It really is.

y va marquer wrote:

jones wrote:

They might have a "perfect right" to do so but so does he in telling them to shove it. Nobody should be forced to do anything because someone plays some shitty melody, regardless of country or occasion.

Where did I say that he does not have a right to protest?
As for the point regarding him being forced to do so: if this falls somehow within the terms of his contract as a WBA player then he should neither have signed nor been offered the contract.

Well none of us are actually privy to his contract but I'd imagine its the standard stuff about not bringing the club into disrepute.

At the end of the day he's an employee of a business and unless he espouses support for a violent or illegal organisation his politics or beliefs are no business of his employer.

y va marquer wrote:

How's that?

Because you can't force other people to respect a symbol of your state just because you do.

@ Biggus, don't they become the business of his employer if he proclaims them publicly whilst wearing the shirt and playing for the club?

Certainly not he's not a slave.
But I take your point about him being a bit strange, if you feel so strongly about something why take the queens schilling?

Qwiss! wrote:

y va marquer wrote:

How's that?

Because you can't force other people to respect a symbol of your state just because you do.

Well excluding the part where I said "[size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro] by those playing for and representing an English club" changes the meaning and the logic alright.[/font][/size]
[size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro]I would not view it as "forcing to respect" - I would class it as expecting that it not be disrespected.[/font][/size]

[size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro]At every GAA game we go to the Manc stands and faces the tricolour - he doesn't particularly want to, yet neither does he want to disrespect me or those around him.[/font][/size]

Biggus wrote:

Certainly not he's not a slave.
But I take your point about him being a bit strange, if you feel so strongly about something why take the queens schilling?

That's my question too.
I genuinely don't get it, seems very superficial to me.

You got your hubby whipped y va? Nice one.

Um, not quite.

y va marquer wrote:

Qwiss! wrote:

Because you can't force other people to respect a symbol of your state just because you do.

Well excluding the part where I said "[size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro] by those playing for and representing an English club" changes the meaning and the logic alright.[/font][/size]
[size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro]I would not view it as "forcing to respect" - I would class it as expecting that it not be disrespected.[/font][/size]

[size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro]At every GAA game we go to the Manc stands and faces the tricolour - he doesn't particularly want to, yet neither does he want to disrespect me or those around him.[/font][/size]

And if he didn't face the flag would you want him to leave Ireland and stop earning a living here?

Got to punish him for the Manc-ness within though right?

Qwiss! wrote:

y va marquer wrote:

Well excluding the part where I said "[size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro] by those playing for and representing an English club" changes the meaning and the logic alright.[/font][/size]
[size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro]I would not view it as "forcing to respect" - I would class it as expecting that it not be disrespected.[/font][/size]

[size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro]At every GAA game we go to the Manc stands and faces the tricolour - he doesn't particularly want to, yet neither does he want to disrespect me or those around him.[/font][/size]

And if he didn't face the flag would you want him to leave Ireland and stop earning a living here?

I'd question his feelings towards being here and his reasons for making such a statement, that's for sure.

y va marquer wrote:

Qwiss! wrote:

Because you can't force other people to respect a symbol of your state just because you do.

Well excluding the part where I said "[size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro] by those playing for and representing an English club" changes the meaning and the logic alright.[/font][/size]
[size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro]I would not view it as "forcing to respect" - I would class it as expecting that it not be disrespected.[/font][/size]

[size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro]At every GAA game we go to the Manc stands and faces the tricolour - he doesn't particularly want to, yet neither does he want to disrespect me or those around him.[/font][/size]

Ah but its not the same thing, if you're a visitor/guest in a country where their national anthem is played it is an expected courtesy.
But if you are in a third country and an anthem which is neither yours nor that of the host countries (as was this case) is played then I certainly wouldn't feel any obligation.

Ah ok, I suppose, I hadn't really factored in the fact that the anthem was played in a country other than England.

Americans are big on National anthems. I love theirs to be honest.

American anthem is 99% of the time very painful to listen, due to every man and his dog making his own version of it. I like the England one, Brazilian, Italian and French ones the most.

The French and Welsh anthems are best, they'd almost propel you to stand up.

marv3llous wrote:

American anthem is 99% of the time very painful to listen, due to every man and his dog making his own version of it. I like the England one, Brazilian, Italian and French ones the most.

We have the worst anthem in the world, I hate it. 

y va marquer wrote:

The French and Welsh anthems are best, they'd almost propel you to stand up.

Ah La Marseillaise flows through the blood like warm wine.
Don't know the Welsh one, don't you have to have a recognised state before you have a national anthem?

I think Amhrán na Bhfiann is a great tune too, the Australian anthem is as boring and cringworthy as fuck everyone knows it should be Waltzing Matilda.

It goes without saying that the best anthems are born in revolutionary and blood soaked contexts.

I thought Wales was a recognised state?

Good on McClean. Anything to poke a hole in England's burgeoning "rainy fascism island" tendency and (separately because he refused to wear a poppy) the sick pretence that World War I was universally approved by people of the time.

The way Australia's going I look forward to a sportsperson turning their back on our flag, then we'll see whether the right to free speech really means anything, or is just a mirage to serve racist and imperialist bigots.

Sounds quite bigoted to me to imply that people who are proud to be English are potential fascists.

@ Klaus - nowhere did I say that he had to [size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro]agree with the national identity or support expressions of nationalism, but his obvious antipathy towards the nation for me calls into question just why he would want to live and work in England.[/font][/size]
[size=medium][font=Source Sans Pro]As I mentioned to qs there are many people who had relatives murdered during the troubles, including English citizens who had their children blown up on the street.[/font][/size]
[font=Source Sans Pro]We strive towards a lasting peace on this island, we don't forget the past but we look at ways to move on, not reopen wounds.[/font]
[font=Source Sans Pro]For me displays such as McClean's drag us back to darker days.[/font]

y va marquer wrote:

Sounds quite bigoted to me to imply that people who are proud to be English are potential fascists

Did McClean stop anyone from being proud of their country? Did he insist they stop? No he was just trying to act like a free citizen in a free country.

I was responding to Bw post qs in which he applauded McClean for poking a hole in England's burgeoning "rainy fascism island" tendency.

Why is it being interpreted that I am saying he should not act like a "free citizen"?
I'm not, what I am questioning is the argument here that his not facing the flag should be accepted without comment or analysis.
I also question why somebody who so clearly and completely identifies with a fundamental republican background would want to play for an English club that brings him into situations that conflict with his personal beliefs.

Sp hypocritical to earn a living in the USA and accept dollars as their pay.

To my eyes, given the current circumstances of Catholics in NI versus black Americans in the 60s, that is in no way comparable qs.
I feel slightly under attack here given the tone of the replies so I'm going to leave this discussion behind.

Just as a last point myself on this, McClean wrote a letter to Dave Whelan about the poppy and I think think the same thing applies here too. It addresses respect and claims he hates Britain etc.

Mr Whelan, for me to wear a poppy would be as much a gesture of disrespect for the innocent people who lost their lives in the Troubles – and Bloody Sunday especially - as I have in the past been accused of disrespecting the victims of WWI and WWII.

It would be seen as an act of disrespect to those people; to my people.

I am not a war monger, or anti-British, or a terrorist or any of the accusations levelled at me in the past. I am a peaceful guy, I believe everyone should live side by side, whatever their religious or political beliefs which I respect and ask for people to respect mine in return. Since last year, I am a father and I want my daughter to grow up in a peaceful world, like any parent.

What strikes me about all this is that he is a no mark footballer who has never and will never make headlines other than for these reasons.

y va marquer wrote:

We strive towards a lasting peace on this island, we don't forget the past but we look at ways to move on, not reopen wounds.

I definitely get that, but peace is not the same thing as assimilation. It's built on respect from both parties, and the English columnists I've read seem unable to respect where McClean is coming from in this situation.

If this had been an international game between Northern Ireland and England I can't imagine that McClean would have turned his back against the English flag. But honestly, what did people think would happen when they started to salute him as if he was a servant of England? It taps directly into the heart of the conflict.

If Pulis and West Bromwich had half a braincell between them they would have foreseen this, and either scrapped the ceremony or at least made sure that McClean wasn't on the field if they had a problem with him quietly rotating 180 degrees to his right and lowering his head. Instead they created a situation where they made one of their own players a target for ultranationalists. When McClean refused to wear a poppy seed on his shirt last year hundreds of people sent death threats towards his one year old daughter. I expect the same thing to happen now. Nationalism can bring out a lot of the ugly in people.

Klaus wrote:

If Pulis and West Bromwich had half a braincell between them they would have foreseen this, and either scrapped the ceremony or at least made sure that McClean wasn't on the field if they had a problem with him quietly rotating 180 degrees to his right and lowering his head. Instead they created a situation where they made one of their own players a target for ultranationalists. When McClean refused to wear a poppy seed on his shirt last year hundreds of people sent death threats towards his one year old daughter. I expect the same thing to happen now. Nationalism can bring out a lot of the ugly in people.

That seems to have been what Martin O'Niell did when Ireland played England earlier in the summer. If it was a competitive game I'd have some sympathy for Pulis but now.

This whole situation is just weird. If McClean hates the British so much why did he spent almost his entire life living and working in England?

I believe wherever you go, no matter how strong your views about some political situations are, you don't intentionally show disrespect to a country flag. He did not even have to look up or sing to the flag. He just had to turn and face in that direction. What he did was deliberately showing disrespect in a meaningless friendly game and trying to create news.

Unlike Americans, we are not hung up on national flags/anthems bollocks.
We used to laugh at Alf Garnett types, 40 years ago.

This is such a non story, he respectfully (and understandably) refused to acknowledge the English flag. Big fucking deal.

Bold Tone wrote:

Unlike Americans, we are not hung up on national flags/anthems bollocks.
We used to laugh at Alf Garnett types, 40 years ago.

Sadly there seems to be a media effort in Britain to rile people up into just that.

Tam wrote:

What strikes me about all this is that he is a no mark footballer who has never and will never make headlines other than for these reasons.

Most footballers are no marks by your definition then. Most professional footballers don't make headlines.

I respect what he did.

I wouldnt mind if a professional footballer did that in my country against my anthem. Its his business.

Qwiss! wrote:

Sp hypocritical to earn a living in the USA and accept dollars as their pay.

Thats a completely different situation, those athletes were amateur's and not "earning a living" they were competing in the Olympics  and as  Americans would be "expected" to respect their flag/anthem but of course are entitled to their political opinions too.

Tam wrote:

What strikes me about all this is that he is a no mark footballer who has never and will never make headlines other than for these reasons.

Thats not the issue here and trying to demean a players achievements in the game is irrelevant.