dwn: I see your point regarding the statements made about Halle Berry. You are right… in the US context. And that is one key difference between the US and Canada. In America the headlines are that she is the first black woman to win an Oscar.

In Canada, that was a footnote. Her Performance, her LONG speech, breathlessness and tears, and her kiss from Brody got more attention.

As per my first paragraph, I’m irritated by the fact that Birchall is getting attention not because he’s a good footballer – which he is – but primarily because he’s a white footballer playing for Trinidad. Why not wax eloquent about the goal that salvaged our Bahrain game. Birchall is not getting the credit that he merits – or to put it another way, his skin colour is getting more attention that it’s worth.

Whatever the ‘political correctness’ of the issue, it irks me that all coverage of Birchall has revolved around his being an ‘anomaly’, rather than him being invaluable to the Warrior midfield. Of course, as the old argument goes, the latter assertion won’t sell newspapers or capture readers. This is patronising. The world doesn’t know anything about the Warriors. Articles like these don’t help.

As for the ’sun sea stereotypes’ – I didn’t mean that literally, especially not regarding this article. What I meant is that I’ve seen too much lazy and uninformed ‘journalism’ when it comes to coverage of the Warriors and the greater Caribbean. FIFA could have done better than that headline.

Its not suprising to me that people are going to be more interested in reading about a “white trinidad player”, than they would be in reading about a “trinidadian player”.

So from the publishing and marketing perspective, i think its a case where alluding to whiteness will get me more readers.

However, the article doesnt really describe trinidad or trinidadians in a “sun, sea and stereotypically” way.

Your comment – What, exactly, is that supposed to mean? That despite his ‘fair hair and pale skin’ Birchall has integrated into the squad?

I agree with DK here in that you may be over analysing. Truth is Birchall, due to his physical appearance, does stand out (visually). The fact that the next sentence refers to his fitting into the team does not necessarily imply “despite”.

In essence he looks different but he fits in due to the fact that football is what really matters in the end.

I guess an underlying issue is it really wrong or politically incorrect to highlight Birchall’s whiteness? If so, when Halle Berry was “the first black woman to win an oscar”, was reference to that politically incorrect too? How do we decide …..?

They should have just used his name in the title and not mention colour.

I think people are curious and where there is curiousity there is a story.

When I first saw Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink playing for Chelsea I was curious…

I think it’s similar with Birchall. What I displayed with Jimmy was not racism, but I had pre-conceived notions of what his name should be like.

This pre-conception is related to Pre-judging. And Pre-judging and Prejudice are the same thing. So, often people are prejudicial without being racist. Racism is the fundamental belief that a race is better or superior to another.

One key thing about eliminating racism is to stop highlighting peoples race and I think this is where the fifa article erred. “Birchall the new warrior” or “Birchall, an England-born warrior” and a photo would have been sufficient… people would have inferred the rest.