Auburn fan yells 'Go back to Uruguay' at Tennessee PG Santiago Vescovi
Tennessee PG Santiago Vescovi is a native of Montevideo, Uruguay, making the long journey to Knoxville to play college basketball.
Since arriving on campus, he’s blossomed into a strong player for the Vols, averaging 11.4 points, 4.2 assists, 3.8 rebounds and 1.4 steals per game.
However, he’s also had to deal with some trolls, including one on Saturday at Auburn. As you can hear in the video below, one rogue Auburn fan yelled that he should go back to Uruguay:
Wow. Listen closely. Auburn fan taunting Vescovi.
“Go back to Uruguay, this is America” #Vols pic.twitter.com/5OCuBLf7K7
— Trey Wallace (@TreyWallace_) February 22, 2020
Obviously, that’s not a representation of all Auburn fans — just one person being an idiot and it happened to get caught on national TV. After all, Auburn has a player who wasn’t born in America on its roster — freshman center Babatunde Akingbola from Nigeria.
Oh, and the possible SEC Player of the Year (Kentucky big man Nick Richards) was born in Jamaica. So, yeah, SEC basketball is definitely better off with guys like Vescovi in it.
This shouldn’t even be a story.
I agree but it would be a huge deal if someone said it to a black player; hence, the coverage here is at least consistent.
If it would have been Africa man o man, in Bama.
So because he’s not black it’s not a big deal? Ok, understood.
I don’t think it’s worthy of an article regardless of whom the comment is directed to. I’m merely stating that skin color typically does matter to the media.
That’s true. I was just replying to Dawgs comment.
The Barnes lack of in game coaching continues. Actually-was it ever there?
Been that way his whole career. Very poor in game coach. Great recruiter and motivator though.
Get a big lead then quit being aggressive game plan hasn’t worked for us yet.
Adam “safe space” Spencer cannot resist.
Whenever there are women around, why can’t my competition be Adam?
Alpha males always trying to pull my women, why can’t I go up against a beta like Adam from time to time?
This is sickening as a fan. Unacceptable.
The kid is a literal Hitler Jr Nazi and should be executed, right?
What?
Mocking the level of outrage. People say rude stuff at games (including swearing) and stay in the game. I don’t see how this is worse than the ordinary level of swearing and personal attacks (“you suck”, etc) that we see at most major collegiate events. It seems excessive and we seem to have forgotten that the best response to things we find rude or stupid is to ignore them.
I mean I agree to an extent but this crossed the line and has no business being said whatsoever. Yes, there are tons of examples people saying rude stuff and people overreacting to it but to me this was more than just rude.
Which is precisely my point-who decides where the line is drawn? Are insults not insults? If so, throw out any fans who say rude things (incl the UT students who chant “you suck”). Or should the SEC league office post a list of specific phrases? Who judges what level of offense is beyond the pale and what qualifications should said individual have? It’s arguable that the insult that’s the subject of the article is a right wing stance. Is this an issue of pc politics subjectivity determining what is unacceptable speech? How can we be sure said arbiters of the truth of spoken word are being objective and reasonable to paying customers?
This isn’t a 1st amendment issue.
As for drawing the line, I’d say that it’s pretty reasonable to consider protected classes (such as religion, race, color, and national origin) that have been codified in federal law for over half a century to be across the line of acceptability. It doesn’t seem that hard for people who study this stuff or for regular, decent folks. Not sure why some people want to work so hard to display their misanthropy.
Never claimed the constitutional rights of the student were violated. Please indicate where I said so. My question is how do officials determine which speech crosses the line, what qualifications do they have to ensure this enforcement is undertaken objectively, and whether such enforcement is done consistently. I have misgivings in the capabilities of SEC and university officials in handling these objectively and consistently. If you’re going to strawman my argument, try harder.
“As for drawing the line, I’d say that it’s pretty reasonable to consider protected classes (such as religion, race, color, and national origin) that have been codified in federal law for over half a century to be across the line of acceptability.” It’s in the law.
I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiment to be a duck and let “most” things slide. However, not all. You yourself point out this was right-wing propaganda – specifically, “Nationalism.” A big war was fought over it in the 20th century. Not saying this student is Goebbels, but it’s a responsibility to keep hateful attitudes in check.
It’s arguable limiting immigration comments (left wing offended) whilst letting cussing slide (right wing offended) is taking a left of center policing stance and the lack of catering to all offensive speech is inherently subjective. If we’re tallying lives lost to political ideologies in the last century (you went there-not bringing up politics), please don’t forget 70 million Chinese and 30 million Soviet citizens.
I get the essence of your argument, but I disagree. In a semantic vacuum, you would be right. However, not all offensive speech is equal. Anti-immigration speech vs foul language is apples and oranges.
In the end, what’s wrong with being a decent human being and showing someone who is working harder than most some respect. Fine, heckle him. But leave his country of origin out of it. It’s patently un-American.
As for the student’s punishment, I say offer him the option of spending a day with Vesconti – or accept the ban. If he’s worth his salt, he’d see how disrespectful and short-sighted his comment was, and gain a new respect for recent immigrants.
*Vescovi*
I’m not sure you’re getting the point, as my argument is with subjective interpretation. Here’s a rational consideration that’s truly objective-don’t say rude things to unpaid players. Let’s enjoy this great college sport in a positive manner.
Well, I thought I understood your argument but maybe not? Subjective interpretation and where to draw the line i.e. what’s the real difference between any of it and who gets to decide – dives pretty deep. If I KISS it, I go with secer’s point and use the law as a guideline; even easier than that, I use your standard. Be nice, until they’re getting paid to put up with it (and, still be decent).
Let’s not cry strawman and then put words in someone else’s mouth; I never said you claimed constitutional rights were infringed. You and others were dancing around/on the free speech narrative, so I wanted to head that off.
As for determining what speech crosses the line, the aforementioned protected classes are a basic, agreed upon guideline that is more than sufficient in this case. Furthermore, Auburn/their athletic department, as sponsors of this even, have the right to decide what they’ll allow and how they’ll make those decisions. If you don’t like it, don’t go there. This really isn’t that hard.
At no point did I dance around the free speech narrative as I’ve indicated in multiple comments that it’s not a free speech issue. Unless you’re directing a general comment at others, you’re ignoring the evidence that I have never claimed this is a free speech issue. I bring up the strawman fallacy because claiming I’m alleging a free speech violation occurred isn’t part of my comment and I’ve indicated otherwise. To allege I’m dancing around the issue is to claim knowledge of my thoughts that’s opposed rather explicitly by my comments and is yet another strawman.
You were asking who decides where the line is drawn between acceptable and unacceptable speech. That qualifies as at least dancing around the free speech issue in American discourse. So no, I’m not concocting some strawman against you, I’m simply assuming you meant what you wrote. In light of that and other comments, it seemed prudent to head off the free speech narrative.
Anyways, I’m guessing we’ve focused on the least relevant issue here because the ‘substance’ of your position didn’t stand up to scrutiny. I was thankful when someone helped me think about this kind of stuff more reasonably, and I’m always happy to pay it forward; hope you enjoy doing the same.
Again you’re assuming (admittedly) as I’ve never claimed they didn’t have the right to remove people. I don’t agree with what was said (clearly as a UT fan I’m very supportive of Vescovi). I’m saying reinforce the policy consistently. You’re argument is speculative as the university hasn’t posted a guideline as to what’s acceptable (even if Title IX). I’d congratulate and thank you for attempting to help this poor, uneducated soul, but I’m afraid you’ve humbly attributed every possibly accolade upon yourself in doing so. In attempting to return the favor, albeit feeling like I’m trying to pay back the sacrifice of Christ himself), permit me to do the same. The most effective teachers are those who do so without self-accolade and self-interest.
So you finally admit (by omission) that you were at least circling the free speech issue. Glad we can agree on something.
Now you’re complaining that the policy needs to be “reinforced” consistently, despite no evidence that enforcement has been inconsistent? And falsely claiming that Auburn is the only place that doesn’t have guidelines about this kind of stuff? Read the back of the ticket; listen to the announcer before the game; read a program and/or posted signs; google and/or contact the athletic department. Is there an exhaustive list of every word and phrase accompanied by an exact prescription for how its utterance should be handled in every situation? No. But that’s not really how laws, rules, guidelines, etc. generally exist in our world anyways. There is a policy, and the ejection in this instance indicates that it gets enforced. Maybe you think consistency means that every similar transgression receives the exact same outcome? Bad news – in that case, we aren’t consistent about any crime; people who don’t get caught tend to get away. Fortunately for many, most incidents like this aren’t caught on a national broadcast that both accentuates the egregiousness of the violation and enables the identification and punishment of the offending party; unfortunately for the ejected spectator, his was.
No one who is word vomiting on a cfb blog like us can claim to be humble, but I don’t see where I “humbly attributed every possible attribute upon myself” (perhaps we should stop playing with straw), nor do I see how doing so would prevent your congratulations or thanks. Perhaps you were projecting? I find it richly ironic that you called yourself an arrogant and an ineffective teacher just to try to mock your fictitious caricature of me as the same, but I’m really not sure how any of this deflecting is supposed to contribute to the original topic of discussion. Let me know if you want to get back to that or if we’re done here.
Lol
Guess we’re done. Can’t say I expected a real discussion, but I’m disappointed we couldn’t have one.
Glad it was dealt with pronto. He is now banned from the arena, and may face additional discipline from the university.
That’s quite the overreaction. He just needed to he told to knock it off by someone in authority. If he refused, he should have been thrown out. This was a teachable moment. Auburn turned it into major punishment.
I agree completely. I further argue this is politically driven. To me, insults are insults and, provided they aren’t legitimate threats, should be treated equally. Would cussing Viscovi out have gotten the same treatment? I think not.
Cussing him out and telling him to go back to Uruguay because this is American are two completely different insults. The latter crosses the line for allot of ppl, especially if it was a black person. Perfectly fine with how this was handled. Otherwise, are fans allowed to tell ever black player to go back to Africa because this is America?
This is the point I’m trying to make-it’s incredibly subjective and comes down to the university’s opinion of what is too offensive as opposed to some standard definition. The example you cite comes down to personal preference in terms of what is offensive as both are non-threatening but very rude and targeted statements.
The vast majority of black people in this country are from this country. You can’t really go back to where you have never been. Either way, you should simply tell the offender, we don’t talk like that here. If he were to continue, then you remove him.
It does seem like “banning him” from future games may have been a little harsh…Does anyone here remember how you acted when you were in college ? I’ve got a feeling that all of us have done worse…right ? But the officials at auburn acted properly to defuse the situation.
Teachable moment: Give him the choice of going through Vescovi’s routine with him for a day, or the ban. (Would hate to punish Vescovi like that, but it might just change the student’s attitude).
Ha-great idea
We’e all done stuff like that is NOT an excuse. try again.
FYI, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act basically makes it illegal for most organizations to permit discrimination on the basis of, among other things, national origin. Auburn was well within their rights to do what they did, and I think legal experts and regular folk alike can see that it was an appropriate response. Anyone trying to subvert the letter or spirit of the laws that have made the US a better place needs better education, empathy, or both.
Organizations or spectators?
Organizations…who have the right to impose restrictions on spectators, especially in pursuit of complying with anti-discrimination laws.
Really? Attacking Barnes coaching record, which last I looked is one of the finest in the nation. The guy is a winner. He has lost 4 of last years starting five and still has the Vols above .500. He will have them dancing next year for sure with virtually everyone returning along with one of the best recruiting classes in the nation. Shame on the idiot Auburn fan – frankly, every fan base has it’s share of idiots. Auburn’s just happened to be yelling into a live mic. This post has nothing to do with Barnes and his coaching ability. SMH
I think you can be a great, winning coach and still have problems with in-game coaching. Cal comes to mind here, along with Barnes (Loyola and the games against Bruce). I’m not a Bruce over Barnes guy btw as Bruce has also had choke jobs (UT/Oh St sweet 16) and Bruce is one mistake away from getting canned yet again. I have no faith in that guy’s ability to adhere to the rules.
I liked having Bruce here as coach, and he’s a good one. But, I expect at some point he’ll slip up again.
AMEN – UT sure has its share of idiot fans, too. Banning a fan for it seems extreme, but you are a “guest” of Auburn University at a sporting event, booster or not, student or not. They have every right to eject a fan from a game if they are being overly abusive/disruptive/dangerous to the other fans in attendance. ESPECIALLY something embarrassing to the University.
Agreed, we are still good with having Barnes. Seen a LOT of UT basketball over the decades, and the “one shining moment” has only felt remotely close during Pearl and Barnes eras.
Now if we could only stop the trash talking between the players.
This shouldn’t be a story…Yeah we should hide stuff like that and sweep it under the rug!
Excuse me??? You have “VOL” in your name but a Duke logo???