BlueStar Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Celtic fans certainly seem to think it's political... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlufPurdi Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Evening Standard's take on why this is only coming up as an issue now... The Football Association have never previously requested the symbol on an England shirt because the use of poppies on football kit is a relatively recent phenomenon. Leicester were the first club to instigate the adornment of poppies on their kit in 2003 and it has gradually been adopted in what must be considered one of football's more thoughtful and considerate acts. Since England played a friendly in Geneva against Argentina on November 12, 2005, they have not had a match so close to the 11th hour of the 11th month of the 11th day which, on the 11th year of this millennium carries so much significance in marking the end of World War One. http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-sport/football/article-24007829-defy-fifa-play-with-a-poppy-england.do Personally I think it's a load of fuss over nothing. I didn't think anything could be as dull as the Terry story this week but I've been proven wrong. Also, what if - for whatever reason - a player didn't want to wear a poppy on their shirt? Aye, I've been wondering that too. As if the robotic, braindead morons in the England squad would make such a statement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It's a mark of respect for dead soldiers, the fact that they have died in a war brought on by politics doesn't make the gesture itself political imo. The fact that money from the shirts/poppy symbol is going to support a military body is enough for FIFA to say, "Like f***". They can't afford to set a precedent. It's nowt to do with international football which is what this boils down to. Sometimes matches occur that are played in politically-charged circumstances: matches with Israel, the Koreas, some African games, etc. FIFA has to ensure that ultimately the game is simply a match between two football sides. I know people like to lay the boot into FIFA because they're a bunch of corrupt wankers, but their job is to run football and they're doing the right thing in this instance. How on earth is the poppy going to cause unrest amongst rival nations? It stands for nothing but respect and remembrance. It sets a dangerous precedent. You allow this and then you have countries wanting to commemorate war victories or pay respect to charities or all kinds of nonsense. Putting a blanket ban in place (which has always been the rule) means this doesn't even become a topic. Like Keefaz says it's a sport and FIFA's responsibility is to make sure it remains solely about the sport. It's their job to make sure politics and sport remain separate, and I completely agree with that. I still don't see how this can be linked to politics. It's a symbol of respect sewn onto a shirt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It's a mark of respect for dead soldiers, the fact that they have died in a war brought on by politics doesn't make the gesture itself political imo. The fact that money from the shirts/poppy symbol is going to support a military body is enough for FIFA to say, "Like f***". They can't afford to set a precedent. It's nowt to do with international football which is what this boils down to. Sometimes matches occur that are played in politically-charged circumstances: matches with Israel, the Koreas, some African games, etc. FIFA has to ensure that ultimately the game is simply a match between two football sides. I know people like to lay the boot into FIFA because they're a bunch of corrupt wankers, but their job is to run football and they're doing the right thing in this instance. How on earth is the poppy going to cause unrest amongst rival nations? It stands for nothing but respect and remembrance. It sets a dangerous precedent. You allow this and then you have countries wanting to commemorate war victories or pay respect to charities or all kinds of nonsense. Putting a blanket ban in place (which has always been the rule) means this doesn't even become a topic. Like Keefaz says it's a sport and FIFA's responsibility is to make sure it remains solely about the sport. It's their job to make sure politics and sport remain separate, and I completely agree with that. I still don't see how this can be linked to politics. It's a symbol of respect sewn onto a shirt. So what if the German national team wanted to sew some similar thing on to their shirts? Or the Serbs? Or the Israelis? It's laughable to suggest it can't "be linked to politics". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 What 'similar thing' are you referring to? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Craig-NUFC posted this in chat: This is the 37th time ENG have played between Nov 1 and Nov 15 since 1918. In 93 years, they've never felt the need for a poppy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Fascinating. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 What 'similar thing' are you referring to? Some "symbol of respect" for their war dead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Evening Standard's take on why this is only coming up as an issue now... The Football Association have never previously requested the symbol on an England shirt because the use of poppies on football kit is a relatively recent phenomenon. Leicester were the first club to instigate the adornment of poppies on their kit in 2003 and it has gradually been adopted in what must be considered one of football's more thoughtful and considerate acts. Since England played a friendly in Geneva against Argentina on November 12, 2005, they have not had a match so close to the 11th hour of the 11th month of the 11th day which, on the 11th year of this millennium carries so much significance in marking the end of World War One. http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-sport/football/article-24007829-defy-fifa-play-with-a-poppy-england.do Personally I think it's a load of fuss over nothing. I didn't think anything could be as dull as the Terry story this week but I've been proven wrong. Also, what if - for whatever reason - a player didn't want to wear a poppy on their shirt? Aye, I've been wondering that too. As if the robotic, braindead morons in the England squad would make such a statement. More than fair point, but it's still a valid question. If the "sacrifice" of British soldiers in those conflcts that were worth fighting means anything, it's about the right to live in a country where you don't have to wear some fucking symbol of nationalist or ideological orthodoxy if you don't want to. It always depresses me this time of year when I watch some British TV and am reminded how it's obviously simply impossible not to wear a poppy if you're a professional broadcaster or any kind of public figure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 What 'similar thing' are you referring to? Some "symbol of respect" for their war dead. So you have no idea how the 3 countries that you mentioned commeorate their lost? Or even if they do so already? Symbols of respect for individuals who've lost their lives shouldn't ever be omitted by force. The poppy promotes peace between nations, if anything. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 What 'similar thing' are you referring to? Some "symbol of respect" for their war dead. So you have no idea how the 3 countries that you mentioned commeorate their lost? Or even if they do so already? Symbols of respect for individuals who've lost their lives shouldn't ever be omitted by force. The poppy promotes peace between nations, if anything. You're drifting off into drivel. Try tuning your brain in a bit more carefully, and consider the question I was actually asking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Some sense here, at least: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2011/nov/09/england-poppies-spain-game Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 If you actualy retrace the history of the poppy remberance its actually quite sad and indicitive of the modern world that people are arguing about it appearing on an item of clothing in a sporting match. The poppy celebrates life and death and is a reminder of how preciious life is and how pointless death is, indeed how pointless war is. It is used today to raise funds for soldiers and to allow people to remember those lost and to show some pride. If anything FIFA is making a political issue of it by not allowing it on the shirts and the FA and others are making it political by campaigning for it. In an ideal world it should be down to the individual to wear one like it is on the street. If you don't want to wear a poppy you don't have to, if you do, great. All without the fanfare and political side issues. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 I see Prince William and David Cameron have both now weighed in about the issue. Nothing political there, then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 I see Prince William and David Cameron have both now weighed in about the issue. Nothing political there, then. It appears you're basically using the fact people are using the poppy remeberance as a political tool to downgrade the poppy rememberance. This is the same kind of ideology that makes being proud of being English shit because the bnp have latched onto the union jack and britishness and its sad and wrong in my opinion. It is thought like that that does more harm than anything, more harm than a mere poppy stiched into a bit of fabric at a sporting venue would ever do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 If you actualy retrace the history of the poppy remberance its actually quite sad and indicitive of the modern world that people are arguing about it appearing on an item of clothing in a sporting match. The poppy celebrates life and death and is a reminder of how preciious life is and how pointless death is, indeed how pointless war is. It is used today to raise funds for soldiers and to allow people to remember those lost and to show some pride. If anything FIFA is making a political issue of it by not allowing it on the shirts and the FA and others are making it political by campaigning for it. In an ideal world it should be down to the individual to wear one like it is on the street. If you don't want to wear a poppy you don't have to, if you do, great. All without the fanfare and political side issues. Excellent post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 I see Prince William and David Cameron have both now weighed in about the issue. Nothing political there, then. Not with the President of the FA, no. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 What 'similar thing' are you referring to? Some "symbol of respect" for their war dead. So you have no idea how the 3 countries that you mentioned commeorate their lost? Or even if they do so already? Symbols of respect for individuals who've lost their lives shouldn't ever be omitted by force. The poppy promotes peace between nations, if anything. You're drifting off into drivel. Try tuning your brain in a bit more carefully, and consider the question I was actually asking. Your question has neither potence nor relevance without an example. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 By the way I can see why FIFA don't want to 'sanction' this because it could lead to all kinds of things, which probably says more about the mindset of the world than they themselves. A mindset that could well conclude "well if fucking Ingurland are allowed to put poppies on their shirts we'll fucking put the star of david or a cross or a nazi symbol on wors" which is a shame. That said, I genuinly don't think that would happen. In short a lot of people are getting their nickers in a twist over something that really is harmless. A fucking poppy man the least offensive thing ever. A bit of knowledge wouldn't go ammis mind, again retrace the history of the poppy rememberance and what it all means. Its not about politics, imperialism, heroism, money. Its not about the end of the war either. Its about life and death. You don't have to buy a poppy to remember the war and the dead, again that's not what its about. Wearing the poppy should be your way of agreeing that life is indeed precious and that death and war is pointless. Who wouldn't want to celebrate that? Fuck Cameron the opportunist and Prince William... as if he even likes football man Fuck FIFA too and the FA, fuck anyone who wants to politicise and use rememberance day and the things that go hand and hand with that as tools of whatever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 I see Prince William and David Cameron have both now weighed in about the issue. Nothing political there, then. It appears you're basically using the fact people are using the poppy remeberance as a political tool to downgrade the poppy rememberance. This is the same kind of ideology that makes being proud of being English shit because the bnp have latched onto the union jack and britishness and its sad and wrong in my opinion. It is thought like that that does more harm than anything, more harm than a mere poppy stiched into a bit of fabric at a sporting venue would ever do. I'm not doing anything of the sort. It's meaningless, though, if you HAVE to do it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heron Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 By the way I can see why FIFA don't want to 'sanction' this because it could lead to all kinds of things, which probably says more about the mindset of the world than they themselves. A mindset that could well conclude "well if f***ing Ingurland are allowed to put poppies on their shirts we'll f***ing put the star of david or a cross or a nazi symbol on wors" which is a shame. That said, I genuinly don't think that would happen. In short a lot of people are getting their nickers in a twist over something that really is harmless. A f***ing poppy man the least offensive thing ever. A bit of knowledge wouldn't go ammis mind, again retrace the history of the poppy rememberance and what it all means. Its not about politics, imperialism, heroism, money. Its not about the end of the war either. Its about life and death. You don't have to buy a poppy to remember the war and the dead, again that's not what its about. Wearing the poppy should be your way of agreeing that life is indeed precious and that death and war is pointless. Who wouldn't want to celebrate that? f*** Cameron the opportunist and Prince William... as if he even likes football man f*** FIFA too and the FA, f*** anyone who wants to politicise and use rememberance day and the things that go hand and hand with that as tools of whatever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 What 'similar thing' are you referring to? Some "symbol of respect" for their war dead. So you have no idea how the 3 countries that you mentioned commeorate their lost? Or even if they do so already? Symbols of respect for individuals who've lost their lives shouldn't ever be omitted by force. The poppy promotes peace between nations, if anything. You're drifting off into drivel. Try tuning your brain in a bit more carefully, and consider the question I was actually asking. Your question has neither potence nor relevance without an example. It was a hypothetical question, so how could it have an example? Why not just admit that you don't have any answer because it's a totally valid point? Of course this fucking issue can be "linked to politics". Even the dimwits of the English Defence League can see that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It isn't a valid point without a legitemate example. You're giving the poppy connotations it simply doesn't carry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It isn't a valid point without a legitemate example. You're giving the poppy connotations it simply doesn't carry. Stop wriggling and face the question. If the German national team wanted to wear a symbol to honour their war dead, you'd see that as uncontroversial and support the idea? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foluwashola Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It isn't a valid point without a legitemate example. You're giving the poppy connotations it simply doesn't carry. Stop wriggling and face the question. If the German national team wanted to wear a symbol to honour their war dead, you'd see that as uncontroversial and support the idea? Yes. Why would anyone be against such a gesture? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts