Kane, Neuer and Van Dijk risk instant booking over one love armband

[Citizen Sandman]

Just now, Confused Clarity said:

What has she said? Am in work so can't see it.

She worn the band for one.

[RTHerringbone]

I'm still hoping he has it on under that training top.....

[InigoPatinkin]

Of course they aren't going to wear it  I'm trying to be sympathetic with people who are put in difficult positions by this but bloody hell... this is a very, very low bar. 

[SteveUK]

Hope we do what Omid Djalili requested when we score to show support to the Iranian revolution.

[GunmaN1905]

Spot the difference:

One team is full of filthy rich players not missing anything in their life, who refuse to wear an armband to avoid potential yellow card.

Other team refuses to sing the anthem to protest a dictatorship, even though they know they or their families can get killed at any time if they come back home.

 

[InigoPatinkin]

9 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Spot the difference:

One team is full of filthy rich players not missing anything in their life, who refuse to wear an armband to avoid potential yellow card.

Other team refuses to sing the anthem to protest a dictatorship, even though they know they or their families can get killed at any time if they come back home.

I don't think making this a "look how much one side is better than the other" take is needed or valid here.

The Iranians are refusing to sing their national anthem because the issue is far more pressing and immediate for them than the England players who are 2-3 degrees removed from stuff. It's depressing England aren't doing it, but it's not remotely the same situation (and the Iranian team aren't doing it either, for obvious, even more depressing reasons). 

Edited November 21, 2022 by InigoPatinkin

[GunmaN1905]

1 minute ago, InigoPatinkin said:

I don't think making this a "look how much one side is better than the other" take is needed or valid here.

It absolutely is because your people talked about support for equal rights for months and then nothing happens just because the result might be jeopardized.

Quote

The Iranians are refusing to sing their national anthem because the issue is far more pressing and immediate for them than the England players who are 2-3 degrees removed from stuff. It's depressing England aren't doing it, but it's not remotely the situation (and the Iranian team aren't doing it either, for obvious, even more depressing reasons). 

Yeah, the issue is far more pressing, but the consequences are actually as bad as it gets.

[InigoPatinkin]

8 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

It absolutely is because your people talked about support for equal rights for months and then nothing happens just because the result might be jeopardized.

Yeah, the issue is far more pressing, but the consequences are actually as bad as it gets.

Yes, they usually are when the issue is that pressing. I suspect if the UK government was trying to execute 15000 protestors the England football team would probably develop a backbone too. 

The Iranian team don't have the courage to wear the armband either, do they?

[GunmaN1905]

8 minutes ago, InigoPatinkin said:

The Iranian team don't have the courage to wear the armband either, do they?

They don't want to wear it, like many other teams.

[InigoPatinkin]

Just now, GunmaN1905 said:

They don't want to wear it, like many other teams.

So they only want to protest for things that immediately affect them? Doesn't seem particularly honourable or praiseworthy. 

[GunmaN1905]

Just now, InigoPatinkin said:

Doesn't seem particularly honourable or praiseworthy. 

Who said it's praiseworthy?

But it's still better than getting some peolpe's hopes up only to back down at the slightest inconvinence.

[InigoPatinkin]

1 minute ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Who said it's praiseworthy?

But it's still better than getting some peolpe's hopes up only to back down at the slightest inconvinence.

Is it though? 

I'm pretty sure there's an episode of the Simpsons where they do a **** take of Homer adopting this logic. 

[Mr Wallin]

34 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Spot the difference:

One team is full of filthy rich players not missing anything in their life, who refuse to wear an armband to avoid potential yellow card.

Other team refuses to sing the anthem to protest a dictatorship, even though they know they or their families can get killed at any time if they come back home.

 

So what would be acceptable to you? Bringing the issue to the headlines obviously isn't enough. Would coming out for the anthems with the armband and then immediately take it be enough? Or do they need to get a caution before taking it off? Or get someone sent off? Or go the whole way and forfeit the game? At what point have they done enough???

The "take a caution and go on" thing that has been mentioned in the papers isn't an option.
If Kane (or anyone else) steps onto the pitch with a piece of clothing that the referee deems not acceptable then he'll get told to leave the pitch to correct it. The game won't start/re-start until he has left the pitch and if he refuses then it's a caution (and the game still won't re-start). And he won't be allowed back until the issue is corrected, trying to do so is another caution. And then the team needs to decide on an alternate Captain and the issue starts over from step 1.

So again, at what point have they done enough?

 

The Iranian players protest might in the long run be a lot more dangerous to them (and their relatives) but there is nothing in it that will be an issue during the tournament. It isn't a breach of the LotG or the competition regulations so they are free to do it as long as they want without FIFA interfering in any way.

[GunmaN1905]

Just now, Mr Wallin said:

So what would be acceptable to you? Bringing the issue to the headlines obviously isn't enough. Would coming out for the anthems with the armband and then immediately take it be enough? Or do they need to get a caution before taking it off? Or get someone sent off? Or go the whole way and forfeit the game? At what point have they done enough???

You said you're going to wear the armband, you wear the armband.

That's about it.

If they send someone off or worse, the entire World Cup becomes a farce and invalid.

And you just might make somee more teams do it.

But wait...England is actually good and they care about the result more than equality.

End of discussion.

[m_fenton]

It's stupid to turn on the teams/captains over this - if you're doing so you're doing exactly what FIFA want you to do.

The scumbags here are the Qatari government and FIFA. The players are clear in what they want to do, but are being put in a crap position by those two.

[Ackter]

Well the Welsh wore rainbow stripes on their warm up kits, so that's a start.

Edited November 21, 2022 by Ackter

[ShirazS]

28 minutes ago, m_fenton said:

It's stupid to turn on the teams/captains over this - if you're doing so you're doing exactly what FIFA want you to do.

The scumbags here are the Qatari government and FIFA. The players are clear in what they want to do, but are being put in a crap position by those two.

I don't think it needs to be only one of them that have done things wrong.

FIFA shouldn't have tried to stop them from wearing the armbands but also the teams should not have backtracked at the first sign of more substantial consequences. The whole point of a protest is to have courage and do the difficult thing in spite of the consequences. If anything, doing it after the threat of "sporting sanctions" would make the action so much more significant.

[m_fenton]

4 minutes ago, ShirazS said:

I don't think it needs to be only one of them that have done things wrong.

FIFA shouldn't have tried to stop them from wearing the armbands but also the teams should not have backtracked at the first sign of more substantial consequences. The whole point of a protest is to have courage and do the difficult thing in spite of the consequences. If anything, doing it after the threat of "sporting sanctions" would make the action so much more significant.

Does it have to be a completely black and white issue? If so they should have boycotted the whole thing.

If we accept that they wanted to show a symbol while continuing to compete, then it's clear that there's a line to be drawn somewhere. For them the line is drawn at the point where it affects on field performance, which seems fair enough to me. Otherwise you've just gone full circle, and are effectively saying they need to boycott it.

[Wolf_pd]

21 minutes ago, Ackter said:

Well the Welsh wore rainbow stripes on their warm up kits, so that's a start.

Such a simple solution to annoy FIFA and Qatar. Please let other teams take notice and copy.

[Constantine]

Yes, it was a different time but Socrates risked his life protesting against military rule in Brazil. And surprise, surprise, it took among his peers and caused **** to change. This sorry bunch won't even risk a bloody yellow card for their "convictions"...

[ShirazS]

7 minutes ago, m_fenton said:

Does it have to be a completely black and white issue? If so they should have boycotted the whole thing.

If we accept that they wanted to show a symbol while continuing to compete, then it's clear that there's a line to be drawn somewhere. For them the line is drawn at the point where it affects on field performance, which seems fair enough to me. Otherwise you've just gone full circle, and are effectively saying they need to boycott it.

I do think teams should have boycotted if they genuinely wanted to bring about change.

I totally understand drawing a line somewhere and it is logical but it's disappointing that any risk to a football match result is more important than showing a small symbol to support inclusion. I really do think that if the captains of all the 7 teams did it anyway, FIFA would have caved so it probably would not have affected on field performance.

[PMLF]

9 minutes ago, Constantine said:

Yes, it was a different time but Socrates risked his life protesting against military rule in Brazil

While at the same time supporting the Cuban dictatorship though.

[Constantine]

21 minutes ago, PMLF said:

While at the same time supporting the Cuban dictatorship though.

Didn't say he was perfect... You know it better than me for sure, did he actually support the regime? From what I remember, he liked revolutionary figures, Che and Castro among others.

 

Tifo painted a flattering picture of Socrates in their video on the man

https://youtu.be/_NLME8esE9w

 

Edited November 21, 2022 by Constantine

[ShirazS]

20 minutes ago, PMLF said:

While at the same time supporting the Cuban dictatorship though.

Not sure if it's the same but I know many South African anti-apartheid activists were very close to Cuba and Castro as well. It had a lot to do with Cuba being one of the few countries that supported and helped them fight the South African government.

[Confused Clarity]

Laura Mcallister had problems tonight trying to get in with a Rainbiw bucket hat 

 

 

[decapitated]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/england-world-cup-armband-grealish-28551123

 

Quote

England star Jack Grealish has hit out at the "stupid" decision by FIFA to threaten nine countries into abandoning their support for the One Love armband.

The One Love campaign was being used as an attempt to show support for the LGBT+ community, who are persecuted by World Cup hosts Qatar. Mirror Football revealed last week how LGBT+ people have been arrested, beaten unconscious and forced into conversion therapy by security forces in the country.

Three Lions skipper Harry Kane had been set to be one of the captains to wear the armband, but that gesture was abandoned when FIFA confirmed players would be shown a yellow card if they did so. The FA joined the other associations in climbing down from their support of the LGBT+ community as a result.

In a joint statement, they insisted they could not risk their players suffering sporting sanctions. They had been prepared to pay fines and wrote to FIFA in September informing them the One Love armband would be worn.

FIFA only responded to that request on Sunday when they confirmed captains would be booked for doing so. Grealish has clearly been left frustrated by the move, which has also been widely condemned by many pundits.

The Manchester City star scored England's final goal in their win over Iran on Monday. And following the game he slammed the decision to prevent Kane and the other captains wearing the One Love armband.

"Obviously we wanted to wear it. I think it's a bit stupid why we couldn't. Harry himself wanted to wear it, we all wanted Harry to wear it but sometimes in life and in football things are out of your control and there's not much you can do about it," he told ITV Sport.

"I'll be honest with you, I actually haven't been in no meetings or anything about it. But from my point of view and everybody else's in there, we all wanted Harry to wear it but I read before that he might get booked so there's stuff out of your control.

"But from me and all the lads we wanted Harry to wear it. We feel strongly about it, we're with them [LGBT+ fans], we wish they were here with us. All I can say is we wanted to wear it, we feel the same way they do."

England supporters group Three Lions Pride and Wales' Rainbow Wall also released a joint statement blasting FIFA. "All of us at 3 Lions Pride and The Rainbow Wall stand together in condemning the actions of FIFA today," the statement read.

"In seeking to censor European FA's and players by forcing them to abandon using the ‘OneLove’ Armband aimed at tackling all forms of discrimination, FIFA are guilty of crushing the basic human rights to freedom of speech and of expression that every single one of us should have without question.

"In doing so, FIFA are also guilty of silencing anti-discrimination work within the game and of giving a platform to hatred. This abuse of power by those who have chosen to remain silent for so long is a gross betrayal of trust and cannot be allowed to stand. We have no faith in FIFA, no trust in this World Cup, there is No Pride Without All."

Grealish's reaction to FIFA's actions came as Wales fans entering the stadium for their side's clash with the United States had Rainbow bucket hats confiscated. A journalist was also detained by security guards at the Wales came when he tried to enter wearing a shirt with a rainbow football on it.

 

 

[Barnzy]

Apparently the rainbow is a banned symbol in stadiums, couldn’t make it up could you 

[SteveUK]

Do they fire missiles at the sky when rainbows appear over there?

[Ackter]

Just now, SteveUK said:

Do they fire missiles at the sky when rainbows appear over there?

It doesn't rain, there aren't any.

[Heartwork]

 

[Ackter]

Good.

Hopefully Qatar dont arrest and kill her.

Not even a joke.

[PMLF]

A Brazilian journalist carrying the flag of the state of Pernambuco was attacked (according to his own words) by Qatari authorities because they allegedly thought that was a LGBT flag. 

I suppose they didn’t like the cross in the flag either.

[HopOnBaby]

2 hours ago, Heartwork said:

 

Did she say where she got it from? Can't imagine they were widely available, so wouldn't be surprised if she had a word with/was approached by the England kit man.

[Coulthard's Jaw]

 

[Andrew_]

15 minutes ago, Analog said:

 

Just so I'm not totally clueless, the Germany gesture signifies they can't speak the truth, right?  And so that's what that other guy's tweet was in response to, "when you don't focus on football"? 

 

[Ackter]

The people using the defeat to score points against their message are the lowest of the low.

[outlander]

4 hours ago, Ackter said:

The people using the defeat to score points against their message are the lowest of the low.

Who are those people? It always amazes me, why do people even have such friends and speak to them to hear such opinions?

 

[Ackter]

You don't know how social media works do you?

[outlander]

1 hour ago, Ackter said:

You don't know how social media works do you?

I almost never use social media but whenever I used Facebook and Instagram, I see the posts from friends and may be a few other related posts where my friends commented etc. And then I am part of some what's app groups but again, there are just friends there. So, I didn't see anyone linking Germany loss and the good message before the match.

So, that is exactly why I asked those questions. You need to have "friends" with such views to see those comments. Or does the social media work any other way?

 

Edited November 24, 2022 by outlander

[VamPook]

2 hours ago, outlander said:

Who are those people? It always amazes me, why do people even have such friends and speak to them to hear such opinions?

I know quite a few

They feel it's hypocritical of western countries to talk about human rights when they themselves are one of the biggest abusers

[Heartwork]

GMB bringing out a man who famously disowned his own gay brother to defend Qatar.

[HopOnBaby]

37 minutes ago, outlander said:

I almost never use social media but whenever I used Facebook and Instagram, I see the posts from friends and may be a few other related posts where my friends commented etc. And then I am part of some what's app groups but again, there are just friends there. So, I didn't see anyone linking Germany loss and the good message before the match.

So, that is exactly why I asked those questions. You need to have "friends" with such views to see those comments. Or does the social media work any other way?

Seems like you don't use Twitter, but you get served up trending topics that can give views that you wouldn't see otherwise. Also, friends seeing such views and sharing them to show their disgust/disbelief.

[decapitated]

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/nov/24/england-feared-unlimited-liability-on-captains-in-dropping-armband-protest?

 

Quote

England, Wales and five other European nations feared their captains would be exposed to “unlimited liability” and would have faced suspensions if they had defied Fifa’s banning of the pro-diversity OneLove armband during the World Cup.

Despite facing criticism for backing down after coming under pressure from Fifa, the English Football Association’s options were limited by concerns that the sporting sanctions for Harry Kane could have been worse than an instant booking if the captain had worn the armband against Iran. There were also fears that Gareth Southgate’s side could have been prevented from entering the field.

The FA’s worries were shared by the other six countries involved in the OneLove campaign after talks with world football’s governing body, with those close to the process left with the impression that “Fifa could do anything” to any captain who wore the armband in Qatar.

The German federation has described Fifa’s behaviour as “extreme blackmail” and sources have indicated there was no clarity over whether the captains would merely receive a caution.

England, Wales, Belgium, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark feared their captains could be banned. It was unclear whether any suspension would be limited to one match. None of the countries were prepared to put their players in that position. A source said that the captains would have risked “unlimited liability” if they had defied Fifa’s warnings.

Separately the FA was concerned that England’s game against Iran would not have started if Kane had tried to leave the dressing room with the armband. The FA is exploring if it will be legally possible to challenge the threat of sporting sanctions, and there has been fury within the seven associations about Fifa’s behaviour.

Suggestions that Kane could have created an iconic moment by walking on to the pitch with the armband and receiving an instant booking are misplaced. The yellow card would have been shown in the dressing room, stripping away any potential symbolism.

Southgate, speaking before Friday’s game against the USA, was asked about the threat of sanctions for Kane. “I don’t know all the ins and outs because I wasn’t in the meeting but there was definitely a feel there were sanctions and not all of those were really clear, I think, so the decision was taken out of the hands of Harry,” England’s head coach said.

“The decision from the organisation was: ‘We’re not even putting the armband in the dressing room.’ There is no discussion. The player had no say.”

 

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

41 minutes ago, decapitated said:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/nov/24/england-feared-unlimited-liability-on-captains-in-dropping-armband-protest?

I call bollocks on virtually all of that. If FIFA were truly going to do any such a thing, then the FAs all should have joined forces and called FIFA's bluff by holding all their players back until the armband was allowed. Would FIFA have the bottle to deal with 7 sides refusing to take the field and award them all 3-0 forfeit defeats?

Strength comes from collective numbers, it's why trade unions work, and if the FAs or players united in a stance, they would force FIFA's hand, but they won't do it because it's a little bit difficult. They'd rather take the easy out and say "oh well, we tried and that's that now, just get on with the football" it's spinless behaviour no matter who it's pinned on.

[Ackter]

They probably only enforced it when they realised it completely compromised the first booking betting market.

[Heartwork]

Fully expect him to end his career in Qatar or Saudi Arabia for the big pay day.

[Mahzun_Savas]

Completely idiotic comment. That gesture had absolutely nothing to do with the result of the game and Germany definitely played to win. You can do than one thing at a football tournament.

[Rafalution]

19 hours ago, Obi-Wan Kenobi said:

I call bollocks on virtually all of that. If FIFA were truly going to do any such a thing, then the FAs all should have joined forces and called FIFA's bluff by holding all their players back until the armband was allowed. Would FIFA have the bottle to deal with 7 sides refusing to take the field and award them all 3-0 forfeit defeats?

They don't need to, they do it to the first one and that would be enough for the other 6 to not wear the armband. 

[Ackter]

I may have imagined this as I'm existing on minimal sleep these days, but I swear I saw an article about Harry Kane defying FIFA by wearing a £500k watch that had a rainbow dial on it.