Serious question, if we had a gay player...

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

I'm not going to ask you whether you'd support that player coming out or not, because if you wouldn't then you aren't the type of person that interests me and you can keep that opinion to yourself - football is 30 years behind the curve here. 

But could you in all seriousness look that player in the eye and recommend that they come out? Tell that that this would be a good idea?

I honestly don't think I could, particularly not a young one with their financial security not yet secured. I just don't think I could look a gay football in the eye and think it would be a good idea for them to become the martyr, and to then suffer the decade of relentless trolling, abuse and bullying that would follow. 

And I find that quite sad to be honest, but I don't think football (fans in particular) have moved on much at all since Justin Fashanu came out and then saw his career go downhill. I'm afraid I really couldn't see that going well for a player in English football, I think they'd have to do it and then escape to America - and how depressing that the USA, backwards in so many other ways, and with so many extreme opinions, would probably still be the safe haven for a gay male athlete (like Robbie Rogers)

 

 

Edited October 3, 2021 by TeemuVanBasten

[Greavsy 2,645]

Does it matter either way? 

If they can play football to the required standard, nothing else is relevant surely?  

I'm not even fussed if our players are married / single or whatever, it makes no difference to me.

Its the ones (with a proven guilty record of course) who perform illegal acts (like Adam Johnson as a player &  Barry Bennell *) as a coach) who shouldn't have any part in the game.  

* I'm sure there are others, these are first two names I could remember. 

   

Edited October 3, 2021 by Greavsy

[cambridgeshire canary 7,804]

Up to them, not me

[The Real Buh 3,765]

If a Norwich player comes out as gay as a fanbase I’m betting we will go above and beyond to protect them.

I honestly believe it would bring our fanbase together

[Son Ova Gunn 165]

I believe I could in all good consciousness say go public (if they wanted it). Honestly think that the earning potential of the player wouldn’t diminish, if anything the added attention could improve earning potential. Sure I think some opposing fans could initially prove troublesome but I would have faith in clubs and authorities to swiftly act. Perhaps overly optimistic but given the opportunity to embrace a gay footballer and I think the football community would take it.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

2 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Does it matter either way? 

If they can play football to the required standard, nothing else is relevant surely?  

I'm not asking whether it would bother you if a player was gay.

It shouldn't do, and it doesn't me.

I'm asking whether you think them coming out would be a good idea, in this society, with football fans in this country being the way that they are.

They'd get relentless social media abuse, homophobic chants, and opposition players using it against them to get under their skin.

And any player thinking about coming out, I'm afraid you'd need to tell them that they need a very thick skin and to probably be prepared to delete all social media first? 

This probably needs to happen for attitudes to change, but would thinks go well for the martyr? I just don't think it would, there is a reason why Hitzlsperger retired at Everton in 2013 and came out in 2014.

[The Real Buh 3,765]

I’d also give them the advice I give everyone, regardless of their status or career or anything.

get off all social media, it’s cancerous.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

5 minutes ago, Son Ova Gunn said:

but I would have faith in clubs and authorities to swiftly act. Perhaps overly optimistic but given the opportunity to embrace a gay footballer and I think the football community would take it.

I mean, authorities said precisely nothing about the appalling chants directed to Billy Sharp by Derby fans the other day despite numerous videos proving them. Basically calling him a rapist, a peado, and a "bender" for no reason whatsoever. And a few mentioning his dead child.

Norwich are fortunate to have mainly progressive fans and the imbecile element is a small minority, in some other parts of the country the fans have moved on very little from the 80s and 90s and it really is only CCTV stopping them throwing sharpened coins at each other. 

 

 

 

Edited October 3, 2021 by TeemuVanBasten

[Greavsy 2,645]

10 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

I'm not asking whether it would bother you if a player was gay.

It shouldn't do, and it doesn't me.

I'm asking whether you think them coming out would be a good idea, in this society, with football fans in this country being the way that they are.

They'd get relentless social media abuse, homophobic chants, and opposition players using it against them to get under their skin.

And any player thinking about coming out, I'm afraid you'd need to tell them that they need a very thick skin and to probably be prepared to delete all social media first? 

This probably needs to happen for attitudes to change, but would thinks go well for the martyr? I just don't think it would, there is a reason why Hitzlsperger retired at Everton in 2013 and came out in 2014.

Its unfortunate that the playing field isn't that same. 

From what you have said above, people not wanting set themselves up to get abused on social media shouldn't be on social media. Surely that somewhat defeats the point. Everyone has a right to be who and what they are, and where they want. But you're suggesting a gay player shouldn't be on the socials to avoid the idiots who will post negative comments. Does that apply for the players who got abuse after the Euros? They dont have the perceived freedom of choice of coming out. 

Ive tried to word that very carefully to get the point across, which is basically, irrespective of  Sexuality colour, age, etc everyone should have the same options. We as fans should only be debating our players football performance, and everything else is personal. 

Edited October 3, 2021 by Greavsy

[A Load of Squit 6,260]

There isn't an 'if' about it, we've had a gay player, it was well known, he kept getting parking tickets outside the gay club in the City.

Justin Fashanu didn't try very hard to hide his sexuality.

 

[Greavsy 2,645]

1 minute ago, A Load of Squit said:

There isn't an 'if' about it, we've had a gay player, it was well known, he kept getting parking tickets outside the gay club in the City.

Justin Fashanu didn't try very hard to hide his sexuality.

 

No social media about then! 

[canarydan23 4,770]

4 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Its unfortunate that the playing field isn't that same. 

From what you have said above, people not wanting set themselves up to get abused on social media shouldn't be on social media. Surely that somewhat defeats the point. Everyone has a right to be who and what they are, and where they want. But you're suggesting a gay player shouldn't be on the socials to avoid the idiots who will post negative comments. Does that apply for the players who got abuse after the Euros? They dont have the perceived freedom of choice of coming out. 

Ive tried to word that very carefully to get the point across, which is basically, irrespective of  Sexuality colour, age, etc everyone should have the same options. We as fans should only be debating our players football performance, and everything else is personal. 

Agreed. Gay footballers being advised to get off social media is in the same camp as lone women walking alone being advised to amend their behaviour (or flag down a bus?). The focus should be on zero-tolerance for perpetrators, not victims (or potential victims) making sacrifices for society's s(um.

Edited October 3, 2021 by canarydan23

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

7 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

There isn't an 'if' about it, we've had a gay player, it was well known, he kept getting parking tickets outside the gay club in the City.

Justin Fashanu didn't try very hard to hide his sexuality.

And coming out was terrible for his career and ultimately his mental health.

Was fine for Tom Daley, could you imagine Tom Daley thriving in the world of football? I'm afraid I just couldn't. 

[The Real Buh 3,765]

7 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Agreed. Gay footballers being advised to get off social media is in the same camp as lone women walking alone being advised to amend their behaviour (or flag down a bus?). The focus should be on zero-tolerance for perpetrators, not victims (or potential victims) making sacrifices for society's s(um.

You should get off social media because it’s immensely bad for your mental health and a massive waste of time

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

5 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Agreed. Gay footballers being advised to get off social media is in the same camp as lone women walking alone being advised to amend their behaviour (or flag down a bus?). The focus should be on zero-tolerance for perpetrators, not victims (or potential victims) making sacrifices for society's s(um.

I don't disagree.

But I can't help but feel that if a player did it they'd effectively be a 'martyr', things would be extremely difficult for them, would impact their performances and career, but then probably improve things for other gay footballers.

They'd be an important pioneer, but I'd fear for their mental health, and I don't think football fans have moved on enough from the Fashanu days to make it an easy ride for any player who comes out. Robbie Rogers instantly came out then quit English football. 

[canarydan23 4,770]

4 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

You should get off social media because it’s immensely bad for your mental health and a massive waste of time

I agree, in most instances. I have a Facebook account but deleted all my "friends" and only use it as a communication tool for my two of my kids' clubs and to get updates from relatives who live outside of East Anglia. I used to have Twitter but deleted it earlier in the year and haven't once felt compelled to go back. I have an Instagram account but cannot remember the last time I logged in.

However, the fact remains that it's a popular past-time for many, even if it is damaging (most fun things are; alcohol, junk food, casual sex, class A drugs) and people from minority groups should not be denied it because of faceless, cowardly trolls. They should be denied it because they independently come to the conclusion that you and I seem to have arrived at.

[The Real Buh 3,765]

Just now, canarydan23 said:

I agree, in most instances. I have a Facebook account but deleted all my "friends" and only use it as a communication tool for my two of my kids' clubs and to get updates from relatives who live outside of East Anglia. I used to have Twitter but deleted it earlier in the year and haven't once felt compelled to go back. I have an Instagram account but cannot remember the last time I logged in.

However, the fact remains that it's a popular past-time for many, even if it is damaging (most fun things are; alcohol, junk food, casual sex, class A drugs) and people from minority groups should not be denied it because of faceless, cowardly trolls. They should be denied it because they independently come to the conclusion that you and I seem to have arrived at.

Social media is being treated as something that you have to have. Like energy, food etc. It isn’t, it’s a joke. It’s incredibly bad for you and run by barely human tech maniacs.

Once you ditch it from your life you are so much happier, social media is the 21st century smoking.

[Greavsy 2,645]

Does an internet forum count as social media? 

I know this was discussed on here before when there was a social media boycott a few months back. 

[Baracouda 47]

Not sure why the need to 'come out'. No heterosexual declares their sexuality not sure why people feel a need for homosexual to do so.

[The Real Buh 3,765]

1 minute ago, Greavsy said:

Does an internet forum count as social media? 

I know this was discussed on here before when there was a social media boycott a few months back. 

Barely, it’s a dial up relic.

theres no algorithms or whatnot here. 

[chicken 3,088]

Pretty sure we have had this sort of discussion before.

The only thing new about this is you are asking what would you advise rather than would you support.

Lots of questions about context would have to ensue first. A younger player would depend upon where they are in the footballing pyramid. I have managed football teams with gay players, the team new, wasn't a problem because they were a footballer, once they step across that white line onto the pitch all that matters is football. That is Sunday League level, so no fans to heckle you though, well, not any that would know who you are anyway.

Age is a big factor. If it was a player coming to the end of their career and perhaps they were on the wane a bit, it may not be a bad move. It may draw a bit more attention and possibly new sources of income. Could be that companies promoting diversity look to support them with sponsorships etc.

Most importantly it is down to them. Working with youngsters in this sort of arena I never advise whether they should or shouldn't make a decision unless I feel they are not taking in all of the available information first. At the end of the day, it's their decision and they'll have to own it - even if you have the best intent in the world.

Gareth Thomas is perhaps a good example of how it can be managed well, though rugby doesn't tend to have the same issues with it's fans as football for some reason...

The point of all this really is asking if the footballing world is really ready for a men's top level openly gay footballer. And if you were to ask me that then I would say probably no. You only need to look on here to see there are many, many embarrassing comments made by some of our so called supporters about players. Stalking their Instagram, criticising their choice of hair cuts, criticising fashion choices as feminine (though I bet they love the Rolling Stones at the same time... not like Mick Jagger et al where women's clothes or anything).

Hell, there is still racist chanting, and that's on the increase, as are homophobic hate crimes in general.

[The Real Buh 3,765]

Just now, chicken said:

Pretty sure we have had this sort of discussion before.

The only thing new about this is you are asking what would you advise rather than would you support.

Lots of questions about context would have to ensue first. A younger player would depend upon where they are in the footballing pyramid. I have managed football teams with gay players, the team new, wasn't a problem because they were a footballer, once they step across that white line onto the pitch all that matters is football. That is Sunday League level, so no fans to heckle you though, well, not any that would know who you are anyway.

Age is a big factor. If it was a player coming to the end of their career and perhaps they were on the wane a bit, it may not be a bad move. It may draw a bit more attention and possibly new sources of income. Could be that companies promoting diversity look to support them with sponsorships etc.

Most importantly it is down to them. Working with youngsters in this sort of arena I never advise whether they should or shouldn't make a decision unless I feel they are not taking in all of the available information first. At the end of the day, it's their decision and they'll have to own it - even if you have the best intent in the world.

Gareth Thomas is perhaps a good example of how it can be managed well, though rugby doesn't tend to have the same issues with it's fans as football for some reason...

The point of all this really is asking if the footballing world is really ready for a men's top level openly gay footballer. And if you were to ask me that then I would say probably no. You only need to look on here to see there are many, many embarrassing comments made by some of our so called supporters about players. Stalking their Instagram, criticising their choice of hair cuts, criticising fashion choices as feminine (though I bet they love the Rolling Stones at the same time... not like Mick Jagger et al where women's clothes or anything).

Hell, there is still racist chanting, and that's on the increase, as are homophobic hate crimes in general.

Is racist chanting on the rise? Is there any actual evidence for that at all?

[chicken 3,088]

4 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Does an internet forum count as social media? 

I know this was discussed on here before when there was a social media boycott a few months back. 

Yes. It's essentially where facebook came from... and what facebook took over from.

It's a social platform using the world wide web.

[Monty13 2,738]

8 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

Social media is being treated as something that you have to have. Like energy, food etc. It isn’t, it’s a joke. It’s incredibly bad for you and run by barely human tech maniacs.

Once you ditch it from your life you are so much happier, social media is the 21st century smoking.

It’s arguably a lot worse than smoking.

[The Real Buh 3,765]

1 minute ago, chicken said:

Yes. It's essentially where facebook came from... and what facebook took over from.

It's a social platform using the world wide web.

Is there sophisticated algorithms, targeted timelines to encourage overuse? 
 

id suggest watching the social dilemma, these company’s are evil, causing the people of this country harm and paying zero tax. They don’t even employ that many people in this country, what benefit do they add at all? Absolutely parasitic.

id tax them into oblivion personally.

[Greavsy 2,645]

4 minutes ago, chicken said:

Yes. It's essentially where facebook came from... and what facebook took over from.

It's a social platform using the world wide web.

I dont see the link from FB to forums per se, I have never been on, and never will be on FB. Just cant see the point. 

I do, obviously frequent this forum, and have a twitter / Insta account, albeit with very limit public posts on the latter two.  

[chicken 3,088]

2 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

Is there sophisticated algorithms, targeted timelines to encourage overuse? 
 

id suggest watching the social dilemma, these company’s are evil, causing the people of this country harm and paying zero tax. They don’t even employ that many people in this country, what benefit do they add at all? Absolutely parasitic.

id tax them into oblivion personally.

The definition of social media, though, does not require the owners to be evil. The fact that they seized upon what was happening and could see that there was a way of financially benefiting from it... that's another debate.

There are a great many mainstream and alternative social media platforms not all are monetised in the same way. However, targeted advertising is now everywhere. It was and has been for a very long time. Many webpages use it now and most forums that are still going rely upon it to exist. It may not be to the degree of other platforms, but again, that isn't important to being defined as social media or not.

[Baracouda 47]

7 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

Is there sophisticated algorithms, targeted timelines to encourage overuse? 
 

id suggest watching the social dilemma, these company’s are evil, causing the people of this country harm and paying zero tax. They don’t even employ that many people in this country, what benefit do they add at all? Absolutely parasitic.

id tax them into oblivion personally.

They should be investgated and banned. Sure they break all data laws in uk, all uk data stored outside of country i believe. Facebook had a 'study' where they change peoples private messaged to see what response people would give. 

[chicken 3,088]

11 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

Is racist chanting on the rise? Is there any actual evidence for that at all?

Yes, and yes. 

Racial and homophobic hate crime is on the rise and this is reflected in football too.

https://www.kickitout.org/news/discrimination-in-football-on-the-rise
https://theconversation.com/racist-abuse-at-football-games-is-increasing-home-office-says-but-the-sports-race-problem-goes-much-deeper-124467
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/jan/30/football-related-racist-incidents-sharp-rise-police-kick-it-out
https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football-racist-indecent-chanting-increase-201920-season-despite-coronavirus-a4555241.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-lgbt-soccer-idUSKBN25V1NI

And there are sadly, many, many more articles that share the similar findings. 

[The Real Buh 3,765]

2 minutes ago, chicken said:

The definition of social media, though, does not require the owners to be evil. The fact that they seized upon what was happening and could see that there was a way of financially benefiting from it... that's another debate.

There are a great many mainstream and alternative social media platforms not all are monetised in the same way. However, targeted advertising is now everywhere. It was and has been for a very long time. Many webpages use it now and most forums that are still going rely upon it to exist. It may not be to the degree of other platforms, but again, that isn't important to being defined as social media or not.

The pinkun may have had a facelift but works in essentially the same way as it did 15 years ago or whenever it started

the bottom line is, people who spend all day on social media, they are losers. It’s a waste of human life.