Jump to content

Poppy banned for England vs Scotland


StringerBell

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Highgate said:

Poppies, it's a tricky one, the tone always seems a little wrong to me.  Not that I'd have the slightest issue with people honouring and remembering those that have fallen in war.  They should never be forgotten, their courage when you think about it, was just awesome.  Brave beyond words, and I don't know of anyone who would criticize others for choosing to wear the poppy as a mark of respect. 

But what seems missing from all the remembrances and commemorations is the question, was their sacrifice necessary? Was it even their own choice?  There seems to be a common belief that all these fallen men, were not only brave but 'fighting for freedom'?  Surely not every side in a war can be actually fighting for freedom? Some must be mistake or have other motives.

WWII is an example when the Allies were fighting a just and necessary war, every Allied soldier was doing the right thing when they signed up.  WWI, in my opinion, is not such a war.  European Empires jostling for power, industrial killing on a never before seen scale. Empires tend not to be the champions of freedom. Young men, felt enormous pressure to risk their lives in an effort to kill for their flag. How is it that countries were so effective at persuading their male population that they had no choice but to join their cause.  And other neighbouring countries were just as effective at persuading very similar men to join the opposite cause.  How easily people are led!  Since 1900 has their been any war, apart from WWII, that was truly necessary? It's not always the right thing to do to put on your country's uniform and march to war, when it's political leaders tell you to do so. 

With all the understandable desire to not forget those who have fought for their country, missing I think is the question whether they should have been asked to do so in the first place.  Missing is the anger with the failed politics and self-important leaders that that led them to the killing fields.

Even so, I still hope that England get to wear their poppies on the shirt, it's clearly not offensive to anyone else, even if it means FIFA will have to decide on similar requests, on a case by case basis in the future.

Great post.

Interesting when you talk about the Allies fighting a just war in WW2. History has shown this to be the case, but at the outbreak of WW2, did people go and fight for freedom, or just for the same reasons then did in WW1.

Wonder how much popular support there was for us to go back into Europe and fight the Germans again, especially when many of the ruling elite sympathised with facism.

Last year I listened to a long audio book on the 2nd World War. It couldn't have been more harrowing and not many countries came out of it with much credit.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 155
  • Created
  • Last Reply

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37872020

"Fifa has opened disciplinary proceedings over the Republic of Ireland's use of a logo to commemorate the centenary of the Easter Rising.

The Republic's players had the years 1916-2016 on their shirts during a friendly against Switzerland in March."

 

Interesting development in the poppy debate. How curious that it took until now, when they want to supress a charity for veterans, for FIFA to address an issue that clearly violates their policy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Highgate said:

Poppies, it's a tricky one, the tone always seems a little wrong to me.  Not that I'd have the slightest issue with people honouring and remembering those that have fallen in war.  They should never be forgotten, their courage when you think about it, was just awesome.  Brave beyond words, and I don't know of anyone who would criticize others for choosing to wear the poppy as a mark of respect. 

But what seems missing from all the remembrances and commemorations is the question, was their sacrifice necessary? Was it even their own choice?  There seems to be a common belief that all these fallen men, were not only brave but 'fighting for freedom'?  Surely not every side in a war can be actually fighting for freedom? Some must be mistake or have other motives.

WWII is an example when the Allies were fighting a just and necessary war, every Allied soldier was doing the right thing when they signed up.  WWI, in my opinion, is not such a war.  European Empires jostling for power, industrial killing on a never before seen scale. Empires tend not to be the champions of freedom. Young men, felt enormous pressure to risk their lives in an effort to kill for their flag. How is it that countries were so effective at persuading their male population that they had no choice but to join their cause.  And other neighbouring countries were just as effective at persuading very similar men to join the opposite cause.  How easily people are led!  Since 1900 has their been any war, apart from WWII, that was truly necessary? It's not always the right thing to do to put on your country's uniform and march to war, when it's political leaders tell you to do so. 

With all the understandable desire to not forget those who have fought for their country, missing I think is the question whether they should have been asked to do so in the first place.  Missing is the anger with the failed politics and self-important leaders that that led them to the killing fields.

Even so, I still hope that England get to wear their poppies on the shirt, it's clearly not offensive to anyone else, even if it means FIFA will have to decide on similar requests, on a case by case basis in the future.

Good post but I think its right that it should be not a part of the remembrance ceremonies that we debate whether the war was necessary as that really does politicise the simple act of remembrance. 

The message , unspoken but still forceful should be "lest we forget"... it may be over 100 years ago since the First  World War, with no servicemen left alive from it, but we really should never forget the  sacrifices made, never forget the horrors of war or the traumas that those that those that did survive it carried for the rest of their lives.

In fact the more futile and wasteful those sacrifices were , the more we should remember the horrors caused precisely so that it does not happen again.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like I'm in the minority here about wearing a poppy on the shirt.

I believe players should be free to do so if they choose, not be forced. Yet at the same time, I think minute's silence and some kind of presentation before KO is remembrance enough if poppies on shirts is not allowed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mrdave85 said:

I feel like I'm in the minority here about wearing a poppy on the shirt.

I believe players should be free to do so if they choose, not be forced. Yet at the same time, I think minute's silence and some kind of presentation before KO is remembrance enough if poppies on shirts is not allowed. 

You are not in a minority, I think everyone feels that if you want to wear a poppy do so, if you don't fair enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mrdave85 said:

I feel like I'm in the minority here about wearing a poppy on the shirt.

I believe players should be free to do so if they choose, not be forced. Yet at the same time, I think minute's silence and some kind of presentation before KO is remembrance enough if poppies on shirts is not allowed. 

The trouble is FIFA aren't saying that the national associations cannot force players to wear them... They are trying to force the FA to force the players not to wear them.

and in any case I could understand a player objecting to a shirt with say wonga sponsoring or something. But what kind of bell-end would object to a poppy on their shirt? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, PistoldPete2 said:

The trouble is FIFA aren't saying that the national associations cannot force players to wear them... They are trying to force the FA to force the players not to wear them.

and in any case I could understand a player objecting to a shirt with say wonga sponsoring or something. But what kind of bell-end would object to a poppy on their shirt? 

250003555.jpg&f=1

I do agree with him in his objection though and I don't think he or anybody should be forced to wear one. I just think he's a greedy hypocritical idiot for happily living, working and paying taxes in a country that supports the occupying forces he hates viscerally enough to object to wearing a flower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, PistoldPete2 said:

The trouble is FIFA aren't saying that the national associations cannot force players to wear them... They are trying to force the FA to force the players not to wear them.

and in any case I could understand a player objecting to a shirt with say wonga sponsoring or something. But what kind of bell-end would object to a poppy on their shirt? 

bell-ends called fifa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anon said:

250003555.jpg&f=1

I do agree with him in his objection though and I don't think he or anybody should be forced to wear one. I just think he's a greedy hypocritical idiot for happily living, working and paying taxes in a country that supports the occupying forces he hates viscerally enough to object to wearing a flower.

Is this the Irish guy? Well he looks like a bell end and if it's the guy I am thinking of he certainly is a bellend. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Anon said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37872020

"Fifa has opened disciplinary proceedings over the Republic of Ireland's use of a logo to commemorate the centenary of the Easter Rising.

The Republic's players had the years 1916-2016 on their shirts during a friendly against Switzerland in March."

 

Interesting development in the poppy debate. How curious that it took until now, when they want to supress a charity for veterans, for FIFA to address an issue that clearly violates their policy.

Most likely FIFA knew nothing about what was on the Irish jerseys. Friendly matches between Rep. Ireland and Switzerland aren't exactly 'box office', and the mention of 1916 was very low key, in fact I knew nothing about it until it was brought up in the poppy debate.

I'm sure the FAI are absolutely delighted that the FA informed FIFA about this, probably landing them with a fine.  Although, I'd have to admit the FA did have a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Anon said:

250003555.jpg&f=1

I do agree with him in his objection though and I don't think he or anybody should be forced to wear one. I just think he's a greedy hypocritical idiot for happily living, working and paying taxes in a country that supports the occupying forces he hates viscerally enough to object to wearing a flower.

I don't think he's hypocritical at all. I detest the royal family yet I have to keep the lizards in Crown Jewels, palaces, cars and have to use money with her mug on it. he 

Feel free to call me a hypocrite for that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, mrdave85 said:

I feel like I'm in the minority here about wearing a poppy on the shirt.

I believe players should be free to do so if they choose, not be forced. Yet at the same time, I think minute's silence and some kind of presentation before KO is remembrance enough if poppies on shirts is not allowed. 

I don't believe any players are forced to wear the poppy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Anon said:

250003555.jpg&f=1

I do agree with him in his objection though and I don't think he or anybody should be forced to wear one. I just think he's a greedy hypocritical idiot for happily living, working and paying taxes in a country that supports the occupying forces he hates viscerally enough to object to wearing a flower.

I don't think anyone would object to anybody not wanting to wear a poppy on their football shirt. I consider him to be a bit ignorant for turning his back on the flag but I guess he missed a few branches when he fell through the brain tree. 

I don't have any issue with him playing on the mainland of his country and paying his taxes towards the services that he benefits from. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Anon said:

250003555.jpg&f=1

I do agree with him in his objection though and I don't think he or anybody should be forced to wear one. I just think he's a greedy hypocritical idiot for happily living, working and paying taxes in a country that supports the occupying forces he hates viscerally enough to object to wearing a flower.

He's one of the few that comes out of this debate with any credibility or honesty.

He has stated publically that he would wear a poppy every day of the year if it was to remember the dead of World War 1 and 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The poppy is massively political. I organized the collections for it at university in the 1980s and was made a bit of a pariah as a result because many of my fellow students saw it as a symbol of militarism and conservatism. Then, far fewer people wore them and the white ("peace") poppy was a thing, also political. Nowadays I don't like that you're really not allowed to wear a poppy. It should be about personal choice, but there's way too much peer and societal pressure making it impossible for people not to wear them.

From the global perspective, it remembers the British fallen in illegal wars such as Iraq. When we finally pull out of Afghanistan next year and the Taliban resume control at some point after as they inevitably will, do we want to see them play with some symbol referring to Afghan "freedom fighters" on their shirts? Why shouldn't the Russians be able to make some statement about their own dead in Ukraine?

So I think FIFA's correct in its interpretation. The best solution would have been to discover (or guess) how much a FIFA fine would be if the teams went ahead and wore poppy shirts and then don't wear the shirts but instead donate the money to the British Legion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, uttoxram75 said:

He's one of the few that comes out of this debate with any credibility or honesty.

He has stated publically that he would wear a poppy every day of the year if it was to remember the dead of World War 1 and 2.

That's not how a military works. It's not a co-operative. Our troops aren't polled on what conflicts we should enter into. Soldiers posted to Ireland served with the same distinction and those in the world wars and deserve the same level of respect and compassion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2016 at 22:08, Mostyn6 said:

symbolism... I'm not too fussed about it. 

Football has spent the last 20 years distancing itself from the people, let it continue. There are plenty of ways of showing your respect without an embroidered poppy on a shirt for 90 minutes.

Wait until the religious **** comes out. You'll be able to do anything you fr!gging well like in the name of your made up imaginary friend, for which there is absolutely no evidence that exists. But respect dead people for instance? No, no, no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2016 at 22:38, Mostyn6 said:

symbolism... I'm not too fussed about it. 

Football has spent the last 20 years distancing itself from the people, let it continue. There are plenty of ways of showing your respect without an embroidered poppy on a shirt for 90 minutes.

Ignoring that this "poppy ban" is a media beatup, such moves are actually there to prevent football from distancing people. Regardless of the "good" in such symbolism, sport should be politically neutral, and ultimately there will be political connotations to them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...