Norwich- A club against homophobia

[Crystal Canary 0]

Agreed Dandy, though I must admit I was a little uncomfortable with Paddy Power being involved. This is a betting firm who seem to revel in being as grossly offensive as possible ,under the guise of ''banter''.

I think several anti-homophobia groups had already mentioned that they weren''t wholly comfortable with the tag-line of the campaign, though supporting the overall aims of the initiative.

Hopefully, if nothing else, the campaign and the various issues that have arisen as a result will add to the overall discussion, and push through further initiatives in future. Like the various racism campaigns in recent years, the important thing is to keep discussing and highlighting the issues and not allow the tentative progress that has been made to be lost through apathy.

[Howson is now! 0]

[quote user="Mr Angry"]I read some of the earlier posts on this thread at the time but haven''t read them all so I''m not sure if this has been mentioned. One of the organisations involved in this campaign is the Stonewall organisation which is one of the leading gay rights organisations around. If they''ve been involved then I''d say that they''ve probably looked into the possible positive and negative aspects of such a campaign and decided that it is worthwhile.[/quote]

 

If they had done all of that research, you would have thought they''d have given the clubs longer than 3 days to think about it as per this quote from Paddy Power:

 

''Paddy Power claimed on Thursday night that they had not mishandled the campaign. A spokesman told the Daily Mail: "The rainbow laces and information were distributed to all clubs last Friday, three days before the launch, to give them a few days to discuss with players about supporting the campaign."''

 

I am an advocate of many gay rights campaigns as I am many human rights initiatives but the issue I have with this is the involvement of Paddy power who would probably happily make a mockery of a gay player to offer some kind of stupid bet in the name of ''banter'' and to make money and the perceived lack of organisation. The clubs had three days before the launch to discuss with players about supporting the campaign? Whilst I''m very disappointed by the club''s decision I understand it from a commercial sense of we have a contract with a rival company of sponsors of this campaign and as such, a contract that we would probably void if we were to support the initiative as a club.

 

Surely, there was nothing to stop the club from saying "Whilst we are unable to support this particular iniative due to third party involvement, our players are under no such obligations and if they choose to support this campaign, this is the choice of these individuals and not Norwich City Football Club."

 

This way you''re saying, we care, but our hands are tied by poor organisation and whilst we can''t support this campaign, our players can and hopefully will to raise awareness and promote tolerance, acceptance, and understanding of fellow human beings.

 

It''s a shame we couldn''t back it, but I kind of understand why we couldn''t and don''t think of NCFC as some kind of homophobic institution because of it.

[snake-eyes 13]

The problem I see here and I have had many similar problems in a business environment, is one of consultation and buy-in.

 

This seems a hastily created campaign which has failed to include all stakeholders in the consultation process.  To get the best outcome and buy-in you need to include all those organisations and people involved.  In this case;

1. FA

2. Premier League

3 All Clubs

4 Players and Managers Union

There may be more.

 

By communicating better a decision can be reached as to how best to implement the campaign such that there are no interfering factors and legal issues that can arise.

 

This may take a long time, but the end result would be more positive.  As it is the whole message could now be lost.

 

Snake

[I am a Banana 0]

Which player wore the rainbow laces?

Bassong, fer or Redmond?