|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 22, 2022 12:12:56 GMT
You are completely contradicting yourself. Either you allow gestures (nothing printed on kits) or you don’t. You cannot allow some but not all for the reasons you pointed out. I don’t think any team would do a gesture promoting rape and murder, or arson. So I am comfortable allowing symbolic gestures, like Iran and England did before the match. If a team did promote rape, murder or arson then I think they would lose all respect and support and the players would ruin their careers instantly. I’m contradicting myself? I don’t know how you’ve come up with that idea. There’s nothing I’ve written which could suggest that I’m ‘anti-gesture’ or ‘anti-protest’. Nice attempt at deflection though. And, I would agree, any team or player promoting rape, murder, etc would lose all respect and support from any right thinking person. I was merely pointing out to you that your professed support for the right of players or teams to wear any symbol in support of any cause whatsoever might not always result in outcomes that you would support or sympathise with. Sometimes, a line must be drawn, surely? You made it clear you are anti gestures but pro the Iranian gesture. So that is contradictory. I support teams being able to make a symbolic stand for or against something before a game, which means I cannot pick and choose what campaign is and is not ok. People should be free to do what they like as a symbolic gesture so long as it does not harm others. Taking a knee, wearing a colourful captain’s armband or not singing an anthem hurt nobody and should be allowed.
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Nov 22, 2022 12:27:06 GMT
I’m contradicting myself? I don’t know how you’ve come up with that idea. There’s nothing I’ve written which could suggest that I’m ‘anti-gesture’ or ‘anti-protest’. Nice attempt at deflection though. And, I would agree, any team or player promoting rape, murder, etc would lose all respect and support from any right thinking person. I was merely pointing out to you that your professed support for the right of players or teams to wear any symbol in support of any cause whatsoever might not always result in outcomes that you would support or sympathise with. Sometimes, a line must be drawn, surely? You made it clear you are anti gestures but pro the Iranian gesture. So that is contradictory. I support teams being able to make a symbolic stand for or against something before a game, which means I cannot pick and choose what campaign is and is not ok. People should be free to do what they like as a symbolic gesture so long as it does not harm others. Taking a knee, wearing a colourful captain’s armband or not singing an anthem hurt nobody and should be allowed. " You made it clear you are anti gestures but pro the Iranian gesture. So that is contradictory" And you're making it clearer than ever that you're happy to spout any made-up bollocks which enters your head. Show me where I've "made it so clear", please. (and I've only been on this thread for about two hours so it shouldn't take you long)
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 22, 2022 12:38:48 GMT
You made it clear you are anti gestures but pro the Iranian gesture. So that is contradictory. I support teams being able to make a symbolic stand for or against something before a game, which means I cannot pick and choose what campaign is and is not ok. People should be free to do what they like as a symbolic gesture so long as it does not harm others. Taking a knee, wearing a colourful captain’s armband or not singing an anthem hurt nobody and should be allowed. " You made it clear you are anti gestures but pro the Iranian gesture. So that is contradictory" And you're making it clearer than ever that you're happy to spout any made-up bollocks which enters your head. Show me where I've "made it so clear", please. (and I've only been on this thread for about two hours so it shouldn't take you long) Where you critique my post by saying if you allow taking a knee, you must allow a gesture showing support of rape. It suggests you are anti gesture. But at the same time you say you are pro Iranian gesture. If I have misunderstood I apologise.
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Nov 22, 2022 12:42:57 GMT
" You made it clear you are anti gestures but pro the Iranian gesture. So that is contradictory" And you're making it clearer than ever that you're happy to spout any made-up bollocks which enters your head. Show me where I've "made it so clear", please. (and I've only been on this thread for about two hours so it shouldn't take you long) Where you critique my post by saying if you allow taking a knee, you must allow a gesture showing support of rape. It suggests you are anti gesture. But at the same time you say you are pro Iranian gesture. If I have misunderstood I apologise. Apology accepted.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 22, 2022 12:49:22 GMT
Where you critique my post by saying if you allow taking a knee, you must allow a gesture showing support of rape. It suggests you are anti gesture. But at the same time you say you are pro Iranian gesture. If I have misunderstood I apologise. Apology accepted. What is your position then? You have criticised my position and although I took that to mean something, you have made a point of ensuring that you are not misunderstood on the issue. So what is your position?
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Nov 22, 2022 13:24:06 GMT
What is your position then? You have criticised my position and although I took that to mean something, you have made a point of ensuring that you are not misunderstood on the issue. So what is your position? I support the right to protest (but not necessarily unconditionally). I don't like the way the FA and the rest bottled the wearing of the armbands although I do object a little to the way the LBGTQ etc etc issue took over from the way migrant workers are treated and mistreated in Qatar and all over the Middle East. I would love to have seen the England team make some kind of gesture of support for the Iran team although accept that it's quite possible they didn't know what was going on.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 22, 2022 13:51:57 GMT
2012 was the first year all 20 Premier League clubs had poppies sewn into their shirts. Kaepernick first 'took the knee' in the US in 2016 and it was 2020 before it made it's way into British Football. I wasn't suggesting one was before the other but rather, that taking the knee, was ANOTHER example of what you were talking about SB.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 22, 2022 15:05:02 GMT
I see your point. Are you suggesting that it is better not to stand up against anything in case you miss out on something else that is unfair and you should be standing up against? The treatment of women in Iran was brilliant supported by the Iranian team as they did not sing the anthem. Should they not have done this because they also didn’t take the knee and they did not wear a rainbow armband!? To be brutally honest England players were put in an invidious position not of their making and in trying to appease various stakeholders and interest groups risk actually making it worse. For me, sport is a powerful weapon and platform for protest but needs to be utilised wisely, succinctly, concisely and sparingly in order for it to maintain its impact. Iran is a perfect example in that they’ve stood up at great risk to themselves and their families to highlight the current demonstrations and subsequent abhorrent treatment of women within their country. That doesn’t likely stop Iran being backward when it comes to homosexuality or racism, although that’s an assumption on my part, but nobody in their right mind would question the precedence of their actions in protest given their current environment over, for example, not wearing a ‘one love’ arm band whilst they did it. The issue for England, and other western countries by extension, is they don’t really have a great deal of clarity on what they’re protesting nor what they’re looking to achieve nor how it isn’t farcically hypocritical on the stage they're using. At the outset the ‘one love’ arm band was a wooly, ill-defined, purposefully obtuse gesture designed to not offend the host and FIFA whilst simultaneously bringing attention to human rights globally with the premise particular concerned around the treatment of migrant labour in the host nation without shouting it too loudly. Somehow though that side of it seemed to disappear down the back of the sofa and it became a vehicle where LBGT+ rights appeared to suddenly take precedent. There could easily be a discussion around how and why the rights of LBGT+ community took the focus from the racial implications of the expendable, essentially slave, labour propping up the Qatar economy who were looking for recompense given their losses but it’s pointless because neither group warranted getting a booking for anyway. Essentially that means that progressing in this murky tournament mired up to its eyes in sleaze and politics is more important than standing up to discrimination because regardless of words that’s what the actions state. What would deliver a message is if a player went ‘fuck it’, wore one anyway and took the booking but by not doing that, fairly or unfairly, open themselves up to criticism. Move on to taking the knee and are the migrant workers covered under this or is this purely black and white rather than brown on brown? It’s a gesture that black players themselves have flagged up as losing impetus and it seems unclear what it is now looking to achieve here. Is it racism within the US where this originates, (who I don’t think took the knee last night); racism in the UK and/or; racism in Qatar? It’s rather moot anyway because what you ended up with was 11 players looking varyingly unconvincing doing it for a matter of seconds spending less time on their knee than it takes me to pick up a stray quid. Essentially hypocrisy became a spectator sport because there was a protest for the blink of an eye within the confines of a stadium and tournament whose very foundations are built on racial exploitation. If they’d stayed down whilst Iran kicked off even for a couple of seconds it would have had a bit more resonance but it just looked token yesterday given the prevailing circumstances. Then to cap it all suggesting not understanding the plight in Iran as a reason for not dipping a toe in there in comparison to the above is a terrible answer - there was sufficient understanding of the LBGT cause, and the migrant worker cause, to decide it’s not worth a yellow card whereas the plight of Iranian women in particular wasn’t worthy of understanding at all. For me the answer is fairly straightforward – the methodology of highlighting the world cup was taking place in a gilded caged shit hole would simply have been not to go because attendance validates it. The other option was to go, delegate questions to the FA and accept your own complicity in that the sport takes precedent because end of the day they’re footballers at a footballing tournament. Anything in-between is just a fudge for me trying to rationalise something that isn’t really defendable and hasn’t been for twelve years. I think this is an absolutely fantastic post (I've argued many times on here against the taking of the knee), although there is a couple of things I do disagree with ... I don't think the wearing of the rainbow armband was originally chosen to highlight the plight of migrant workers over and above LBGTQ+ rights and also, I'm not at all sure that there wasn't any inbetween between not going and accepting complicity. Surely the Iranian players have demonstrated that it's possible to make a stand whilst still competing in the tournament. The difference between the two sets of players being, that the English players haven't got a shred of integrity between them when it comes to politics and I really do hope, that this is now, finally, the end of their pathetic (virtue signalling) taking of the knee.
|
|
|
Post by thewonderstuff on Nov 22, 2022 15:39:41 GMT
I think it's a synonym for how shit this country has become over the past decade or so that it's the players (about half a dozen of whom were still in infant school when Qatar corruptly got awarded the tournament) are now taking the lion’s share of the heat around this tawdry fiasco of an event.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 22, 2022 16:12:53 GMT
Extremely disturbing ...
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Nov 22, 2022 16:17:25 GMT
To be brutally honest England players were put in an invidious position not of their making and in trying to appease various stakeholders and interest groups risk actually making it worse. For me, sport is a powerful weapon and platform for protest but needs to be utilised wisely, succinctly, concisely and sparingly in order for it to maintain its impact. Iran is a perfect example in that they’ve stood up at great risk to themselves and their families to highlight the current demonstrations and subsequent abhorrent treatment of women within their country. That doesn’t likely stop Iran being backward when it comes to homosexuality or racism, although that’s an assumption on my part, but nobody in their right mind would question the precedence of their actions in protest given their current environment over, for example, not wearing a ‘one love’ arm band whilst they did it. The issue for England, and other western countries by extension, is they don’t really have a great deal of clarity on what they’re protesting nor what they’re looking to achieve nor how it isn’t farcically hypocritical on the stage they're using. At the outset the ‘one love’ arm band was a wooly, ill-defined, purposefully obtuse gesture designed to not offend the host and FIFA whilst simultaneously bringing attention to human rights globally with the premise particular concerned around the treatment of migrant labour in the host nation without shouting it too loudly. Somehow though that side of it seemed to disappear down the back of the sofa and it became a vehicle where LBGT+ rights appeared to suddenly take precedent. There could easily be a discussion around how and why the rights of LBGT+ community took the focus from the racial implications of the expendable, essentially slave, labour propping up the Qatar economy who were looking for recompense given their losses but it’s pointless because neither group warranted getting a booking for anyway. Essentially that means that progressing in this murky tournament mired up to its eyes in sleaze and politics is more important than standing up to discrimination because regardless of words that’s what the actions state. What would deliver a message is if a player went ‘fuck it’, wore one anyway and took the booking but by not doing that, fairly or unfairly, open themselves up to criticism. Move on to taking the knee and are the migrant workers covered under this or is this purely black and white rather than brown on brown? It’s a gesture that black players themselves have flagged up as losing impetus and it seems unclear what it is now looking to achieve here. Is it racism within the US where this originates, (who I don’t think took the knee last night); racism in the UK and/or; racism in Qatar? It’s rather moot anyway because what you ended up with was 11 players looking varyingly unconvincing doing it for a matter of seconds spending less time on their knee than it takes me to pick up a stray quid. Essentially hypocrisy became a spectator sport because there was a protest for the blink of an eye within the confines of a stadium and tournament whose very foundations are built on racial exploitation. If they’d stayed down whilst Iran kicked off even for a couple of seconds it would have had a bit more resonance but it just looked token yesterday given the prevailing circumstances. Then to cap it all suggesting not understanding the plight in Iran as a reason for not dipping a toe in there in comparison to the above is a terrible answer - there was sufficient understanding of the LBGT cause, and the migrant worker cause, to decide it’s not worth a yellow card whereas the plight of Iranian women in particular wasn’t worthy of understanding at all. For me the answer is fairly straightforward – the methodology of highlighting the world cup was taking place in a gilded caged shit hole would simply have been not to go because attendance validates it. The other option was to go, delegate questions to the FA and accept your own complicity in that the sport takes precedent because end of the day they’re footballers at a footballing tournament. Anything in-between is just a fudge for me trying to rationalise something that isn’t really defendable and hasn’t been for twelve years. I think this is an absolutely fantastic post (I've argued many times on here against the taking of the knee), although there is a couple of things I do disagree with ... I don't think the wearing of the rainbow armband was originally chosen to highlight the plight of migrant workers over and above LBGTQ+ rights and also, I'm not at all sure that there wasn't any inbetween between not going and accepting complicity. Surely the Iranian players have demonstrated that it's possible to make a stand whilst still competing in the tournament. The difference between the two sets of players being, that the English players haven't got a shred of integrity between them when it comes to politics and I really do hope, that this is now, finally, the end of their pathetic (virtue signalling) taking of the knee. Cheers mate and what I meant by no middle ground was concerned with the Western teams who'd backed out of wearing it. Completely agree for Iran because they have an obvious issue unfolding at home; a clear and concise message to raise awareness and; a platform on the world stage they're rarely afforded which they have grasped with both hands. In terms of the 'one love' I genuinely wasn't sure but had seen it on SSN a few months back - did some digging and from this it came out of a working group back in June to include 'all backgrounds' and the report was on firstly migrant worker welfare and secondly how the LBGTQ/ how LBGTQ visitors would be treated. From the final report too the arm band wasn't specifically assigned to either group (and I think the migrant workers might be the green and the black but not sure): www.eurosport.co.uk/football/world-cup/2022/with-a-heavy-heart-european-teams-abandon-one-love-armband-protest-under-fifa-pressure_sto9237838/story.shtmleditorial.uefa.com/resources/0278-15c9a4398ac5-56628bab3e8d-1000/uefa_qatar_wg_-_site_visit_3_report_-_final.pdfThe thing is though if I thought this was predominantly about migrant workers getting fair settlement following seeing it SSN a few months back and you thought it was always about LBGTQ which I think was the stance of the Dutch FA who came up with it then it doesn't really matter who's right or wrong if either because it proves the message itself was ill defined and purposefully woolly. If there isn't a clear understanding of what it stands for and the message it wishes to convey then how can it achieve anything meaningful other than a virtue signal.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 22, 2022 16:26:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 22, 2022 17:24:32 GMT
It appears that FIFA have taken this down ...
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Nov 22, 2022 17:35:51 GMT
They seemed pretty happy to let the Qatari fans wave Palestinian flags before their game in the ground. Fifa are complicit with the Qatari's in unequal political points scoring. It seems one can wave flags and wear symbols just not particularly those that the regime and its allies dont like.
|
|
|
Post by Scouse on Nov 22, 2022 18:22:05 GMT
Perhaps Interestingly ..skys coverage of the arm band ban ..and it could be argued anti Qatari / FIFA in nature , has appeared on my Twitter feed as promoted tweet by visit Saudi , visit Saudi is the official tourism account of Saudi Arabia ..a promoted tweet is a paid for advertising tweet
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Nov 22, 2022 18:42:03 GMT
In answer to the OP. A resounding NO
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Nov 22, 2022 19:58:42 GMT
I'm seeing a lot of people say on Twitter that it's the foreign fans fault. They aren't respecting the local laws of Qatar.
Hmmmmmm :/
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 22, 2022 20:06:58 GMT
I'm seeing a lot of people say on Twitter that it's the foreign fans fault. They aren't respecting the local laws of Qatar. Hmmmmmm :/ What is the foreign fans fault?
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Nov 22, 2022 20:08:41 GMT
I'm seeing a lot of people say on Twitter that it's the foreign fans fault. They aren't respecting the local laws of Qatar. Hmmmmmm :/ What is the foreign fans fault? Bumming everywhere😉
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 22, 2022 20:16:13 GMT
I'm seeing a lot of people say on Twitter that it's the foreign fans fault. They aren't respecting the local laws of Qatar. Hmmmmmm :/ Yeah I’ve seen this. Gay people have to look at where they can and can’t go on holiday in case it’s a place it’s illegal. Qatar being such a country. I’m sorry but basic human rights like being allowed to love someone of the same sex seems like a basic to me. No one should have to check if they can go somewhere because of their sexuality.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Nov 22, 2022 20:37:18 GMT
I'm seeing a lot of people say on Twitter that it's the foreign fans fault. They aren't respecting the local laws of Qatar. Hmmmmmm :/ What is the foreign fans fault? Wearing the colours? Being gay?
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Nov 22, 2022 20:37:36 GMT
What is the foreign fans fault? Bumming everywhere😉 Camelling in the middle of the desert hanging out the back of Land Cruisers.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Nov 22, 2022 20:37:53 GMT
I'm seeing a lot of people say on Twitter that it's the foreign fans fault. They aren't respecting the local laws of Qatar. Hmmmmmm :/ Yeah I’ve seen this. Gay people have to look at where they can and can’t go on holiday in case it’s a place it’s illegal. Qatar being such a country. I’m sorry but basic human rights like being allowed to love someone of the same sex seems like a basic to me. No one should have to check if they can go somewhere because of their sexuality. Strange.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 22, 2022 20:46:32 GMT
Yeah I’ve seen this. Gay people have to look at where they can and can’t go on holiday in case it’s a place it’s illegal. Qatar being such a country. I’m sorry but basic human rights like being allowed to love someone of the same sex seems like a basic to me. No one should have to check if they can go somewhere because of their sexuality. Strange. What is?
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Nov 22, 2022 21:49:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Nov 22, 2022 22:45:06 GMT
I'm seeing a lot of people say on Twitter that it's the foreign fans fault. They aren't respecting the local laws of Qatar. Hmmmmmm :/ Yeah I’ve seen this. Gay people have to look at where they can and can’t go on holiday in case it’s a place it’s illegal. Qatar being such a country. I’m sorry but basic human rights like being allowed to love someone of the same sex seems like a basic to me. No one should have to check if they can go somewhere because of their sexuality. Just in case you have any Gay Friends who are planning holidays Obviously not while the War is going on but Ukraine would not be recommended by the Equaldex placing Ukraine placing it 97th out of 198 Countries as Gay Friendly with only 14% Public support This is obviously not as bad as Qatar 184th or the Western Liberated Iraq 177th but not as Gay friendly as Hungary 88th or the Vatican City 71st www.equaldex.com/equality-index
|
|
|
Post by awrypotter on Nov 22, 2022 23:12:21 GMT
To be honest Musik I didn't have a clue what he meant. Thought his speech was very strange. He asked us to put all differences in opinion aside. He meant that all Europeans, Africans, homosexuals, disabled and migrant workers are as much welcome during the World Champions as anyone else. Thanks for explaining Musik but unfortunately I don't think what he said was the truth in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Nov 23, 2022 7:39:40 GMT
So Germany are taking FIFA to Court over the "onelove" armband ban after German sponsor walks away saying if your not wearing it we're not interested in sponsoring you. Interesting development our FA and FAW crumble but it takes money for one to make a stand on a moral issue 🤷♂️
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Nov 23, 2022 8:51:13 GMT
So Germany are taking FIFA to Court over the "onelove" armband ban after German sponsor walks away saying if your not wearing it we're not interested in sponsoring you. Interesting development our FA and FAW crumble but it takes money for one to make a stand on a moral issue 🤷♂️ They had the perfect opportunity to make a stand by not going. Same as Lineker, etc. Particularly regarding the deaths involved. And wokesters calling for Western cultural imperialism? How does this woke worldview hang together, when they claim to preach against imperialism? The sooner people realise that the world is not one thing, but a collection of incompatible worldviews and cultures, the better. Agreeing to disagree is far more 'progressive'.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 23, 2022 14:12:05 GMT
So Germany are taking FIFA to Court over the "onelove" armband ban after German sponsor walks away saying if your not wearing it we're not interested in sponsoring you. Interesting development our FA and FAW crumble but it takes money for one to make a stand on a moral issue 🤷♂️ They had the perfect opportunity to make a stand by not going. Same as Lineker, etc. Particularly regarding the deaths involved. And wokesters calling for Western cultural imperialism? How does this woke worldview hang together, when they claim to preach against imperialism? The sooner people realise that the world is not one thing, but a collection of incompatible worldviews and cultures, the better. Agreeing to disagree is far more 'progressive'. You're forgetting that Qatar said that they were going to openly encourage rainbow flags, t-shirts etc. at the tournament as a progressive move towards inclusivity. If big businesses make multi-million pound decisions based on what the Qatari's have promised and then the hosts renege at the last minute, you get sued. THAT'S how the world works.
|
|