The goalkeeper says the matter ‘should go no further’ (Picture: Getty)
Andre Onana has jumped to the defence of Manchester United team-mate Alejandro Garnacho after he used a gorilla emoji in a now deleted post about the goalkeeper and insists he should not face a ban.
The 19-year-old paid tribute to the shot-stopper’s heroics against Copenhagen – in which Onana saved a stoppage-time penalty to secure all three points – by posting a picture on his social media pages celebrating alongside the Cameroonian.
However, he caused controversy by using two gorilla emojis and, after initially editing the original post to remove them following a backlash, then deleted the post from his timeline altogether.
Garnacho could now face a charge from the Football Association as the post is likely to be deemed an ‘aggravated breach’ of its rules on social media behaviour, particularly with regard to racially sensitive posts.
But Onana has broken his silence on the issue to defend the teenager, saying the meaning of the emojis has been misconstrued, and has urged the authorities not to punish Garnacho.
‘People cannot choose what I should be offended by,’ wrote Onana on Instagram on Thursday evening, alongside two pictures of him celebrating with the Argentine winger.
‘I know exactly what Garnacho meant: power and strength. This matter should go no further.’
Onana says he was not offended by Garnacho’s post (Picture: Instagram)
Garnacho was thought to be unaware of the racial connotations of the emoji and deleted them when he was informed, though the FA are still expected to investigate the matter.
In 2020, Edinson Cavani was given a three-match ban and fined £100,000 after using the Spanish term ‘negrito’, which translates as ‘black’, in reply to a friend’s message on Instagram.
FA RULES ON SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS
Cases involving media comments or comments made on social networking sites are charged under FA Rule E3(1). Should the comments include a reference to any one or more of a person or person’s ethnic origin, colour, race, nationality, faith, gender, sexual orientation or disability, these are considered ‘aggravating factors’ and FA Rule E3(2) may apply. This allows for a Regulatory Commission to consider the imposition of a doubled sanction.
Participants are deemed responsible for any postings on their account. The fact that a posting may have been made by a third party will not necessarily prevent disciplinary action being taken.
In addition, re-tweeting another person’s posting may lead to disciplinary action if the original comment was improper.
Finally, deleting an inappropriate posting, whilst advisable, does not necessarily prevent disciplinary action being taken.
More: Trending
Although the Uruguayan swiftly deleted the post and released a statement apologising, he was nevertheless handed a ban and ordered to undergo a training course by the FA.
Similarly, in 2019, Bernando Silva was handed a one-game ban for posting a picture of then Manchester City team-mate Benjamin Mendy alongside a racially insensitive cartoon character from a Spanish chocolate brand.
Despite Mendy offering a defence of his team-mate in the FA’s investigation, he was nevertheless reprimanded and handed a £50,000 fine in addition to the one-game ban.
MORE : David De Gea posts cryptic response to Manchester United transfer speculation
MORE : Manchester United winger Alejandro Garnacho faces ban over deleted Andre Onana post
For more stories like this, check our sport page.
Follow Metro Sport for the latest news on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.
‘This matter should go no further.’
