Taking the knee

[FenwayFrank 2,457]

Seen it

[JF 694]

What a strange precedent to set. Irrelevant of your opinions and feelings about booing this, the supporter in question hasn’t broken any laws. I wonder on what grounds they held the right to eject him? 

Edited December 10, 2020 by JF

[Thirsty Lizard 3,155]

Norwich City are a private club. They can decide who they do or don't admit to the ground. 

Great to see them sending this racist gob sh*te packing. 

[Coneys Knee 941]

3 minutes ago, JF said:

What a strange precedent to set. Irrelevant on your opinions and feelings about booing this, the supporter in question hasn’t broken any laws. I wonder on what grounds they held the right to eject him? 

Exactly, yes it was distasteful but it’s a sorry state of affairs when it seems we are being brainwashed to all have to comply. 
 

as said no laws were broken. 

[Naturalcynic 629]

1 minute ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

Norwich City are a private club. They can decide who they do or don't admit to the ground. 

Great to see them sending this racist gob sh*te packing. 

You know who it was, I take it, to be able to state that he or she is a racist?

[JF 694]

30 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

Norwich City are a private club. They can decide who they do or don't admit to the ground. 

Great to see them sending this racist gob sh*te packing. 

I eagerly await the 9000 ejections once full crowd capacity is back for the use of foul, abusive and aggressive language in a public place and where children are present at the next home game then. Where actual laws would have been broken.

Edited December 10, 2020 by JF

[chicken 2,604]

2 hours ago, ELYOUKAYEE said:

She is known as the "Leader of BLM in Oxford" and the "Leader of Take the Initiative Party". Her name is Sasha Johnson, you can find plenty of video footage on YouTube

The double standard you outline in your first paragraph is extraordinary! So it's ok to Racially Abuse someone now if you're being 'bullied'.. Bullying is subjective at the best of times so I'd love to know how you'd enforce that. No one can honestly watch that video and truthfully suggest that she is being bullied, she is quite clearly BEING the bully.

"All of the things you address are issues and issues that need addressing. But you assume wrong and if you keep doing so this discourse will end with me being involved." 

Is this some kind of message board intimidation.. 😂 I've really sh it now Chicken is involved! 

The reason people are wound up by what I said is because it's the truth and the truth hurts. You all want to help BAME communities.. time you sacrificed your own wealth to do this. As I said before Put Up or Shut Up.

Yup, figured you would say that.

You focus on the slant I left for you to fall into. You understood the overall picture I was painting. I was simply painting the picture of how a situation without context doesn't provide all of the answers. But you would rather apply that to suggest I am sympathetic to her or supportive of her, yet in the same breath you suggest I have a poor knowledge of her - which I do. At the time of reading I had never heard of her, so the video you posted was the first example.

I do find it strange though, that you cannot separate the movement, which involves many people who are not part of the BLM group, many of whom would condone the type of actions and the tweet shared by someone else.

I also find it strange that people often confuse taking the knee with a lot of things it was not part of.

So for example, it originated in 2016 in sport as a way of expressing sorrow and solidarity with the families who had lost members to police brutality. They two American footballers consulted a US Green Beret veteran and he shared that is how some had done so in the past. It was meant to symbolise a flag at half mast. It had nothing to do with BLM at the time, it had nothing to do with an officer kneeling on anyone's neck as that didn't happen until George Floyd's death in June of this year. Yet all of these things are muddled in with it.

Despite the gesture spreading predominantly through sports in support of, and solidarity with Kaepernick who has not had a contract offer since.

Like I said, there is context, there are different things happening. The hippy movement wasn't all pushing and pulling in the same direction. It was born out of all sorts of different things. Sexual inequality, gender inequality (they are different), pacifism, more peaceful approaches to the resolution of conflict, better foreign policy, legalisation of drugs... 

BLM is no different, who voted Sasha Johnson the leader of that group? How big is that group? Do people in Manchester support BLM because of Sasha? Do they know who she is? Would they support her?

So far as I am concerned, if people are protesting peacefully I have no problem. It's what people died to enable people to do. Freedom of expression. If footballers want to continue taking the knee, so be it. Whether I agree or not, whether you agree or not. It should be respected, because next time it could be you protesting and I am sure you wouldn't want the same response.

Obvious typo is obvious:
 

"All of the things you address are issues and issues that need addressing. But you assume wrong and if you keep doing so this discourse will end with me not being involved." 

"Is this some kind of message board intimidation.. 😂 I've really sh it now Chicken is involved! "

I do find it interesting that this thread has seen your posting regularity leap up somewhat. Must be a very invoking subject for you? 

[Midlands Yellow 3,944]

Did Jools have a ticket for last nights match? 

[ELYOUKAYEE 37]

1 hour ago, chicken said:

Yup, figured you would say that.

You focus on the slant I left for you to fall into. You understood the overall picture I was painting. I was simply painting the picture of how a situation without context doesn't provide all of the answers. But you would rather apply that to suggest I am sympathetic to her or supportive of her, yet in the same breath you suggest I have a poor knowledge of her - which I do. At the time of reading I had never heard of her, so the video you posted was the first example.

I do find it strange though, that you cannot separate the movement, which involves many people who are not part of the BLM group, many of whom would condone the type of actions and the tweet shared by someone else.

I also find it strange that people often confuse taking the knee with a lot of things it was not part of.

So for example, it originated in 2016 in sport as a way of expressing sorrow and solidarity with the families who had lost members to police brutality. They two American footballers consulted a US Green Beret veteran and he shared that is how some had done so in the past. It was meant to symbolise a flag at half mast. It had nothing to do with BLM at the time, it had nothing to do with an officer kneeling on anyone's neck as that didn't happen until George Floyd's death in June of this year. Yet all of these things are muddled in with it.

Despite the gesture spreading predominantly through sports in support of, and solidarity with Kaepernick who has not had a contract offer since.

Like I said, there is context, there are different things happening. The hippy movement wasn't all pushing and pulling in the same direction. It was born out of all sorts of different things. Sexual inequality, gender inequality (they are different), pacifism, more peaceful approaches to the resolution of conflict, better foreign policy, legalisation of drugs... 

BLM is no different, who voted Sasha Johnson the leader of that group? How big is that group? Do people in Manchester support BLM because of Sasha? Do they know who she is? Would they support her?

So far as I am concerned, if people are protesting peacefully I have no problem. It's what people died to enable people to do. Freedom of expression. If footballers want to continue taking the knee, so be it. Whether I agree or not, whether you agree or not. It should be respected, because next time it could be you protesting and I am sure you wouldn't want the same response.

Obvious typo is obvious:
 

"All of the things you address are issues and issues that need addressing. But you assume wrong and if you keep doing so this discourse will end with me not being involved." 

"Is this some kind of message board intimidation.. 😂 I've really sh it now Chicken is involved! "

I do find it interesting that this thread has seen your posting regularity leap up somewhat. Must be a very invoking subject for you? 

To be fair, I understand your point that the actions of one person do not represent the views and actions of a whole group.. I think it's very reasonable to consider however, that there are more people within that organisation that hold those views.

To summarise my point of view on the whole topic;

- Considering certain actions the group have carried out this year (Vandalism of War Memorials, spitting in Policeman's faces, etc.) I feel that whilst the players can take the knee if they wish, fans should rightly be allowed to boo this act, seeing it as a show of support for some unsavoury people committing unsavoury acts. 

 

I'm gonna leave it at that, as this thread needs to be resigned to the Non-Football forum for the sake of everyone else on here! 😂

[Leeboy 3]

1 hour ago, JF said:

I eagerly await the 9000 ejections once full crowd capacity is back for the use of foul, abusive and aggressive language in a public place and where children are present at the next home game then. Where actual laws would have been broken.

Me too. It won’t happen of course. Always easier to reprimand a handful of people in the name of ‘standards’ but try to expand that philosophy to a larger group and you’ll need a few more stewards! Everyone in a rush to show how virtuous they are irrespective of the ‘crime’. 

[canarydan23 4,060]

39 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Did Jools have a ticket for last nights match? 

He would've been too scared. Not as brave without his keyboard. 

[Leeboy 3]

1 hour ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

Norwich City are a private club. They can decide who they do or don't admit to the ground. 

Great to see them sending this racist gob sh*te packing. 

Guessing at this individuals thoughts on race is like me suggesting you’re a woke leftie. Not on really. Let’s hope you don’t step out of line at a game with an unfortunate swear word or shout at the ref. You could be next! And what would you be labelled? A foul mouthed thug? See, it’s too easy to make unfounded assumptions. 

[Petriix 2,834]

I sincerely hope that any so called Norwich fan who boos players taking the knee is ejected and banned. We are a respectable club and don't need that kind of 'support'. It's not suppressing free speech, it's making a clear statement that we do not allow racist abuse in the stands. Whatever swing you attempt to put on it, booing a gesture of racial equality *is* racist.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

1 hour ago, Coneys Knee said:

Exactly, yes it was distasteful but it’s a sorry state of affairs when it seems we are being brainwashed to all have to comply. 
 

as said no laws were broken. 

No one was forcing this fan to comply with anything. They could simply have stayed silent, as opposed to what they did, which was to make an active verbal protest against.

[chicken 2,604]

7 minutes ago, ELYOUKAYEE said:

To be fair, I understand your point that the actions of one person do not represent the views and actions of a whole group.. I think it's very reasonable to consider however, that there are more people within that organisation that hold those views.

To summarise my point of view on the whole topic;

- Considering certain actions the group have carried out this year (Vandalism of War Memorials, spitting in Policeman's faces, etc.) I feel that whilst the players can take the knee if they wish, fans should rightly be allowed to boo this act, seeing it as a show of support for some unsavoury people committing unsavoury acts. 

 

I'm gonna leave it at that, as this thread needs to be resigned to the Non-Football forum for the sake of everyone else on here! 😂

It may be reasonable to consider, but it isn't reasonable to extrapolate that to the entire movement.

For example in the US 90%+ of the protests went without incident. Those that did typically had aggressive responses either from the Police or from far right groups, or, like Umbrella Man, had far right protagonists deliberately instigating the damage to property and looting.

It's not really any different to any other movement in that sense. I took part in marches in London against top up to tuition fees in the early 2000's. The overwhelming majority were peaceful and did what we set out to do.

Towards halfway, a bunch of kids, clearly no older than 16 tagged along. They weren't at the start of the march, they didn't have any placards handed out. But they tagged along. No one had any issue, they were old enough to be protesting about the possibility of tuition fees they might face in the next few years. They did interact a little with the actual protest, but minimally. Then, closer to Trafalgar Square where the march ended, they started to become vocal. They were not saying anything in support of the march, they were swearing and throwing insults at people who had stopped to watch the march, with particular intensity and animosity reserved towards the police. In the end other students and I told them to 'go away' or behave. Though I am sure we may have worded it a bit stronger than that. The police had seen what they were doing and didn't want to strong arm youths in the midst of an otherwise incredibly peaceful protest.

They left us in the end when it was clear they weren't welcome.

So yes, you can assume there is more, but what you cannot assume that they are the core, or the majority or even something coming close to a strong force within a movement which is made up of a hodge podge of peoples from around the globe. Some will join it to take advantage of it's support. Some may well even be narcissists looking for their 15mins of fame.

But your suggestion is to boo the majority for the acts of the minority - which is very poor. Especially when it is something our sport supports, our club supports and our players support. If you really want to show opposition to it in a way that doesn't bring embarrassment on your club don't take to your seat until you hear them kick off.

[chicken 2,604]

2 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

No one was forcing this fan to comply with anything. They could simply have stayed silent, as opposed to what they did, which was to make an active verbal protest against.

This.

One league chairman has already said any fan that boo's is not welcome at their club.

[alex_ncfc 648]

7 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

No one was forcing this fan to comply with anything. They could simply have stayed silent, as opposed to what they did, which was to make an active verbal protest against.

Which they are entitled to do, without automatically being tarnished as a racist just because all the do-gooders at the ground and on here say so.

[corbs 147]

‘taking the knee’ as we know it in 2020 did derive from George Floyd’s death  - I can’t breathe. The history obviously pre dates this, 1996, 2016 etc

[chicken 2,604]

1 hour ago, corbs said:

‘taking the knee’ as we know it in 2020 did derive from George Floyd’s death  - I can’t breathe. The history obviously pre dates this, 1996, 2016 etc

No. It didn't. It was taken up by more people internationally outside of the USA because of his death but it didn't "derive" from George Floyd. Hence the history does predate it.

The knee was taken originally by two American Footballers for the same reason, for police brutality. To suggest that it doesn't derive from that is a really poor show. It's been going on since in the US with some players and even entire teams. It became more and more relevant the more people were killed. The more people tried to undermine it and arguing the police were within their rights. It didn't derive, it grew. But that's the point. Same issue, different movement. Worth noting that some premier league teams even see it that way. 

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/12070564/premier-league-players-continue-to-take-a-knee-on-2020-21-opening-day

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

On 09/12/2020 at 14:14, ELYOUKAYEE said:

The biggest driving factor of Racism in this country is HUGE wealth inequality, driven by political polices of the last 40+ years introduced mainly by the Conservative Party and a "Basketcase" Labour Party under Tony Blair.

All these Middle Class, Middle-Aged people supporting this, think that a simple "Gesture" at the beginning of a football game is gonna solve it, when actually they're gonna have to pay more taxes, have the 1 'buy to let' instead of 2 and redistribute the wealth.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

What are you gibbering on about? Rantings of a madman. 

Taxes will rise, but not to be dished out to black people... But to pay for the covid bill and attempt to stimulate our post-Brexit economy. 

Edited December 11, 2020 by TeemuVanBasten

[Naturalcynic 629]

7 hours ago, chicken said:

No. It didn't. It was taken up by more people internationally outside of the USA because of his death but it didn't "derive" from George Floyd. Hence the history does predate it.

The knee was taken originally by two American Footballers for the same reason, for police brutality. To suggest that it doesn't derive from that is a really poor show. It's been going on since in the US with some players and even entire teams. It became more and more relevant the more people were killed. The more people tried to undermine it and arguing the police were within their rights. It didn't derive, it grew. But that's the point. Same issue, different movement. Worth noting that some premier league teams even see it that way. 

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/12070564/premier-league-players-continue-to-take-a-knee-on-2020-21-opening-day

 

It may not have started with BLM but it is now inextricably linked with them and that has been reinforced by the Premier League and Sky Sports emblazoning that logo on everything.  Regardless of the shrill  proselytising by some on here, a lot of people have deep misgivings about that that particular organisation.  They wholeheartedly wish that football would step back from politicising itself and stick with it’s own very successful, apolitical and highly respected “Kick it out” campaign.

 

(Sorry, no matter how much I try to edit this post, I can’t get rid of the duplicate image).

 

Edited December 11, 2020 by Naturalcynic

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

9 hours ago, alex_ncfc said:

Which they are entitled to do, without automatically being tarnished as a racist just because all the do-gooders at the ground and on here say so.

I didn't say they were not. I didn't get into that. I was making a different point.

[king canary 7,580]

I'm pro taking the knee and generally think the criticism of the gesture is vastly overblown but I'm also very uncomfortable with someone being kicked out for booing it. That is an obvious example of a potentially slippery slope. 

[king canary 7,580]

5 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

What are you gibbering on about? Rantings of a madman. 

Taxes will rise, but not to be dished out to black people... But to pay for the covid bill and attempt to stimulate our post-Brexit economy. 

While I don't agree with much of what he's posted, I think @ELYOUKAYEE is pointing out that lots of middle class white folks are happy to make gestures that cost them nothing (taking the knee, going on a BLM process) but much less willing to do the key things that would help to tackle inequality that would involve them actually making a real sacrifice (ie much higher top rate taxes, wealth redistribution etc). 

You're of course right than in reality any upcoming tax rises are going to be funding covid deficits though.

[Haus 259]

2 minutes ago, king canary said:

While I don't agree with much of what he's posted, I think @ELYOUKAYEE is pointing out that lots of middle class white folks are happy to make gestures that cost them nothing (taking the knee, going on a BLM process) but much less willing to do the key things that would help to tackle inequality that would involve them actually making a real sacrifice (ie much higher top rate taxes, wealth redistribution etc). 

You're of course right than in reality any upcoming tax rises are going to be funding covid deficits though.

I'd be much happier with tax on massive corporations that dont pay their fair share at the moment. 

[king canary 7,580]

2 minutes ago, Haus said:

I'd be much happier with tax on massive corporations that dont pay their fair share at the moment. 

Yep but it also applies to them too.

Large corporates will happily declare support for BLM, drape themselves in the rainbow flag at pride etc etc, as its easy and costs them nothing. However ask them to pay more taxes or pay their lowest paid employees more (things that may actually help the most disadvantaged in society) and they'll do everything they can to avoid it. 

[The Real Buh 3,423]

Stop the cringe

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

37 minutes ago, Haus said:

I'd be much happier with tax on massive corporations that dont pay their fair share at the moment. 

Exactly.

What I find baffling is that people readily and correctly criticise the likes of Amazon, Starbucks, etc., but then never take a logical step further and stop buying from them instead. I haven't touched anything from those companies for years.

[king canary 7,580]

2 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Exactly.

What I find baffling is that people readily and correctly criticise the likes of Amazon, Starbucks, etc., but then never take a logical step further and stop buying from them instead. I haven't touched anything from those companies for years.

I'll admit I've failed to wean myself off Amazon but I am trying- using bookshop.com for books for example.

[paul moy 235]

On 07/12/2020 at 16:20, lake district canary said:

Err.....who is forcing it?  It has been agreed by players and clubs as a whole. If they want to stop it, then they have to decide collectively that it can stop. It still means something and people know what it means, but it does no harm to anyone so there is no reason to boo it or try and undermine it. 

Those that booed are the ones with the agenda, not the collective support shown by players and clubs for something very important in the world - that inequality and racism are not going to be tolerated. Those that disagree with that, whether they are from Millwall or Spurs or wherever, are the ones with the problem and should be shown the door of their clubs and banned for good.

 

Those that booed are against a ritual that supports an extremist political party.