and made Adler collateral damage. I think in this case, given the journalist's long reputation, ESPN should have talked to him, apologized for any insensitivity, then stood by him and taken the heat and fallout. They should have talked to Steve Harvey, as well, (and perhaps they did,) but both should have been considered to have a bit of a warning on their records.

Anyway, this was a situation I was not aware of, so thanks for bringing it to our attention. It has been interesting to investigate and examine. Let us know if you find out how the case pans out.

 

[mrzz]

As to "gorilla effect," I'm not sure where you got that from and I don't know what it could mean.

That's the phrase the guy says on the video. The first thing I did was to check the original audio/video. he says "... to put the guerrilla/gorilla effect on [pause] charging.". It seems more plausible/meaningful with "guerilla" (and there is the "charge" mention).

As for the internet search, first, something does not need to be on the internet to exist. But, if the Nike add is there, then... is is proven that the term "guerilla" was used in tennis -- and a Nike add is something that surely hit a lot of people.

With all this can I say I am 100% positive completely damn sure he said "guerilla"? Course not. I can go only as far as saying that I find it much more plausible that he said guerilla and not gorilla. But that is the point, I do not think is sensible to make a guy lose his job and live the rest of his life with the stain of "racist" because "maybe" he said "gorilla". This is the kind of thing that only fuels race tension, and thus racism, on a general level.

 

[Moxie]

That's the phrase the guy says on the video. The first thing I did was to check the original audio/video. he says "... to put the guerrilla/gorilla effect on [pause] charging.". It seems more plausible/meaningful with "guerilla" (and there is the "charge" mention).

As for the internet search, first, something does not need to be on the internet to exist. But, if the Nike add is there, then... is is proven that the term "guerilla" was used in tennis -- and a Nike add is something that surely hit a lot of people.

With all this can I say I am 100% positive completely damn sure he said "guerilla"? Course not. I can go only as far as saying that I find it much more plausible that he said guerilla and not gorilla. But that is the point, I do not think is sensible to make a guy lose his job and live the rest of his life with the stain of "racist" because "maybe" he said "gorilla". This is the kind of thing that only fuels race tension, and thus racism, on a general level.

Oh, I didn't watch the video. I'll do that. Still, I think you're not understanding that I firmly now believe that "guerrilla tennis" is a manufactured term from Madison Avenue, by which I mean the advertising world. Did you watch the video of the ad?

EDIT: I don't think the video you saw is allowed in my region. I get now video of that, only something about Kyrgios and Murray.

 

[mrzz]

try this one...



The phrase is around 1:20.

Yes, I watched the add. I am considering that, being it from before the incident, it is evidence enough that such kind of terminology exists (not that it is common). That is as far as I am going. If I have not understood your point before, sorry. My attention is not that sharp lately.

 

[Moxie]

Obviously, you have more important things to focus on these days, I get that. I won't belabor it as not being in common usage. It was useful watching that video. Tempest in a teapot. Certainly "guerrilla effect" makes more sense than "gorilla effect." Even Venus dismissed it. I hope that guy wins his case. But this is a perfect example of the corporation having no balls and throwing their employee under the bus.

 

[mrzz]

Obviously, you have more important things to focus on these days, I get that. I won't belabor it as not being in common usage. It was useful watching that video. Tempest in a teapot. Certainly "guerrilla effect" makes more sense than "gorilla effect." Even Venus dismissed it. I hope that guy wins his case. But this is a perfect example of the corporation having no balls and throwing their employee under the bus.

I guess that a lot of times we end up echoing the tempest in teapots. We got to an agreement on this one (note to our fellow posters: rational dialogue works wonders), but I can tell you why I got in the discussion in the first place (you know already, but anyway...):

I have had seen the thread, had a guess but basically no opinion as I did not know the facts. But then -- given all that is happening here -- a friend of mine told me a story. She used -- up to a few days ago -- to work on a firm on a city 300 miles south from here, where there is strong support for our little dictator in the making. Everyone was white on her firm (not much of a big deal, as whites are in fact the majority in that place, so statistically you will get a lot of all-white workplaces). Then all of a sudden (given the presidential race) people started talking that (take a seat) "but we are indeed superior to them". She asked "them who?". "You know, blacks". She protested, reminded that racism is a crime here. Her boss told her to shut up. She resigned and at this very moment is staying in our place here in São Paulo, looking for a new place to live, luckily she had a job offer in hand.

So that's why I got in the discussion, because I was wondering how the hell we could regress 100 years in, I don't know, 5. I used to work in that city, 10 years ago. Things like that would be unthinkable.

But now we got a presidential candidate who is caught on record saying a phrase like (I will try to translate it as good as I can, as I saw the video) "... there you have this place filled with Afro-descendants [our "African-American" variant], where the lighter one weighted seven "arrobas" ["arroba" is weight unit used only for cattle], they are not good even for reproducing".

So, with this guy as president, everyone feels entitled to whatever shit they like. This guy rode the "anti-PC" wave, and you can see how far that wave got him. Sorry for (another) rant, I tried to contribute in some random thread and after your post I just found out I was merely still working things up.

 

[Chris Koziarz]

I guess that a lot of times we end up echoing the tempest in teapots. We got to an agreement on this one (note to our fellow posters: rational dialogue works wonders), but I can tell you why I got in the discussion in the first place (you know already, but anyway...):

I have had seen the thread, had a guess but basically no opinion as I did not know the facts. But then -- given all that is happening here -- a friend of mine told me a story. She used -- up to a few days ago -- to work on a firm on a city 300 miles south from here, where there is strong support for our little dictator in the making. Everyone was white on her firm (not much of a big deal, as whites are in fact the majority in that place, so statistically you will get a lot of all-white workplaces). Then all of a sudden (given the presidential race) people started talking that (take a seat) "but we are indeed superior to them". She asked "them who?". "You know, blacks". She protested, reminded that racism is a crime here. Her boss told her to shut up. She resigned and at this very moment is staying in our place here in São Paulo, looking for a new place to live, luckily she had a job offer in hand.

So that's why I got in the discussion, because I was wondering how the hell we could regress 100 years in, I don't know, 5. I used to work in that city, 10 years ago. Things like that would be unthinkable.

But now we got a presidential candidate who is caught on record saying a phrase like (I will try to translate it as good as I can, as I saw the video) "... there you have this place filled with Afro-descendants [our "African-American" variant], where the lighter one weighted seven "arrobas" ["arroba" is weight unit used only for cattle], they are not good even for reproducing".

So, with this guy as president, everyone feels entitled to whatever shit they like. This guy rode the "anti-PC" wave, and you can see how far that wave got him. Sorry for (another) rant, I tried to contribute in some random thread and after your post I just found out I was merely still working things up.

The example you've shown about Bolsonaro's racism is just shocking. I understand ehy you don't even want to call him by his name, just as I as US citizen don't want to call t-man by his name. I admire you that you still think so clearly and fairly and judicially about Adler vs ESPN case after such experience (other could have not), thank you.

 

[Chris Koziarz]

Once a toddler from my sons play group pointed at Venus Williams photo and said ‘gorilla!’ The mother, felt a bit embarrassed, quickly replied ‘its Venus Williams’. Then the toddler again yelled ‘gorilla!’ I laughed. For PC anus lickers, they’d love to label the racist toddler even if for them the facial feature has similarities and should be kicked out of the play group, before going to toddlers court for sentence. While I would be charged being accessory to racism since instead of arresting the racist toddler I actually laughed.

Racism is defined as discriminating people into groups based on anatomic features (such as skin colour) with an intention to denigrate any given group. All elements of above definition can be implied but must be undoubtedly present in the defendant's mind if you want to prove his/her racism. Toddler's yells are not racism because at his age, he does not understand the differences between humans and gorillas. So even though he discriminates people into black and white groups and compares black group to gorillas, the denigrating intent is missing here. And your laugh is just a laugh at toddler's lack of understanding, not an "accessory to racism".
I've been in many similar situations (where other form of discrimination have been implied into ignorant toddlers) and reasonable people usually react like you reacted and mothers explain to toddler his misunderstanding. This is normal at this stage. Only when you can deduce a denigrating intent from toddler's yell (e.g. "dirty gorilla") then you can claim such toddler to be racist.