Christoph's decision

[Nuff Said 5,089]

5 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

Here we go yet again, round and round in ever-decreasing circles.  Some people consider taking a knee as being a symbol of support for the BLM movement and all that that entails, whereas others see it merely as a generic sign of opposition to racism.  For those that consider it to be the former, then if they don’t agree with the political aims of that organisation it would be perfectly reasonable not to be seen to give support to it.  Because it is so divisive, football has been naive and gullible to continue promoting it, particularly when it had its own ineffective and hence non-contentious anti-racism campaigns already in place.

Fixed that for you.

If Kick it Out was highly effective would we see the huge under-representation of BAME people in the managerial and organisational side of the game? Would we have heard the things Greg Clarke said recently? Or the booing at Millwall and elsewhere? I could go on. I think Kick it Out themselves would say there's an awful lot more to achieve.

(I heard and to an extent agree with arguments previously put on here about the lack of BAME coaching staff being for other reasons, but still maintain that much more needs to be done to change it. No need to rehash the same arguments, but if someone feels the need to, don't let me stop you)

[Naturalcynic 629]

14 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

Fixed that for you.

If Kick it Out was highly effective would we see the huge under-representation of BAME people in the managerial and organisational side of the game? Would we have heard the things Greg Clarke said recently? Or the booing at Millwall and elsewhere? I could go on. I think Kick it Out themselves would say there's an awful lot more to achieve.

(I heard and to an extent agree with arguments previously put on here about the lack of BAME coaching staff being for other reasons, but still maintain that much more needs to be done to change it. No need to rehash the same arguments, but if someone feels the need to, don't let me stop you)

Please don’t alter my quote. Others might inadvertently attribute your addition to me.

[Mr Angry 1,545]

If lefty liberals are woke, what are righty fascists? Asleep? Slept? Sleeping?

[Naturalcynic 629]

I think the latent outrage already hinted at by some on here shows just how wise it would be for Christoph to keep silent on this. 

[Badger 2,405]

1 hour ago, kirku said:

I do not presume he is racist but I also do not "applaud him" for being "a free thinking man" because I have no idea what his motivations are.

Exactly. We cannot praise or condemn his actions as we do not know thee motivation behind them. It could be that he has  fine and thought through position on this matter, or equally, he could have been duped by far right propaganda: we do not know.

He has maintained his right to be silent, which is his perfectly entitled to do. His stance is rather different to the Millwall fans booing "taking the knee" which was totally disrespectful of others' opinions and imo motivated by racism.

[Ray 111]

1 hour ago, kirku said:

There are 22+ other people kneeling on the same pitch, it very much is public opposition. We talk all the time, what would you make of someone talking during a minute's silence?

I do not presume he is racist but I also do not "applaud him" for being "a free thinking man" because I have no idea what his motivations are.

 

I take your point kirku, although for me dropping to one knee is the 'more' public stance as I would argue a minutes silence is also the 'more' public demonstration, as both are predetermined 'changes' of behaviour to make a point, that said I accept any action/non-action could be considered public, although we may be subjecting ourselves to a semantic discussion here.  For the record I was not suggesting you would presume he was a racist, far from it, simply that by remaining standing 'no-one' can presume he is a racist because as you say, we have no idea of his motivations.  That said, I do applaud anyone for being a free thinker rather than the opposite, which doesn't mean I would agree with their opinion, nor that I would consider any player who did take the knee a non-thinker, just that I would rather there were more free thinkers in the world prepared to 'stand up' (again scuse the pun) for their convictions, assuming they do not physically harm anyone in the process.

[KeiranShikari 1,410]

Always feel like I'm having a brain aneurysm whenever I read one of Connor Southwell's articles.

[kirku 1,332]

1 hour ago, Naturalcynic said:

Here we go yet again, round and round in ever-decreasing circles.  Some people consider taking a knee as being a symbol of support for the BLM movement and all that that entails, whereas others see it merely as a generic sign of opposition to racism.  For those that consider it to be the former, then if they don’t agree with the political aims of that organisation it would be perfectly reasonable not to be seen to give support to it.  Because it is so divisive, football has been naive and gullible to continue promoting it, particularly when it had its own highly successful and non-contentious anti-racism campaigns already in place.

You're filling the void with your own unsubstantiated views, as I predicted.

[kirku 1,332]

21 minutes ago, Ray said:

I take your point kirku, although for me dropping to one knee is the 'more' public stance as I would argue a minutes silence is also the 'more' public demonstration, as both are predetermined 'changes' of behaviour to make a point, that said I accept any action/non-action could be considered public, although we may be subjecting ourselves to a semantic discussion here.  For the record I was not suggesting you would presume he was a racist, far from it, simply that by remaining standing 'no-one' can presume he is a racist because as you say, we have no idea of his motivations.  That said, I do applaud anyone for being a free thinker rather than the opposite, which doesn't mean I would agree with their opinion, nor that I would consider any player who did take the knee a non-thinker, just that I would rather there were more free thinkers in the world prepared to 'stand up' (again scuse the pun) for their convictions, assuming they do not physically harm anyone in the process.

Agree to disagree on the first point but with you in the most part 👍

[Orly 277]

3 hours ago, kirku said:

Zimbo is publicly opposing an initiative to use football's platform to help support racial equality.

It is naive to think that this wouldn't be noticed and questioned and, the longer the silence goes on, the more the void will be filled with uninformed nonsense.

"not joining in" is not "publicly opposing".  That's an insane statement to make.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

https://quillette.com/2020/12/22/a-peculiar-kind-of-racist-patriarchy/?fbclid=IwAR1xk7XWf6iz7zhXO25Tcf-t6CCo9oAAKsDw1JaRb9cRA3Oov5ft2uG_LoE

[kirku 1,332]

7 minutes ago, Orly said:

"not joining in" is not "publicly opposing".  That's an insane statement to make.

How else would you describe the visual of one player not doing the same as 22+ other people on the pitch? Especially given that the entire initiative is about raising awareness with a symbolic gesture.

It's the same as James McClean and him choosing not to wear the poppy (except he's made his motivations quite clear).

[Naturalcynic 629]

58 minutes ago, kirku said:

You're filling the void with your own unsubstantiated views, as I predicted.

Transparent attempt at deflection.

[Naturalcynic 629]

13 minutes ago, kirku said:

How else would you describe the visual of one player not doing the same as 22+ other people on the pitch? Especially given that the entire initiative is about raising awareness with a symbolic gesture.

A symbolic gesture, yes, but in support of what?  A generic stance against racism, or support for the BLM movement and its associated political baggage?  Some see it as the former and some the latter.  

[Orly 277]

14 minutes ago, kirku said:

How else would you describe the visual of one player not doing the same as 22+ other people on the pitch? Especially given that the entire initiative is about raising awareness with a symbolic gesture.

It's the same as James McClean and him choosing not to wear the poppy (except he's made his motivations quite clear).

You're presenting a false dichotomy to a complex situation.    You seem like a perfectly reasonable person, so I'm surprised you view this (extremely complex and nuanced) issue as so black and white (no pun intended).

There aren't just "opposed" and "for" views, there are a myriad of shades of grey inbetween, and even extremes of both "for" and "opposed".

 

[Nuff Said 5,089]

11 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

Transparent attempt at deflection.

**** me! Is there a bigger culprit in this thread than you at deflecting? Outrageous.

 

You repeatedly post arguments on the lines of "this might happen and that would then demonstrate x". Then when challenged you introduce a different argument. Go back and actually engage with some of the points made or I have to assume you're just on a wind up (successfully in my case 😣).

[kirku 1,332]

13 minutes ago, Orly said:

You're presenting a false dichotomy to a complex situation.    You seem like a perfectly reasonable person, so I'm surprised you view this (extremely complex and nuanced) issue as so black and white (no pun intended).

There aren't just "opposed" and "for" views, there are a myriad of shades of grey inbetween, and even extremes of both "for" and "opposed".

 

Completely agree - however, in this context, his actions are perceived as opposition. And given the whole thing is a PR campaign, that's an issue.

There's a league-wide initiative to make a public display against racism, and Zimbo chooses to stay standing.

We don't know his motivations, but we do know how it will be perceived. It would be naive to think otherwise, especially given the national discourse and international profile. 

So while there is clearly nuance to individual views, it doesn't translate well to public non-conformity to symbolic gestures. Especially when there's no explanation given.

If a room of people were asked to stand up and applaud something, but one person chose to stay seated and not clap; how would that be perceived?

Edited December 22, 2020 by kirku

[Haus 259]

Is a weird hill to die on.

[Surfer 1,547]

Maybe he has a banged up his knee. Just drop it lads.... these "purity" tests get tiresome. 

Reserve your ire for those who promote racism, not those who "don't do enough" to protest it.

 

 

 

[horsefly 4,287]

2 hours ago, Mr Angry said:

If lefty liberals are woke, what are righty fascists? Asleep? Slept? Sleeping?

I believe the collective noun is a "Twa*t" 

[king canary 7,580]

21 minutes ago, Surfer said:

Maybe he has a banged up his knee. Just drop it lads.... these "purity" tests get tiresome. 

Reserve your ire for those who promote racism, not those who "don't do enough" to protest it.

 

 

 

Big lol at the idea he's apparently hurt is knee too much to kneel for 5 seconds but can play 90 minutes of football twice a week.

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

The players union have stated that the vast majority of players wish to carry on the statement of anti racism that the knee is.... If Zimmerman doesn't wish to take the knee he is 100% within his rights to do so. All actions of players going to be discussed & opinions made. It's up to the individual if they wish to clarify their actions or not. My opinions on this are, I am glad this is happening as it keeps the issue of racism at the forefront and hopefully will readdress the huge rise in racism as reported by the police in the last 5 years. 

[Naturalcynic 629]

36 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

**** me! Is there a bigger culprit in this thread than you at deflecting? Outrageous.

 

You repeatedly post arguments on the lines of "this might happen and that would then demonstrate x". Then when challenged you introduce a different argument. Go back and actually engage with some of the points made or I have to assume you're just on a wind up (successfully in my case 😣).

What utter nonsense.  My line has been consistent throughout, and that’s that Christoph would be wise to maintain a dignified silence on why he chooses not to kneel because there are many who are already gearing themselves up for the metaphorical internet pile-on if he dared to admit not fully embracing the currently approved version of ideological purity.

[Peanuts 150]

2 hours ago, KeiranShikari said:

Always feel like I'm having a brain aneurysm whenever I read one of Connor Southwell's articles.

I don't blame the lad, he's young and inexperienced, but his employers really should take more responsibility for his training and development as a journalist.

I know times are hard in local journalism but surely there is someone at Archant who can at the very least proof read his articles and correct the most obvious errors, if not an actual editor? What about Dave Freezer or Paddy Davit? Aren't they able to mentor him and coach him to improve?

There are obvious mistakes with words omitted or additional words added, the style is not pleasing to read and the whole premise of the article is poorly realised. Someone with more experience should be intervening before publication.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

8 hours ago, kirku said:

Obviously, there can't have been protests against the Poll Tax because you've stated that the majority opposed it

How confusing..

 

I knew as soon as I had posted it it didn't make sense. I know what I meant obviously.

 

8 hours ago, kirku said:

To be fair, he's probably taken his lead from Suella Braverman..

She's not in opposition.

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

1 minute ago, keelansgrandad said:

I knew as soon as I had posted it it didn't make sense. I know what I meant obviously.

 

She's not in opposition.

I was in the poll tax riots.... having a horse charge at you is an experience you never forget.

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

It's certainly one big crock of shoite that doesnt need stirring any more. Until he speaks publicly about why he doesnt kneel, why argue the subtleties of a standpoint  that is undeclared. 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

22 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

What utter nonsense.  My line has been consistent throughout, and that’s that Christoph would be wise to maintain a dignified silence on why he chooses not to kneel because there are many who are already gearing themselves up for the metaphorical internet pile-on if he dared to admit not fully embracing the currently approved version of ideological purity.

People having different opinions whatever next... 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

1 hour ago, kirku said:

How else would you describe the visual of one player not doing the same as 22+ other people on the pitch? Especially given that the entire initiative is about raising awareness with a symbolic gesture.

It's the same as James McClean and him choosing not to wear the poppy (except he's made his motivations quite clear).

Isn't that my point? The other 21 are not protesting, they are following the anti racism movement which unless the nation is heading far right, is in the majority. Robinson and his crew are in the minority and protesting against what is reasonable and acceptable.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

1 hour ago, kirku said:

Completely agree - however, in this context, his actions are perceived as opposition. And given the whole thing is a PR campaign, that's an issue.

There's a league-wide initiative to make a public display against racism, and Zimbo chooses to stay standing.

We don't know his motivations, but we do know how it will be perceived. It would be naive to think otherwise, especially given the national discourse and international profile. 

So while there is clearly nuance to individual views, it doesn't translate well to public non-conformity to symbolic gestures. Especially when there's no explanation given.

If a room of people were asked to stand up and applaud something, but one person chose to stay seated and not clap; how would that be perceived?

"however, in this context, his actions are perceived as opposition." I think you should consider that the people who kneejerk to this reaction are far more of a problem than the action itself. Being free to not stand and applaud when asked to is one of the fundamental tenets of a free democracy with free expression. In fact, some of the heroes of the 20th century are those who stood up against groupthink and coercive conformity. Have you read 1984?