Booing the knee *Mod Note in Post 1232 and OP*

Omackeral

Tell me how wrote: »

Forgive me for assuming as much when your solution to the issue was to go in with hard tackles and to rake studs down the back of someone's leg.

You're right, it was definitely me twisting your words.

I gave a scenario relating to if I personally heard a team-mate being racially abused on the pitch. Never said anything else. Where did I say it doesn't happen in the stands? I didn't. So yes, you most definitely did assume and assumed wrongly. Not great for credibility.

Ahwell

jackboy wrote: »

I’d be fairly confident in almost all cases all the players are being pressurised. If they were free to choose some would kneel and some wouldn’t. A sports team is not a democracy, it is a dictatorship, and that should not be extended to the players political opinions.

The PFA did poll the players before the start of last season. 80% were in favour of continuing to take the knee even if it resulted in adverse responses. I assume there will be another poll at the start of next season. In some Permiership stadiums you can say with some degree of certainty that taking the knee will be applauded (by the home support), in other stadiums it's likely there will be some booing. Is that going to be enough to stop the players? At a guess, I think the gesture will change to something else.

A lot will depend on what happens during the Euros. If the English is perceived to be having a good tournament I suspect the applause during the taking of the knee will drown out the booing to such an extent that it will become a non issue. If England do badly the booing will get worse.

Billy Mays

Faugheen wrote: »

But you never, ever call out the extremism from posters who share your view about kneeling or BLM. I never once said that you are the one who holds the extremism.

You are always there to argue with anyone who believes that those who have such an issue with this have racist tendencies, but you don't say anything about those who say that kneeling supports a terrorist grouping.

I support the footballers kneeling and if I was on the pitch with them I would kneel too. Does that mean I support a terrorist organisation and am therefore a terrorist sympathiser?

If you say no, then I would expect you to put your balanced hat on and call out that provocative nonsense for what it is. However, you don't. You are more than happy for people you disagree with being called supporters of terrorism and communism and Marxism etc etc and but you make it your mission to speak up if the word racist is thrown at anybody.

That's why its hard to take anything you say seriously. You will fight and fight against people being called racists but if that same person calls someone you disagree with a supporter of terrorism or communism then you are nowhere to be found.

That's not a balanced view. That is taking sides. Either provocative language (from either side) is ok or it's not. You can't have it both ways.

Fr D Maugire

Tell me how wrote: »

Already answered.



In relation to this point.



Some of it is outright discomfort at being told to respect black footballers but I suspect these are small numbers of people in most stadiums.
I think much more is down to people equating the booing with another campaign that they see as PC motivated, or virtue signaling or whatever brand of attention seeking they want to put on it and so they react against that.

But I don't think it is true to say that it isn't clicking with a lot of people, I think it doesn't take many people to make a significant noise when booing as all other people are being silent. In fact, in a 50K seater stadium, I reckon if 5,000 were booing and 45,000 staying silent it would sound like a lot but it's still only 10% of people doing so.

In a previous post, you suggested that booing was actually necessary because it raised the possibility of something being done if it led to division. This would suggest that the last year has been a waste of time as only getting a reaction will move the conversation on. Is booing actually a good thing in the long run? Was this the long-term aim or is this something that has been plucked from the air?

A part of the resistance to the whole kneeling thing will be down to the fact that people have been hearing about the issue of racism for so long, they are fed up with it, especially when it devolves into the 'white guilt' type of nonsense that exists.

There is also a perception among people that the race card is overplayed which serves to undermine actual genuine racism. I would say some feel that the racism angle is also given so much attention, that any other forms of abuse that effects other people like bullying have been simply pushed aside and it is only issues that affect minorities that truly matter. That will always create a certain amount of push back when the majority of people feel left out and waving it away as minorities get it worse will not fly with a lot of people.

Out of curiosity have you ever seen any of your friends play the race card?

What are the actual goals of the kneelers? What is the concretely quantifiable point at which the goals will be met and the kneeling will stop?

Quantum Erasure

Deleted User wrote: »

What are the actual goals of the kneelers? What is the concretely quantifiable point at which the goals will be met and the kneeling will stop?

The kneelings will continue until morality improves

~Rebel~

Find some of the deflection away from the basic core purpose of the kneeling - as an anti-racist gesture - really interesting.

Back when Kaepernick did it first, it was not connected to anything at all beyond his own views, and STILL he was told “that’s not the right way to protest”.

Once it became successful as an anti-racist symbol, of course anti-racist groups would use it - and now we get the story that it's tainted, with some especially overzealous people going so far as to compare it to swastikas and goose stepping!

The reality is, if any symbol or act - regardless what these players may have chosen day one - were to ever become impactful, it will of course be used by anti-racist groups, thus giving some folks their license to denigrate everything to do with it once they have their tangential connection to draw.

So really, what people are saying is that anti-racist actions can only be taken as long as they’re not too successful with it.

Dr. Bre

Why aren’t people taking the knee in work or is this something our celebrities should do

Tell me how

tailorspy wrote: »

So while initially admitting that some of the "anti-kneeling" crowd are not racist, just tired of the hollow gestures and tokenism you then backtrack and say that they are using that as a shield for their deep-seated racism. Which brings us right back to the old "everybody that boos is a racist" position.

Didn't say that.
I said I suspect some are guilty of this. Who knows who? Each individual, that's it.

Are you telling me that no one falls in to this position because if not, then what I have said is true.

ArthurDayne

tailorspy wrote: »

So while initially admitting that some of the "anti-kneeling" crowd are not racist, just tired of the hollow gestures and tokenism you then backtrack and say that they are using that as a shield for their deep-seated racism. Which brings us right back to the old "everybody that boos is a racist" position.

It may, possibly, be correct that not all those who boo are invariably racist — but it’s much harder to envisage that they aren’t all at least somewhat weak-minded, boorish and unpleasant. Ultimately, it’s OK for someone to claim they aren’t racist, but they can hardly complain too heartily about the reasonable likelihood of the accusation arising when they are literally jeering at a black footballer taking part in an anti-racism gesture.

It is not irreconcilable or paradoxical to hold the view that there are perhaps some issues of tokenism, selectivism and social obligation in the whole ‘taking the knee’ — while also being capable to respect the more sincere elements / participants in it. You don’t have to actually boo and jeer someone just because you disagree with how they are going about something, especially when it’s clear it has deep meaning for at least some significant portion of people out there.

Wouldn’t it have been a better thing to simply hold up banners saying End Racism in Football or words to that effect, as if to show the world that they don’t need this particular taking the knee gesture to define their views in the eyes of Western Europeans? Was there not the requisite brain cell count among them to formulate a respectful way of expressing their supposedly more-nuanced-than-racist view? Instead ... they just booed like a pack of trolls and, whether they are racists or not, I feel very ill-equipped to deny that their behaviour creates a very reasonable suspicion.

is_that_so

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

The kneelings will continue until morality improves

So ad infinitum! At least it'll give fans a last chance to check their phones before the match starts!

nullzero

~Rebel~ wrote: »

So really, what people are saying is that anti-racist actions can only be taken as long as they’re not too successful with it.

If success is defined by how widespread taking the knee has become then it's a runaway success.

However, if you apply a more rigorous method of quantifying it's success, such as it's impact on the behaviour of fans of the sport then the success is less evident.

The fact that some people from all corners as identifying it as tokenism displays it's lack of effectiveness most clearly. Apart from becoming a part of the furniture of football it hasn't stopped the racist rhetoric directed at players which albeit coming from a tiny minority, still exists.

The take away would seem to be that the small pockets of individuals who engage in racist name calling will not be dissuaded from doing so by players taking the knee before kick off. Taking the knee may well keep the issue of tackling racism in the minds of spectators but anti racism campaigns have been in operation for decades already, and whilst all anti racism campaigns are worthwhile the existence of racism will not hinge on players taking the knee.

Put simply the eradication of racism amongst the small numbers of fans who still engage is racist behaviour is beyond the ability of taking the knee, that is why is has become a token gesture at this point.

The players taking the knee are effect preaching to the choir whilst those opposed are never going to be swayed by it.

KeepItLight

It just reeks of collective peer pressure, insincerity and attention-seeking.
I think most people see through it.

Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with it if it were for some other cause, like solidarity for some of the ethnic minorities being genocided by world powers, but I guess there is no advantage for the powers that be to draw attention to that.

NoLuckLarry

~Rebel~ wrote: »

So really, what people are saying is that anti-racist actions can only be taken as long as they’re not too successful with it.

Nobody is saying that at all. It’s essentially a nothing gesture - it doesn’t raise awareness, it doesn’t tackle the problem, it doesn’t do anything to make a genuine difference in groups that might experience racism. It’s overpaid athletes getting down on one knee and that’s it. Billy Bob Racist is not watching a player of the Irish team get down on one knee and saying to himself “well that’s ****in put me in my place now”. It does absolutely nothing to “end” racism, it’s a hollow self aggrandising bat signal and nothing more.

Surely these players could find a better focus, like putting money in to anti racism initiatives or ground level campaigns that actually make a difference.

archfi

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I would say it’s linked to the ethos of Black Lives Matter, the phrase. The vast majority of people don’t even particularly know what Black Lives Matter - the organisation - stand for beyond general anti-racism and anti-police brutality.

As a good quick test, if the word ‘Marxist’ comes to someone’s mind when they see the knee, that’s a fairly sure fire way of knowing they’re in the niche group getting told their opinions by the likes of Farage, and are also the people for whom any Black pushback will be seen negatively.

Tad disingenuous there - the relationship is BLM-->Marxist political aims-->'bending/taking the knee'
Whether you like it or not, that is the connotation of the gesture - in this instance, I don't believe the players are Marxists but by adopting the gesture others may conflate the whole lot with a Marxist political organisation - hence it is an incredibly stupid and ill-thought out gesture to adopt and couldn't be more wrong.

A helluva lot of people when signalling their virtue which I accept/hope the majority do with good intentions should really, really open the pretty box with the bow labelled with some sweet slogan and actually see what is inside the box. And that goes for most of this crud.

archfi

Tell me how wrote: »

So you'd be able to completely dismiss the experience of team mates who are being racially abused and just focus on winning the match.

You sound like you're writing a scene for Dream Team in the 90's

Well that's what England under Southgate did in Bulgaria in 2019 after initially taking the right stand - players off the pitch.
They left out the vital bit that most certainly would have changed things - refuse to go back on.

Retr0gamer

archfi wrote: »

Tad disingenuous there - the relationship is BLM-->Marxist political aims-->'bending/taking the knee'
Whether you like it or not, that is the connotation of the gesture - in this instance, I don't believe the players are Marxists but by adopting the gesture others may conflate the whole lot with a Marxist political organisation - hence it is an incredibly stupid and ill-thought out gesture to adopt and couldn't be more wrong.

A helluva lot of people when signalling their virtue which I accept/hope the majority do with good intentions should really, really open the pretty box with the bow labelled with some sweet slogan and actually see what is inside the box. And that goes for most of this crud.

And it's been explained multiple times that the connotation is ridiculous. And yet faced with the evidence this frankly stupid connotation is dragged out again and again because it's the only justification people have for disgustingly booing an anti racist gesture.

Tell me how

NoLuckLarry wrote: »

Nobody is saying that at all. It’s essentially a nothing gesture - it doesn’t raise awareness, it doesn’t tackle the problem, it doesn’t do anything to make a genuine difference in groups that might experience racism. It’s overpaid athletes getting down on one knee and that’s it. Billy Bob Racist is not watching a player of the Irish team get down on one knee and saying to himself “well that’s ****in put me in my place now”. It does absolutely nothing to “end” racism, it’s a hollow self aggrandising bat signal and nothing more.

Surely these players could find a better focus, like putting money in to anti racism initiatives or ground level campaigns that actually make a difference.

Seriously, this is either deliberately ignoring points that have been made, or you can't understand the basic premise.

• It has raised awareness because it is a topic across all sports media and some mainstream media. And there is a thread with nearly 2K posts in a couple days on here about it.
• No one is suggesting it, in and of itself is going to solve anything.
• The pay some players get is irrelevant given this is happening in games where some players are by no means well paid.
• Of course no racist is going to change after watching a player kneel. But the authorities are more likely to clamp down on said racist as a consequence of this awareness and then the fcuker will pay attention.
• You could, and many do, call every call for action as being a self-aggrandising bat signal, but throughout history, significant changes have come about because someone stood up with a sign or a loudspeaker. Or in this instance, took a knee.

Let's hope the next poster who'll be along like clockwork to say the same thing as you have just said might stop for a second and educate themselves before doing so.

extra gravy

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/euros-england-fans-taking-the-knee-b1863556.html

"There will be even more excitement than expected during the Euro football tournament, as some fans have promised to boo footballers “taking the knee” in support of Black Lives Matter, because the campaign is “Marxist”.

It’s lucky they’ve spotted this. It’s obvious, now they mention it, that when he’s on one knee, Harry Kane is thinking, “Hee-hee, secretly we’re doing this to promote the cause of the toiling masses overthrowing the ruling order in favour of a communal system of production.”

archfi

elvui wrote: »

There seems only one side providing concreate actions that need to be taken. The other is bend the knee.

edit

to be fair Tell me how, did come out with measures we all can agree on.

Banning, identifying etc racism in grounds is already in place for years, pre- useless gesture campaigns were responsible for that.
Not so much when we get to international competition where derisory fines are the usual crap with the odd ban on fans at games thrown in.
So, nothing new.

archfi

Tell me how wrote: »

So the people drawing attention to the racists are doing more harm than the racists?

Madness, 200 years ago, you'd have been blaming slaves for hurting their masters hand when he beat them.

Try this - the ones trying to draw attention to racism in this way are making a total balls of it.
No charge.

Tell me how

archfi wrote: »

Try this - the ones trying to draw attention to racism in this way are making a total balls of it.
No charge.

I disagree. They're making it an active conversation which is the purpose of drawing attention to anything.

PhlegmyMoses

nullzero wrote: »

However, if you apply a more rigorous method of quantifying it's success, such as it's impact on the behaviour of fans of the sport then the success is less evident.

What rigorous method is this? I am all ears for how you have gone about rigorously quantifying this.

Fr D Maugire

Tell me how wrote: »

I disagree. They're making it an active conversation which is the purpose of drawing attention to anything.

But the only reason this even became a topic here was because of the booing, not the actual gesture of kneeling despite it being ongoing for the last year.

You even said elsewhere that the booing will bring more attention as it will draw the attention of the authorities. So in the long run, booing is a plus according to your own logic, No?

Tell me how

Fr D Maugire wrote: »

But the only reason this even became a topic here was because of the booing, not the actual gesture of kneeling despite it being ongoing for the last year.

You even said elsewhere that the booing will bring more attention as it will draw the attention of the authorities. So in the long run, booing is a plus according to your own logic, No?

Right now yes, because of the conversation that has come about.

If there was no booing, that would be fine also because it would communicate the message that everyone was open to action by the authorities.

If the booing continues, and some players stop doing this and those that do are booed more loudly and the authorities don't do anything to address the issue, then the booing will be a bad thing because it will signify that there isn't interest in people not be targeted for something outside their control.

It's not a hard and fast rule that booing is good or bad forever.

Fr D Maugire

Tell me how wrote: »

Right now yes, because of the conversation that has come about.

If there was no booing, that would be fine also because it would communicate the message that everyone was open to action by the authorities.

If the booing continues, and some players stop doing this and those that do are booed more loudly and the authorities don't do anything to address the issue, then the booing will be a bad thing because it will signify that there isn't interest in people not be targeted for something outside their control.

It's not a hard and fast rule that booing is good or bad forever.

You seem quite confident that the authorities will do something. What is that based on?

Tell me how

Fr D Maugire wrote: »

You seem quite confident that the authorities will do something. What is that based on?

• Granting of voting rights.
• Womens rights.
• Desegregation legislation.
• Removal of homophobic laws.
• Approval for Same sex marriages.
• Access to abortion.

History has plenty examples of change coming about on the back of protests. I've repeatedly said here that these current protests are part of the process rather than the solution to fix all problems.

archfi

Retr0gamer wrote: »

And it's been explained multiple times that the connotation is ridiculous. And yet faced with the evidence this frankly stupid connotation is dragged out again and again because it's the only justification people have for disgustingly booing an anti racist gesture.

You appear to take great offence at people that simply do not accept your explanation.
You cannot say that that gesture is not associated with the BLM organisation whether you believe that it shouldn't.
It's simply not open to question.

archfi

Tell me how wrote: »

I disagree. They're making it an active conversation which is the purpose of drawing attention to anything.

But not about the actual racism or methods to reduce it/stop it.
Lots of divisive talk though.

jackboy

Tell me how wrote: »

• Granting of voting rights.
• Womens rights.
• Desegregation legislation.
• Removal of homophobic laws.
• Approval for Same sex marriages.
• Access to abortion.

History has plenty examples of change coming about on the back of protests. I've repeatedly said here that these current protests are part of the process rather than the solution to fix all problems.

Except taking the knee is not protest.