Quins v Sale (Actual NH live Rugby)

[MSG#]

My biggest issue with not doing it, is why the hell not.

They clearly agree with the message, otherwise they wouldn't wear the t-shirt. What is the big deal about going down on one knee for 20 seconds. It's a simple easy thing to do, but it's a powerful symbol given their prominent positions.

Because it is about something that happened in the States, and they are rugby players playing for their club team in England. They stood in respect for the care workers and advertised their anti-racist commitment prominently.

[sockwithaticket]

My biggest issue with not doing it, is why the hell not.

They clearly agree with the message, otherwise they wouldn't wear the t-shirt. What is the big deal about going down on one knee for 20 seconds. It's a simple easy thing to do, but it's a powerful symbol given their prominent positions.

Because it is about something that happened in the States, and they are rugby players playing for their club team in England. They stood in respect for the care workers and advertised their anti-racist commitment prominently.

Do you have to actively try to misread a situation that extensively?

[OomStruisbaai]

What's better for team cohesion, mandating that everyone do the same thing, despite some disagreeing, or allowing the latitude for different expressions of the same sentiment?

I know where I'd put my money.

Eendrag maak mag.

[Slick]

My biggest issue with not doing it, is why the hell not.

They clearly agree with the message, otherwise they wouldn't wear the t-shirt. What is the big deal about going down on one knee for 20 seconds. It's a simple easy thing to do, but it's a powerful symbol given their prominent positions.

I disagree with you on that quite profoundly. How many people that are taking the knee are doing it because it’s a simple and easy thing to do and it’s expected of them without any real thought going into it.

The guys wearing the t-shirts and standing with their team but not taking the knee are the ones that have probably given it the most thought and decided that they agree with the sentiment but not the action. That to me seems much more sincere.

At this game one of the white players standing had his hand on the shoulder of one of the black players kneeling- that for me had far more emotional impact

[Raggs]

My biggest issue with not doing it, is why the hell not.

They clearly agree with the message, otherwise they wouldn't wear the t-shirt. What is the big deal about going down on one knee for 20 seconds. It's a simple easy thing to do, but it's a powerful symbol given their prominent positions.

I disagree with you on that quite profoundly. How many people that are taking the knee are doing it because it’s a simple and easy thing to do and it’s expected of them without any real thought going into it.

The guys wearing the t-shirts and standing with their team but not taking the knee are the ones that have probably given it the most thought and decided that they agree with the sentiment but not the action. That to me seems much more sincere.

At this game one of the white players standing had his hand on the shoulder of one of the black players kneeling- that for me had far more emotional impact

What thought is there to take? If they're genuinely religious church going folk etc that believe they should only do it for god, then so be it, no issues. Otherwise, it's a simple easy thing to do, takes a few seconds and has a potentially large impact.

[notfatcat]

and has a potentially large impact

Such as?

[Slick]

My biggest issue with not doing it, is why the hell not.

They clearly agree with the message, otherwise they wouldn't wear the t-shirt. What is the big deal about going down on one knee for 20 seconds. It's a simple easy thing to do, but it's a powerful symbol given their prominent positions.

I disagree with you on that quite profoundly. How many people that are taking the knee are doing it because it’s a simple and easy thing to do and it’s expected of them without any real thought going into it.

The guys wearing the t-shirts and standing with their team but not taking the knee are the ones that have probably given it the most thought and decided that they agree with the sentiment but not the action. That to me seems much more sincere.

At this game one of the white players standing had his hand on the shoulder of one of the black players kneeling- that for me had far more emotional impact

What thought is there to take? If they're genuinely religious church going folk etc that believe they should only do it for god, then so be it, no issues. Otherwise, it's a simple easy thing to do, takes a few seconds and has a potentially large impact.

Not everyone standing is doing it for religious reasons. Forcing or embarrassing everyone to do it is not a very sensible route and completely cheapens the whole thing.

[Raggs]

and has a potentially large impact

Such as?

It only takes one kid watching it to think perhaps he shouldn't be such a racist dick, for a large impact to be made.

Not everyone standing is doing it for religious reasons. Forcing or embarrassing everyone to do it is not a very sensible route and completely cheapens the whole thing.

Can you give me other good reasons to stand? Clearly no one was forced to do it.

Can you tell me how embarrassed you would need to be to kneel? How big a deal is it for you to go onto one knee for a few seconds to show support for a good cause? You're not being asked to pledge allegiance to someone or some group etc. Just make a momentary gesture to show that you believe racism is wrong.

If you've got some super serious reason against kneeling in particular, then no problem. I may have other issues with those doing it because of faith (like do they still play on Sunday's?? I know there's been a few rugby players that don't, had a lot of respect for them).

[sockwithaticket]

If an observer's not getting it from the words "rugby against racism" emblazoned on every player's chest, I'm not sure that kneeling is going to bring them around.

Have you listened to the Rugby Union Weekly pod where Ugo talks about this? He explains pretty well why some might not want to kneel - essentially, players might agreee with the principle of black lives matter but not with Black Lives Matter due to a number of demands made during the protest in the organisation's name*. Kneeling can be seen as an endorsement of BLM rather than blm.

[Raggs]

If an observer's not getting it from the words "rugby against racism" emblazoned on every player's chest, I'm not sure that kneeling is going to bring them around.

Have you listened to the Rugby Union Weekly pod where Ugo talks about this? He explains pretty well why some might not want to kneel - essentially, players might agreee with the principle of black lives matter but not with Black Lives Matter due to a number of demands made during the protest in the organisation's name*. Kneeling can be seen as an endorsement of BLM rather than blm.

Yeah I get that they don't want to support BLM, I thought myself it was pretty clear that the clubs were doing it as blm though. I'll take a listen.

EDIT - Everyone wearing a t-shirt isn't seen as being forced or embarrassed, but everyone taking a knee would be?

[assfly]

If an observer's not getting it from the words "rugby against racism" emblazoned on every player's chest, I'm not sure that kneeling is going to bring them around.

Have you listened to the Rugby Union Weekly pod where Ugo talks about this? He explains pretty well why some might not want to kneel - essentially, players might agreee with the principle of black lives matter but not with Black Lives Matter due to a number of demands made during the protest in the organisation's name*. Kneeling can be seen as an endorsement of BLM rather than blm.

Yes that was my take on it too.

It was always going to be a complicated issue for Saffa players, given the situation in SA.

[Margin__Walker]

If an observer's not getting it from the words "rugby against racism" emblazoned on every player's chest, I'm not sure that kneeling is going to bring them around.

Have you listened to the Rugby Union Weekly pod where Ugo talks about this? He explains pretty well why some might not want to kneel - essentially, players might agreee with the principle of black lives matter but not with Black Lives Matter due to a number of demands made during the protest in the organisation's name*. Kneeling can be seen as an endorsement of BLM rather than blm.

Yeah I get that they don't want to support BLM, I thought myself it was pretty clear that the clubs were doing it as blm though. I'll take a listen.

EDIT - Everyone wearing a t-shirt isn't seen as being forced or embarrassed, but everyone taking a knee would be?

The T Shirt is a focused and unambiguous message that any right minded person can get behind

Kneeling has all kinds of other connotations. Seen as a full endorsement of demands made in the name of BLM, as Sock mentions, religious aspect and the fact that it can feel like a pretty submissive gesture that a lot of people just aren't comfortable doing and shouldn't be shamed into doing. It's should be a completely personal choice with absolutely no repercussions for not kneeling

[JM2K6]

I totally understand that SA politics involving sport are complicated and often counter-intuitive / batshit insane, but I'm confused as to why that means it's less likely for SA players to kneel. They are more likely to get flak from the govt for not doing it, right? So there must be an equally strong reason to not do it. What are these counter pressures?

[sockwithaticket]

I totally understand that SA politics involving sport are complicated and often counter-intuitive / batshit insane, but I'm confused as to why that means it's less likely for SA players to kneel. They are more likely to get flak from the govt for not doing it, right? So there must be an equally strong reason to not do it. What are these counter pressures?

Goode said on his pod it's a religious thing, that the players will only kneel for God.

[Raggs]

I totally understand that SA politics involving sport are complicated and often counter-intuitive / batshit insane, but I'm confused as to why that means it's less likely for SA players to kneel. They are more likely to get flak from the govt for not doing it, right? So there must be an equally strong reason to not do it. What are these counter pressures?

Goode said on his pod it's a religious thing, that the players will only kneel for God.

I can respect that for a reason for not kneeling.

I mean I still then get pissed off when those same guys will play on a Sunday, but yeah.

[JM2K6]

I totally understand that SA politics involving sport are complicated and often counter-intuitive / batshit insane, but I'm confused as to why that means it's less likely for SA players to kneel. They are more likely to get flak from the govt for not doing it, right? So there must be an equally strong reason to not do it. What are these counter pressures?

Goode said on his pod it's a religious thing, that the players will only kneel for God.

That does make sense - I just wasn't sure it really answered why every Sale Saffer stood and Quins' saffer kneeled. Coincidence then?

[sockwithaticket]

If an observer's not getting it from the words "rugby against racism" emblazoned on every player's chest, I'm not sure that kneeling is going to bring them around.

Have you listened to the Rugby Union Weekly pod where Ugo talks about this? He explains pretty well why some might not want to kneel - essentially, players might agreee with the principle of black lives matter but not with Black Lives Matter due to a number of demands made during the protest in the organisation's name*. Kneeling can be seen as an endorsement of BLM rather than blm.

Yeah I get that they don't want to support BLM, I thought myself it was pretty clear that the clubs were doing it as blm though. I'll take a listen.

EDIT - Everyone wearing a t-shirt isn't seen as being forced or embarrassed, but everyone taking a knee would be?

I think being against racism is a baseline that everyone can hit and that wearing the t-shirt is a passive thing anyone who's not actually a racist would be happy to go along with, taking the knee is a specific gesture with acquired bagge that has to be actively done and that's what should be left to individuals. I wouldn't be embarassed if my boss told me I had to kneel, but I'd definitely be annoyed. I

[assfly]

I totally understand that SA politics involving sport are complicated and often counter-intuitive / batshit insane, but I'm confused as to why that means it's less likely for SA players to kneel. They are more likely to get flak from the govt for not doing it, right? So there must be an equally strong reason to not do it. What are these counter pressures?

Goode said on his pod it's a religious thing, that the players will only kneel for God.

Further that, I wouldn't be surprised if the issue of farm murders is at the centre of their decisions as some of them coming from the farming community.

[sockwithaticket]

I totally understand that SA politics involving sport are complicated and often counter-intuitive / batshit insane, but I'm confused as to why that means it's less likely for SA players to kneel. They are more likely to get flak from the govt for not doing it, right? So there must be an equally strong reason to not do it. What are these counter pressures?

Goode said on his pod it's a religious thing, that the players will only kneel for God.

That does make sense - I just wasn't sure it really answered why every Sale Saffer stood and Quins' saffer kneeled. Coincidence then?

I know a couple of the Glaws Saffers stood rather than knelt, so it's not just Sale. Quins guys are atheists or more relaxed in their Christianity?
The overriding impression is that Saffers take their religion very seriously, but that can't be all of them.

I totally understand that SA politics involving sport are complicated and often counter-intuitive / batshit insane, but I'm confused as to why that means it's less likely for SA players to kneel. They are more likely to get flak from the govt for not doing it, right? So there must be an equally strong reason to not do it. What are these counter pressures?

Goode said on his pod it's a religious thing, that the players will only kneel for God.

I can respect that for a reason for not kneeling.

I mean I still then get pissed off when those same guys will play on a Sunday, but yeah.

I have long since ceased to be surprised by apparent inconsistency or hypocrisy in the religious.

They'll have their own reasons which are able to reconcile playing on the Sabbath with a faith so significant that they can't kneel for anyone but their God.

[Sandstorm]

I have long since ceased to be surprised by apparent inconsistency or hypocrisy in the religious.

They'll have their own reasons which are able to reconcile playing on the Sabbath with a faith so significant that they can't kneel for anyone but their God.

No-one can tell me that Rohan Janse van Rensberg doesn't kneel in the showers.

[Slick]

If an observer's not getting it from the words "rugby against racism" emblazoned on every player's chest, I'm not sure that kneeling is going to bring them around.

Have you listened to the Rugby Union Weekly pod where Ugo talks about this? He explains pretty well why some might not want to kneel - essentially, players might agreee with the principle of black lives matter but not with Black Lives Matter due to a number of demands made during the protest in the organisation's name*. Kneeling can be seen as an endorsement of BLM rather than blm.

Yes, I thought this was fairly obvious, but there you go.

[Un Pilier]

Yeah, Billy has said he’s a person of God first and foremost.

[Raggs]

Yeah, Billy has said he’s a person of God first and foremost.

He referred to his support of Folau too. Again, if he's so very religious, why is he playing on Sundays.

[Amethyst]

Yeah, Billy has said he’s a person of God first and foremost.

He referred to his support of Folau too. Again, if he's so very religious, why is he playing on Sundays.

Depends which day he sees as his Sunday.

[Raggs]

Well the Romans apparently decided the Jews had got it wrong, but i don't believe you're allowed to choose...

[Un Pilier]

Yeah, Billy has said he’s a person of God first and foremost.

He referred to his support of Folau too. Again, if he's so very religious, why is he playing on Sundays.

I’m not a Christian so have no idea. However, it’s pretty clear you are taking a very narrow view of Christian beliefs.

[Raggs]

Yeah, Billy has said he’s a person of God first and foremost.

He referred to his support of Folau too. Again, if he's so very religious, why is he playing on Sundays.

I’m not a Christian so have no idea. However, it’s pretty clear you are taking a very narrow view of Christian beliefs.

Very narrow? Like follow one of the biggest rules in the book? I accept that they enjoy twisting the rules to suit themselves, but I think not working on the sabbath is a fairly big rule, and if you're going to follow all the ones that Folau posted about, you should probably be following that one too.

[Un Pilier]

He referred to his support of Folau too. Again, if he's so very religious, why is he playing on Sundays.

I’m not a Christian so have no idea. However, it’s pretty clear you are taking a very narrow view of Christian beliefs.

Very narrow? Like follow one of the biggest rules in the book? I accept that they enjoy twisting the rules to suit themselves, but I think not working on the sabbath is a fairly big rule, and if you're going to follow all the ones that Folau posted about, you should probably be following that one too.

Yes, very narrow, by which I mean that’s not how the vast majority of Christians live.

[Raggs]

The vast majority aren't condemning lots of people to hell for what are really relatively minor things if issues at all. They want to play at religion that's on them. But if they're going to ask me to respect their vile views because their book says it's so, then I'm going to expect them to do everything else the book expects if they want me to believe they're taking it seriously.

[Un Pilier]

The vast majority aren't condemning lots of people to hell for what are really relatively minor things if issues at all. They want to play at religion that's on them. But if they're going to ask me to respect their vile views because their book says it's so, then I'm going to expect them to do everything else the book expects if they want me to believe they're taking it seriously.

I’m not sure it’s entirely reasonable to conflate Folau’s beliefs with a number of Christians who decide they shouldn’t take the knee. I would do it and my thoughts would be with Martin Luther King taking the knee at the march in Selma. I guess we all have different values and motivations having grown up at different times in different places. I just don’t feel in a position to judge what others are thinking.

[Raggs]

I was talking about Billy Vunipola in the post you quoted. Billy was talking about his support for folaus position.

[ASMO]

For me T shirt wearing should not be conflated with kneeling. T-shirt states a clear message saying racism should not be tolerated, kneeling is more of a political/support gesture for an organisation who's aims/values they do not agree with, an organisation who's core message in their view may have become somewhat diluted with political and somewhat radical individuals and ideals.

[fishfoodie]

I thought Lewis Hamilton was being a dick when he questioned why some drivers weren't taking a knee; but instead stood at the start of race.

This typified exactly why causes like this, fall on their arses.

Ask for peoples support; fine. Start telling people how they have to demonstrate their full, & proper support; Not so fine.

The Instant you start telling people they are racist/facist/etc, etc; because they have the nerve to not agree with you; you lose the argument.

This is also a two way street. Folau et al; don't get to tell anyone else they are Christians, if they don't agree with their particular interpretation of Christian doctrine

[Amethyst]

The vast majority aren't condemning lots of people to hell for what are really relatively minor things if issues at all. They want to play at religion that's on them. But if they're going to ask me to respect their vile views because their book says it's so, then I'm going to expect them to do everything else the book expects if they want me to believe they're taking it seriously.

You may be surprised but nobody actually cares what YOU think nor do they worry which things YOU take seriously or not. You don't respect their views and you can call them hypocrites or whatever, so what? In the same way, don't YOU prescribe what they should do or not do. Why should they respect YOUR views if you don't respect theirs?