I see a lot of questions being asked in France after Idrissa Gueye refused to play for PSG last week because of rainbow-coloured numbers on their jerseys to join the fight against homophobia.
In the corresponding fixture last season, he cried off with a bug? Shame on him – I've lost all respect for him.
Great to see Harry Kane and other professionals support Jake Daniels.
Former Everton player Idrissa Gueye 'REFUSED to play in rainbow colours as his club PSG backed the fight against homophobia', with manager Mauricio Pochettino blaming his absence on 'personal reasons'
Reader Comments (144)
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 17/05/2022 at 18:34:10
Bigger issue than Gueye may be the hypocrisy of PSG who are owned by Qatar where you won't find any rainbow shirts.
2 Posted 17/05/2022 at 20:40:49
I of course have no idea of Gueye's actual position. It's possible his actions are related to the principle of football/sport being increasingly used as a vehicle for political and social messages of change - with dissenters almost automatically subject to accusation of the relevant -ism.
I say this because it's my own view. It is unfair to impose the role of ambassador upon people this way. Particularly in an environment where they are subjected to justifying their position at the risk of their whole career and reputation.
Perhaps Gueye does indeed object to the intent, who knows. Should he not openly voice that or insult anyone publicly, then he is allowed to believe what he wishes.
3 Posted 17/05/2022 at 23:18:03
This afternoon, the president of Senegal personally expressed his support for Gueye's actions and for his religious beliefs.
From the New York Times: "According to the team source with knowledge of PSG's internal conversations over the weekend, club officials had told Gueye that the team was committed to the campaign and that he had no option but wear the same jersey as the rest of his teammates if he wanted to play. When Gueye decided he would not, he was sent to the stands for the game, according to a person with knowledge of the incident."
There have been some suggestions here about bringing Gana back to Goodison this summer when he's out of contract. This would seem to eliminate that possibility.
4 Posted 17/05/2022 at 00:00:05
I will say just this for example, which reflects in no way my view of religion. If there was currently started a campaign to support the rights of people to openly practice Christianity, that required shirt messages or logos, and Gueye and other Muslims refused to wear them... I'd bet you my house they would not be forced to wear them, nor penalized.
This growing piggy-backing of "Messages" onto sport is fraught, and the compulsion to partake is not the way to get people to be more open and accepting of the various "Differences" among us.
5 Posted 18/05/2022 at 01:56:48
Gueye's employer, who pays him and provides his uniform, dictated that the players would wear a particular uniform for a game. Gueye declined and therefore did not dress. He wasn't fined, or fired, or forced to profess beliefs he does not share... just given the day off for not wearing the shirt his employer directed. It's entirely his choice. And choices have consequences.
My point is that his views would not be welcomed in the Premier League today. I don't think he can come back to Everton.
6 Posted 18/05/2022 at 05:06:20
I didn't raise arms against Russia. I didn't even change my Facebook profile pic to a Ukraine flag. It doesn't mean I'm pro-Russia or anti-Ukraine.
If people don't want to participate, or if they hold contrary beliefs, then why should anyone else care? As long as Idrissa is not running around shouting anti-homosexual abuse, then he's not really causing any problems.
7 Posted 18/05/2022 at 06:50:01
Eric Arassus, the president of France LGBT+ Sports Federation: “Idrissa Gueye is a great player, but religion is not a part of the sport. Every player took part (in the rainbow shirt initiative), except him. He should be sanctioned. Gueyes excuses show that the club (PSG) and league let homophobia happen.”
Rouge Direct, a French anti-homophobia organization: “Homophobia is not an opinion but a crime. The LFP and PSG must ask Gueye for explanations and very quickly. And sanction him if necessary.”
Travis Yoesting, footy columnist for the Houston Chronicle and The18:
"LGBTQ+ rights are human rights. Though many try to politicize the issue, human rights should not be up for political debate, just as freedom of religion should not be up for debate. If Gueye refuses to play in a uniform supporting those human rights, then he should be subject to sanctions. PSG has reportedly said it is handling the issue internally, but there has been no public statement on the matter, implying complicity. "While Gueye could try to hide behind his faith as an excuse, the truth is every other player was fine with the rainbow colors, including many other Muslims and Christians, two religions that dont exactly have great track records when it comes to LGBTQ+ rights. In the past, Gueye has seemingly been fine wearing gambling or alcohol sponsors from his time in England with Everton and Aston Villa, but it seems LGBTQ+ rights are a step too far."
"While Gueye could try to hide behind his faith as an excuse, the truth is every other player was fine with the rainbow colors, including many other Muslims and Christians, two religions that dont exactly have great track records when it comes to LGBTQ+ rights. In the past, Gueye has seemingly been fine wearing gambling or alcohol sponsors from his time in England with Everton and Aston Villa, but it seems LGBTQ+ rights are a step too far."
You may not agree with the views of these organizations and commentators, but they exist and are deeply felt. In many eyes, Gueye has aligned himself with intolerance and is therefore damaged goods.
8 Posted 18/05/2022 at 07:05:31
I haven't looked.
9 Posted 18/05/2022 at 07:17:08
And anyway, if he doesn't like the rainbow shirt he should hear how his name is pronounced.
More seriously, I'm glad his teammates (including other Muslims) just got on with it. Surely the sport should be past all this by now. Ridiculous that the young lad at Blackpool coming out is even a story in this day and age.
10 Posted 18/05/2022 at 08:25:07
And Mike, I still don't see any offence in those releases. I see righteousness, which isn't the same. They want him flogged for not participating in what they want him to participate in.
I don't care what people do. They're all fine to me. Equal rights for all? Absolutely. Gay marriage, why not?
Is it great that we have campaigns to support a range of different forms of discrimination? Absolutely.
But a Muslim doesn't want to align himself with the LGBTQIA+ movement? Okay, well keep it to yourself, treat people fairly, and we won't have an issue.
I just don't see the offence he could possibly cause, unless people are desperately trying to find something to be offended about. He said and did literally nothing!
11 Posted 18/05/2022 at 08:42:11
So goes the slippery, lethal, modern liberal mind.
12 Posted 18/05/2022 at 08:53:36
Amen to that, live and let live.
13 Posted 18/05/2022 at 08:53:51
I'm all for a free society and freedom of choice of opinion - obviously within reason. I've been to parts of the world where they simply haven't and still don't have that freedom.
Otherwise we'd all vote for the same political party and support the same football team. Simplistic view, but probably not far off. If it's not his thing, it's not his thing. It doesn't make him a bigot.
It's like the knee thing. Why is it excepted and people get outraged if individuals don't choose to do it? Why is it expected? And before anyone kicks off, do not accuse me of being biased other than my allegiance to Everton.
We have become a very outraged society, influenced by a liberal media. Outraged by things that really shouldn't bother us. We call it courage and I get that. It takes a lot of courage to come out, using the Blackpool player as an example.
But when you've seen young lads physically vomiting, crying and having to be convinced they need to walk out of the gate in Sangin, Helmand Province because they saw what happened to their mates 2 days ago it puts courage into perspective.
Sorry if that sounds dramatic and I know courage comes in different forms, but this society of ours is really concerning me.
Not as much as Everton, but it still frustrates me.
14 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:01:43
15 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:33:53
I have never been concerned over a player's religious beliefs or his political beliefs, or his opinion on anything; all I was concerned with was his performance in a Blue shirt. But now we have nation states owning football clubs and many have appalling human rights issues which should have precluded them ever having ownership of a club in this country.
We have other owners whose wealth and where it came from has also been questioned, but again the powers that be thought it would be right for these people to have ownership of clubs.
Now money is the over-riding factor in owning a football club, and while money is exceptionally important for someone wanting to own a football club, it shouldn't be at the exclusion of other issues that are more important than just money.
I know we can't turn the clock back but it worries me just where football is going, players are becoming even richer while the fans paying to watch are becoming poorer.
16 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:46:12
Now, for balance, the Sir John Moores backed Merseyside Millionaires can't cry wolf too loud.
But in the past decades, it has taken a more sinister turn. Basically, we now have nation state backed clubs even if that has been by proxy.
I have literally thought of this as I'm typing, so no context, but given what I've just typed, I wonder if the politics is influencing the perceived corruption?
And I'm talking at Premier League level. FIFA and UEFA have been corrupt for as long as I can remember.
17 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:50:48
Therein lies the problem of high profile role models and their responsibility. They have ridiculously high pay, their every word or action is documented and analyzed, media slants put on every action.
In short, they are not their own people, they are not you or me, whose views mean little to anyone outside our circle. It's why organisation's employ PR to carry the message, whatever it is, to a hungry audience. It's done to mitigate any damage to a player's or a club's reputation.
18 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:55:08
I am not against wealthy people owning football clubs, I just question how they earned that money.
You mention Sir John Moores… well, everybody knew were his wealth came from and, unlike many of today's owners, he paid taxes in this country. Sir John built his business by selling football pools coupons initially in Manchester and then the business grew through hard work into making Sir John one of the wealthiest men in the country.
Also, Sir John didn't plough millions into the club like Abramovich did at Chelsea; Sir John loaned Everton money to buy players on interest-free loans, which was all paid back to him.
So yes, we were called the Mersey Millionaires but the club were financially sound and never in debt, so I have no embarrassment over how the then owner obtained his wealth or how the club was allowed to prosper under his stewardship.
19 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:56:26
I obviously do, but if it got too far, I fear my love of sports would be over.
I'll be hoping Anthony Joshua can find a way against Usyk when they participate in a blatant sportswashing event in Saudi Arabia.
Everton are backed by whoever lurks in the background but on Thursday and Sunday that won't be on my mind.
It's not right though.
20 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:59:31
But to counter your post, where is the line on enforced compliance?
There is a fine line between tolerance and enforcement.
I'm a tolerant person who will give my view and respect those of others regardless of whether they agree with me or not. But I won't impose it on someone.
Otherwise everyone would be an Evertonian.
I find Liberalism interesting. Portrayed as tolerant and nicey-nicey. Until someone disagrees with them. Then they get nasty and outraged.
21 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:04:36
Except Gueye didn't say or do anything. He's being attacked for not doing something. He hasn't expressed any view for people to follow.
That's wrong. The media and, let's be honest, the LGBTQIA+ mafia, are on a mission. They'll ruin this kid based on his religion, and all in the name of tolerance. So it's okay then.
22 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:05:03
They don't have to do anything to anyone, their very existence offends some, even without as you say, saying or literally doing anything. That's the society we live in.
As much as one may believe in live and let live, there is a significant wedge of society that don't believe that.
23 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:10:11
As a Muslim, he is absolutely entitled to refuse to comply as all of the components are haram. Ridiculous of course but he must be allowed to exercise his religious rights.
I'd switch the TV off if the screen was full of rainbows (is that LGBTQ or NHS rainbow?)
I refuse to watch players taking the knee at the start of a game too, the point was made long ago but is a joke now. They are fully entitled to do it of course.
24 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:17:42
Ernie, that's the very point I was trying to make, by him refusing to wear the shirt, the situation and message should have been managed. Instead, you end up with wild speculation by anyone and everyone including media and social networks, which is totally out of proportion, hurting the player and club.
I respect him for his belief and his choice but people in the limelight have everything they do or don't do dissected for different agendas.
25 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:23:13
We are a very tolerant society. Very much more so than the one I grew up in during the 70s and 80s.
Yes, there are still idiots but they are generally the exception. I live in arguably the most multi-cultural city on the planet. I coached lads from west African, Somalian, Irish and Kazakhstani backgrounds as well as those from the local council estates. Never any issues in building them into a team. Contrary to perceptions, even in the military I would absolutely claim it to be one of the most accepting organisations of diversity since the 90s. We've moved on but some can't accept it and still look for faults.
There are places in the world we have both probably been to that are genuinely not tolerant (I won't list them), but where you and I live are not one of them.
We are letting the BBC led liberal outrage at just about everything take over the world. It doesn't mean we should not always strive for improvement, but we also shouldn't beat ourselves up about different opinions, and the progress we have made.
Especially when nothing has been said or done, as is the situation here. He chose not to participate. That's it for me.
26 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:28:19
But this is vengeful beating up of the guy who didn't do anything. He's an easy target. Who's going to help the black Muslim kid?
27 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:31:14
As I said, I respect Gueye's decision, but as a club, it should have been managed better.
28 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:35:17
29 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:35:29
I respect Idrissa Gueye's beliefs and people are saying he has burnt his bridges in respect of any potential return even to the Premier League. However, his beliefs are no different to what they were before, and by extension therefore he potentially could have been sanctioned for them before.
So this liberal anti-Gueye stance is simply not right, whether you agree with him or not.
In my opinion.
30 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:35:37
The issue here is what defines a proactive action, in relation to the club's definition of discrimination.
For example, if the club required that all employees undertake mandatory training on discrimination per their Code of Conduct, then Gueye would be in breach of contract by refusing to take part.
Standard employment contracts require workers to comply with the company's policies and procedures, such as mandatory training. Of course, the legality of that can only be tested via case law.
My own take on it is that he has not breached his terms of employment unless PSG's policies set out clear guidelines on the dress code, ie, wear what we require of you on a case by case basis. I doubt that is the case.
Without having read PSG's D&I policy, he has probably breached the intent of the policy if not the legal wording. Given that means he is not aligned with the values, behaviour and culture of his employer, that might lead them to decide he should continue his career elsewhere.
31 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:41:31
Of course there are attempts to fudge this when it does not suit certain parties with different agendas. Particularly where there is media backing and a reluctance to accept No as meaning No.
Gueye has the right to say no and the right to expect his decision will be respected.
32 Posted 18/05/2022 at 11:12:11
Clearly football is a hostile environment to be gay – although, interestingly, not lesbian as there are a number of out players in the womens game – despite all the rainbows and rhetoric.
And Gareth Southgate saying the group are so supportive of gay rights that they will make their feelings known at the World Cup (more rainbow laces I presume), is not stopping them going to the homophobic host country is it?
Gueye supposedly not wanting to wear a rainbow number on his shirt because his magic pixie in the sky tells him homosexuality is wrong is pretty irrelevant because this is all just virtue signalling anyway.
Meanwhile, not a dickie bird was said when the Spurs crowd loudly and consistently sang "Yid Army" in their local derby last week. I know they use the excuse of "It's a Jewish club and we're reclaiming the insult", but that is utter bollocks. I would imagine only about 5% (if that) of the Spurs support is Jewish, so it's a bit like me singing "Nigger Army" at Everton because I once saw a black fan in the crowd.
33 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:03:24
Gueye refused to play for his club because the rainbow colours on his jersey, which was to highlight antihomophobia, that's nothing to do with religion, it shows he has no respect for those people, and for people to come on here and say he's entitled to say no, and should be respected for it, shows how you believe also.
34 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:41:42
If he doesnt participate in any, then he cant really be criticised.
35 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:43:39
The problem of course is that the church and its leaders change views over generations, what was a mortal sin then is okay now… at the whim of a leader?
So you, me may or may not be good Catholics by not agreeing with everything we are instructed to believe. Thousands adhere to religious interpretations… Gueye is probably no different. I don't agree with his decision but I respect it is his to make.
36 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:47:54
37 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:48:05
No awkward questions when the circus turns up in Qatar later this year… Watch that grandstanding pillock Southgate say not one fucking word about his feelings then.
They can all shove it. A person's politics or religion are a private matter, progressives don't get to bully everyone else into line all the time.
38 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:53:08
There is no reflection at Everton FC it is patently obvious all the Mirrors have been smashed.
39 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:55:36
You're making too many assumptions in the statement I've cut and pasted above. You know nothing about how Gueye feels towards "those people" and you know nothing about whether "it shows how you believe also."
You've made up your mind on what you think, not what you know. Always a dodgy stance.
40 Posted 18/05/2022 at 14:00:24
Since I can only think of the kid at Blackpool and the US player at Leeds a few years ago who were 'out' while playing, there's obviously an issue.
I said earlier that Gueye has been fairly restrained about it all - so these comments aren't really directed at him but football generally.
I heard an interview with Ian Holloway about it a few years ago in which he said something like he hoped players would come out and be themselves because it's not nice to be alone. I liked that.
Souness (for all he is a massive bellend) has also made encouraging remarks.
Gay kids got loads of grief when I was at school and homophobic abuse was the insult of choice generally. I feel ashamed of my own use of this kind of language in the past when it was just 'banter'. Hopefully it's improved in schools. Football is really far behind though - so I guess the liberal press / woke brigade etc aren't so forceful as is made out.
Anyway, we can all continue to disagree in the close season perhaps. There's a big game coming.
41 Posted 18/05/2022 at 14:40:21
My reaction to the Blackpool footballer was more: "Is this another Rashford or DCL whose agent has told him to try to boost his career and earning power through something other than talent?"
BLM is being exposed as a large scale scam with the leaders distributing the funds to family (a bit like the Bidens and Clintons) - but the EPL continues to require absolute obedience before each match.
Idrissa Gueye is perfectly right to resist being made to show support for something which (I suppose) he has no time for.
I would hope that most people would refuse to wear outward emblems of support for any cause if the reason for wearing them was authority imposed diktat and not personal choice, even if they supported the cause.
42 Posted 18/05/2022 at 14:40:51
43 Posted 18/05/2022 at 15:00:17
Fair play to Jake. Good timing too. As for Idrissa Gueye, love to see him back at Everton.
44 Posted 18/05/2022 at 15:03:08
A lot of people won't bat an eyelid at the Jake Daniels thing, true, and that's probably a good thing. But I'd agree with you more if there were hundreds of other examples going back many years. There aren't though. Like I say I can only think of two. Fashanu too, I guess (before my time) and he killed himself didn't he?
45 Posted 18/05/2022 at 15:17:04
46 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:03:53
In the same way James Maclean had the right not to wear the poppy.
Funnily enough a lot of those criticising Gueye would support Maclean and vice versa.
47 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:16:12
We could certainly do with him at the moment!
48 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:25:22
"Crystal Palace's Cheikhou Kouyate and Watford's Ismaila Sarr have posted on social media in apparent support of their Senegal team-mate's stance.
Kouyate posted a picture of himself alongside Gueye on Instagram, with a caption calling Gueye "a real man". Watford winger Sarr posted a picture of him and Gueye accompanied by three heart emojis and the caption "100%"."
So the question of whether Idrissa would be welcome back in the prem is an open question.
49 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:30:33
And more to the point, why do you doubt Daniels' honesty when he says he came out so he wouldn't have to live a lie?
Why do you ascribe a crass profit motive to it?
And by the way, your own crass political cracks look pretty hypocritical, considering the presidential family you undoubtedly support lined its collective pockets to the tune of over a billion dollars in four corrupt years. The Trump Organization directly skimmed $151 million in taxpayer revenue just for Bleach Boy's golf vacations, and Jivanka reported $500 million income and a $500 million real estate bailout loan from business activities inside the White House itself. So slide your political slant someplace else.
50 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:54:15
Out of interest, do you support Kapernicks right not to stand for the National Anthem?
51 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:56:12
I worry for mankind, because slowly but surely, free thinking is getting eradicated imo. Hopefully Gana Gueye gives his reason for not wanting to wear the rainbow colours, because he always came across as a very hard working and respectful human-being, whenever he represented Everton, and his opinion might not be fueled by hatred.
52 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:57:21
53 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:00:37
54 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:02:45
The world is dividing into two very entrenched camps. One that believes in big government, globalist socialism, enforced woke ideology and that both social media and the general people need to be ruled and governed. The other are often nationalistic, anti-New World Order, low rules, capitalist, believe wokism has lines, and support free speech (even if offensive).
Apparently one is called a “liberal” but I got no fucking clue anymore which or why? To most in one of those camps, the others a Nazi, Commie, Fascist, or something else filled with hatred. The merest mention or sniff and they're all over it (à la Mike). Funnily enough demonstrating their own prejudices and intolerance.
It'd be a hope too far to say “keep all the political shit” out of football altogether. It's even a hope too far to ask it to stay off these forums… but how about some mutual respect? If Gana wants to not wear something, good luck to him. If someone wants to criticise him for doing so, fill yer boots.
55 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:07:49
And Gary, you've not exacty set yourself up as an arbitrator on this matter. Show some patience for others to say what they want. Then slam them if you see fit, whatever.
56 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:12:58
57 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:25:34
58 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:26:27
So I dont have a human right to expression, freedom from political imprisonment, freedom from torture, right to equality before the law etc etc
Im expected to see that as a privilege?
Catch your self on feller.
59 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:32:06
60 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:33:03
How many posts would be “showing patience” in your view? When are you arbitrating that I am allowed to express my view to “stay on the subject and dont slip into entrenched” stone throwing?
61 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:34:20
In my view, politics is a part of every aspect of life today.
And if the Gueye situation wasn't a political issue, his nation's president and politicians wouldn't have inserted themselves into the debate. Clearly it is.
62 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:35:32
Absolute Nazis the lot… cancel them!!! SMH.
63 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:37:49
Kevin, where did I cancel Gueye? What the hell is that about. I have a right to support whatever I wish just like Gueye don't I? Idrissa doesn't want to wear a particular kit and reveals a dimension of himself that I don't support and I take a proportionate action in response.
I think you're using 'cancel culture' to mean what you want it to mean in a rather fluid way that really isn't how English is supposed to be used. But I'm a colonial, what do I know?
64 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:40:05
By the way, watch yourself. It's a slow day at work and I have time for this. Your move.
65 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:42:01
66 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:43:20
So now it's former Everton player blah blah blah what the hell has this got to do with us ?
I'm expecting former Gwladys St season ticket holder, Fred West, buried lots of people under his patio.
Guess it's inevitable...they are the Prince Charmings we have to be the Ugly Sisters.
67 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:46:15
68 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:47:21
69 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:51:12
70 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:54:49
71 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:55:30
Ill raise you……
72 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:01:04
Idrissa Gueye is not a slave, so he was not and cannot be compelled to play for PSG. But if he does then he needs to wear the team shirt. If he doesn't want to play in the team shirt then he should not be paid.
At the same time, PSG should not seek to sportswash the homophobia of their owners' regime, and states or their puppets should not be allowed to own football clubs.
73 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:01:36
So, Dale & Mike, have fun with your cancelling culture and use of sport to further your personal views. Hope it works out for you and makes you good fun to be around.
74 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:04:14
I think Andrew gets it.
75 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:06:24
76 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:09:15
77 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:09:29
Putting it on the players shirt is forcing him to say he supports whatever the support is for. Whatever a players beliefs are, they are personnel, and I doubt if it is in his contract that he has to support various beliefs to play for the team.
P.S.G should have informed the players of what the shirt represented, days before a game for their players reaction.
No one is against the club for supporting different minorities, but they should realize not everyone is in support.
78 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:13:46
Dale - the giveaway is its the bits ending in a “?” But please dont worry about responding. I have zero remaining interest in getting pulled in further. Not because I dont want the debate, but because I may as well go have it with the dog or wallpaper than someone in either one of the two trenches I noted originally.
79 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:15:46
80 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:18:45
81 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:20:12
82 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:28:16
I imagine that by that statement, what you REALLY mean is “sport is ok to further MY POLITICS”. Are you a fan of “lets go Brandon”? That ok?
83 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:31:19
Back to the actual issue. I think Andrew and Bill get it right that the club got it wrong and it may be clumsy precisely because it lacks integrity.
84 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:31:25
85 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:34:37
86 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:37:40
87 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:43:21
88 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:59:39
Homophobia is a crime, not a belief, and the rainbow was an anti-homophobia emblem and he was the only player to refuse to wear the jersey, how can you defend or support his stance?
89 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:01:04
Each to their own indeed.
I mean those that find Chubby Brown “funny” are very much limited to those who share the majority of the racist, homophobic, misogynist comedians particularly entrenched views.
Hope you see what I did there
90 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:09:42
By the way, has anyone found their hotel yet?
91 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:13:32
Whilst I have absolutely no truck with homophobic views, Gueye has the right to view homosexuality however he wishes. He doesnt have the right to discriminate, make homophobic comments or incite hatred.
Its a really important distinction. Telling people how to think is so illiberal and just gives fuel to those who do want to create division.
92 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:15:45
"My point is that his views would not be welcomed in the Premier League today. I don't think he can come back to Everton."
Across the whole spectrum of football including fans and participants, I'd guess, welcomed by some, unwelcome to others. This is the reality.
Should it ever happen, the likely ensuing all-media battle for supremacy would be as predictable as the dawning day.
If by Premier League you mean the confluence of those that consider him wrong and not entitled to his views and beliefs; should they "Win", then maybe so.
The result would be yet another nail in the coffin of genuine tolerance, and further consolidation of drama and division.
93 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:16:00
94 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:24:15
95 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:30:27
96 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:33:10
97 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:38:39
98 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:43:22
99 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:57:14
It looks akin to affluent people in the West, whove been happily burning fossil fuels since the Industrial Revolution, telling developing countries that they shouldnt do it.
I guess Imperialism and Colonialism, and associated arrogance, never really go away.
100 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:16:40
Dunno, Stan - I'm seeing it more as the West itself getting whacked with that one and similar.
If you're right though, then China has longed ceased any categorization as developing.
101 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:22:22
Christy@88: I dont think homophobia per se is a crime. Spreading homophobic views and inciting hatred is a crime, but having homophobic opinions, so long as they remain unexpressed, is not. There is no regulation of thought.
102 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:40:07
For a period, China was commissioning a new coal-fired power plant almost by the week. Barely heard a peep. (Albeit the technology and operation of such plants is far advanced from older types).
It continues too - and more large scale use of coal within the steel industry. OK where it suits...
103 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:41:28
They're trying, Stan.
104 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:43:13
Okay, fine, step up to the mic and say s;o otherwise, it looks like homophobia wrapped in sports washing.
105 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:51:30
He might privately be a raging anti-gay hater in mind, that says nothing of it in public, or in no way ever materially acts upon it.
Which would be worse?
106 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:59:43
107 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:03:16
108 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:07:30
109 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:10:36
If Gana were ‘anti-gay, that would be nobody elses business provided he does not express it and incite hatred. And so far as I am aware, he hasnt.
110 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:25:06
As a Muslim, he is absolutely entitled to refuse to comply as all of the components are haram. Ridiculous of course but he must be allowed to exercise his religious rights.”
“My feeling about that quote is that there are no such thing as LGBTQ or even human "rights". Rights are confused with privileges afforded to any group by the rest of humanity. If individuals have rights then society at large does too.”
Ah, Martin Mason, going with whatever definition suits his own peculiar ‘take' on things.
Which human organisations are NOT artificial constructs? There must be a hierarchy of rights. If my right to religious freedom led me to a situation where I was in danger of denying someone a more basic right because of a religious point of view, then I would question that point of view.
Which is exactly what I did when I was of an age to understand the conflicts between the Catholic Church and general societal acceptance, and I've simply learnt to ignore anything that doesn't fit with the Christian (as expressed by Jesus himself) parts.
I was perhaps fortunate that all of my parish priests have appeared to be tolerant, inclusive and progressive. It is my view that some parts of the Bible are essentially from a survival manual published by an oppressed and persecuted group of people who needed guidelines that kept their population healthy (avoid pork and you avoid the potentially deadly pork tapeworm) and increasing in number.
At the least, Idrissa Gueye should understand that simply supporting an anti-homophobia message doesn't automatically mean that someone can be said to be actively pro-homosexuality. I am against Islamophobia but I'm not a Muslim.
111 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:33:47
112 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:45:28
This is not his doing to some extent and I understand that. However, this is where you earn your big public bucks by being a stand-up person and state your beliefs or state why this is a difficult situation for you.
To express a refusal and leave everyone to their own conclusions is not a neutral action that deserves a pass with no accountability. He is a public figure and did not hand in a sick note for this game, he knew the interpretation was obvious.
113 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:45:59
What does 'actively pro-homosexuality' mean? The guy obviously doesn't think homosexuality is right.
We might not agree with his opinion, I don't, but he's made no comment on the matter, he just doesn't want to be asked to promote it.
It's his right. You cannot tell people what they should think based on your moral agenda. You can object to them being hateful.
114 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:47:31
115 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:51:41
116 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:57:09
Just as we are all ostensibly allowed our own thoughts and beliefs, so should we be allowed the option of sharing them, mindful as we are more and more nowadays of the implications.
This whole thing shines a light upon the growing culture of being forced to be outwardly pro or anti to a growing list of causes, beliefs, campaigns and so on. It's about being seen to be in a camp and then judged for it, or used as a tool to further stir the argument.
These camps are often simplistic and polarized in nature and no quarter is given. It's nasty "Out there" and the sensible and only working option is often to stay away.
Not for no reason were politics and religion recommended as excluded from polite conversation; it's emotive. Nowadays it seems nothing is off the table, and woe betide those that are unwilling or unable to navigate it and construct a workable response; which could be any of us, in certain circumstances.
There is no place for people to needlessly harm and discriminate against others. Forcing them to be a sandwich board for a litany of causes is another thing entirely.
117 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:05:52
Dale @ 107:
I'm interested to hear your thoughts on being forced to wear the equivalent of a rainbow badge/logo as you go about your business. Whether it's something you believe in, are without opinion, or strongly disagree with.
Are you prepared to outsource your input to this in all aspects?
118 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:21:57
Either the club or the player should address the issue and I'm not sure which. I'm not claiming to have the right answer here – just making clear that my support depends on some clarity when controversial actions run against my preferences.
Gueye can do whatever PSG will allow him to do and I can respond however I wish as long as I am not doing anything illicit. My personal belief is that, if the club set this up without his knowledge, he should be given an out – not a chance to say or signal his personal position but a complete non-response and non-performance. That way, he gets his way and no-one gets insulted.
119 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:23:49
Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever attended any kind of rally or protest either and I've been aware of plenty. I could be all sorts of things without ever knowing!
120 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:29:50
The harder they push and attempt to involve sports teams and other high profile bodies the more fuel they add to the haters mindset.
121 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:44:13
Because there is an awful lot of people without an ounce of decency.
122 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:47:07
It's not public money just because people pay to watch the game. If that's the case, the person on the till in Tesco's takes the public's money.
Not a valid point in any way, shape, or form, IMHO.
123 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:49:30
i) currently in vogue, or ii) that you happen to agree with.
How far away is not wanting to wear a shirt with a rainbow collar, from my point blank refusal to even think about buying a red jumper – let alone wear the fuckin' thing?
How different is Christensen's Cup Final morning withdrawal – for as yet unspecified reasons?
All people's views and reasons matter – or nobody's do. See Voltaire's quote.
Homosexuality, abortion or, for that matter, wearing a red jumper; it's legal – not compulsory.
124 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:51:31
And just to validate the position, here is a quote from the French Football Federation council president Patrick Anton:
"By refusing to take part in this operation, you are validating discriminatory behavior [and] the rejection of others, and not just against those in the LGBTQ+ movement," Anton continued.
"The impact of soccer in society and the way players are role models for those who admire them gives all of us a personal sense of responsibility. We hope this letter makes you conscious of the fact you need to clarify your position, or to make amends."
Sounds kind of like a public thing there.
125 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:53:04
It simply means that, if he is a rational person, he shouldn't worry that by wearing the rainbow numbers kit he is setting himself apart from his religious beliefs, unless his personal belief is that he has to actively speak out against homosexuality or stop people from being gay.
I'd have thought that most of us can distinguish between not necessarily being ‘pro' something and being happy with others being persecuted because of it.
As a heterosexual man, I don't see how I can actually ‘promote' a sexuality I don't personally share but I have absolutely no problem with acknowledging that there are a range of sexualities and supporting the view that people should be free to be what they are and do as they will as long as it is consensual and not harmful to others.
Dave Lynch, the only ‘stance' I can see is one of promoting tolerance and removing discrimination. Anyone that ‘hates' that can take a running jump.
126 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:59:05
So how about James Maclean not wearing the poppy?
127 Posted 18/05/2022 at 23:02:44
128 Posted 18/05/2022 at 23:11:42
Just what I meant earlier - people are being railroaded into being a public mouthpiece irrespective of their own personal views or freedom to not partake.
Refuse, and you become a pariah, framed as an active oppressor or supporter of the opposite position.
Very unsavoury - and increasingly dangerous.
129 Posted 18/05/2022 at 23:21:09
Where have I mentioned James Maclean and the poppy? Do you think I must have some firm position on that; otherwise, all my statements on here are null and void?
To be honest I'd have to check that out in more detail. Off the top of my head, that does seem to be about taking a political stance and would clearly represent wanting to advocate a particular position.
It is also about making a statement about what you believe the poppy as an emblem of remembrance actually represents, rather than what the majority of people probably believe it stands for.
Personally, I can wear a poppy to show my appreciation for all who have died serving in the military without thinking I am supporting all the bad things which have occurred historically. If others can't then that is up to them.
One thing that has not really been mentioned (although I have brought it up on other threads): France are a secular republic and religious practices are not necessarily as tolerated as they would be in other countries. Doesn't mean they can persecute religious beliefs, just that it doesn't afford much leverage.
130 Posted 18/05/2022 at 23:37:21
I think Anton has lawyers that would advise him to not harass a player who has simply exercised their right of refusal of an offer. This tone suggests something rather specific was expected of Gueye.
Additionally, Pochettino has already dropped the 'personal issue' line, further implicating Gueye as the shit-starter here. It looks like Gueye made a commitment of some sort to participate – otherwise, why would the FFF president be going after him publicly?
And please don't say it was imperialism that caused him to say that.
131 Posted 18/05/2022 at 23:42:59
Will, the cause here is for tolerance for and removing discrimination against those of the LGBQT+ communities, not for advocating being LGBQT+ is for everyone or better than anything else.
Your post would suggest you are conflating separate things.
132 Posted 18/05/2022 at 00:02:06
Free speech means being able to read and then respond, and really respond, to those of different opinion, no matter how extreme.
Our ex-lad just needs education that his country and elements of his faith forcefully prohibit.
133 Posted 19/05/2022 at 00:32:28
I'm not conflating anything. You might be confusing something though - your post makes no sense.
134 Posted 19/05/2022 at 01:03:09
They are not made to wear ‘sandwich boards' above and beyond the kit they always wear with all manner of promotional emblems on all occasions.
For a player to actively refuse to wear something that doesn't actually put him in the position of being an advocate for something his religion prohibits really only makes sense if he believes it does make him an advocate for it.
The cause is anti-homophobia / anti-discrimination, whereas the sponsors logos were actually trying to promote consumption of things Islam also prohibits. He can't accept one and reject the other without being hypocritical.
Being anti-Islamophobic doesn't make me a Muslim or a Muslim missionary.
135 Posted 19/05/2022 at 08:48:57
I just don't get the race to reach the most righteous position possible. He doesn't want to associate himself with something. Life goes on.
It's not like he's out preaching hatred. That was left to those in authority who are scared witless that the alphabets might come after them next if they don't publicly condemn him.
As for him 'actively refusing'... I'm envisaging a lot of hand gestures. Close? Better or worse?
136 Posted 19/05/2022 at 09:09:18
Amen to that Ernie!
Nail on head there.
137 Posted 19/05/2022 at 09:25:53
All Gana needs to do is act upon his own best judgement. For others not to realise this represents the ignorance of those who are naive enough to think they know better than he does. It is ignorance that needs reducing, including this type of ignorance.
If Ganas thought-response to those criticising him were “Oh, shut up, you pseudo-moralists keeping up appearances by jumping on your fashionable bandwagons”, Id agree with him.
138 Posted 19/05/2022 at 10:04:44
What the fuck does that mean?
Of course people have the right NOT to feel offended.
What a ridiculous statement.
139 Posted 19/05/2022 at 16:55:13
My last paragraph in that post from which you cited the last line, is self explanatory. It means:
- I don't agree with discrimination.
- I also don't think people should be forced to wear any kind of political messaging against their will.
- I used "Sandwich board" as a metaphor, i.e. as a form of advertising a cause by messages or symbolism on a person's clothing.
How on earth you got to me being confused about the issue at hand here, or conflating anything from that, I have no idea.
140 Posted 19/05/2022 at 17:30:38
I remember when he was about 18, I asked him was he going to a pride march in Liverpool, he looked at me in horror and said he has no need to go and parade himself or his sexuality in front of anybody, "im me dad" he stated, "not a fucking freak show for people to look at".
I asked him earlier about the Gana "thing"... he thought for a moment and said... "wish we still had him"... I laughed my head off.
141 Posted 19/05/2022 at 17:47:15
142 Posted 19/05/2022 at 18:14:17
I also support the right of supporters to boo him, and if the clubs think he will lose them money, the right to sack him within the terms of his contract.
143 Posted 20/05/2022 at 00:20:58
Idrissa Gueye was not asked to actively promote homosexuality so he shouldnt have a problem unless he thinks his mortal soul will be damaged unless he actively supports persecution of homosexuals.
Ernie, you are right, I suspect he might be a bit of a hypocrite. Im not actually bothered about the legality of the situation and have not made a comment about whether I think he should be punished for his stance.
144 Posted 20/05/2022 at 02:30:53
so now your problem seems to have evolved to the use of the word political. OK, just re-read without that word, as just "Messaging".
Everyone knows what is meant by the concept of "Political". Including you.
I have said not one thing that could be construed as a distinction between promoting homosexuality as against promoting the acceptance of it - you raised that.
I'll ask you again - how did you extract all this from the single line of mine that you quoted?
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.