Quote Originally Posted by the other bob wilson View Post
It seems pretty obvious to me. I’ve not seen anyone arguing that some of the things Ollie Robinson tweeted were not racist. Therefore, there seems to be general agreement that he did send out some racist messages and according to an online dictionary I’ve just looked at, an apologist is”a person who offers an argument in defence of something controversial”, so what’s there to argue about?
So you seem to agree that people weren't arguing that what Robinson wrote should be defended, indeed there seems general agreement that it was offensive and wrong.

What they were doing was saying that it was not necessarily the right thing to suspend him for saying these things when he was an immature teenager, who may have different views now (of course his views may not have changed, and if that was proved he should never play for England again).

I don't therefore think that anyone saying that they don't think suspending him in this case is a racist apologist unless at the same time they also defend what he said.