[Football] Sam Morsy

[Algernon]

A Captain's armband is a Captain's armband.
It's a way of letting players, officials, and fans that the chap wearing it is the Captain of his team.
That's all it should be, and it should never have become a polarising billboard to someone's/anyone's acceptances or support.
If any Club or any organisation wish to show their support for one group of people or another, let them show it on their electronic pitch-side hoardings or their corporate literature.
Even have it loud and proud on their e-tickets to show that they're an inclusive club that cares for mostly everyone.
However don't make an attempt to advertise your allegiances vicariously by forcing one single person on your team into the social media spotlight. They may hold some differing views.

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

I’ll be interested in how Ipswich square his responsibilities as a captain with his Ipswich club duties with the wider Ipswich community and its LGBTQ representation. Unless of course Ipswich FC don’t give a stuff.
Not a lot of joined up thinking going on here and a kick in the teeth if you are Ipswich LGBTQ.

It’s the hypocrisy that gets me. LGBTQ is against Islam so he‘ll not wear the arm band. I could get it (though why he would believe in an imaginary friend is still confusing) if he also refused to wear a shirt with a gambling organisation on it. In fact if he had done both I’d have a grudging respect for him, though he’d still be a dickhead but at least an honest one.

If he’d have said ‘my religion forbids me to wear the armband, but I deplore the victimisation and persecution of the LGBTQ community’ then he would have been fine.

 

[Hiheidi]

 

[Nitram]

A Captain's armband is a Captain's armband.
It's a way of letting players, officials, and fans that the chap wearing it is the Captain of his team.
That's all it should be, and it should never have become a polarising billboard to someone's/anyone's acceptances or support.
If any Club or any organisation wish to show their support for one group of people or another, let them show it on their electronic pitch-side hoardings or their corporate literature.
Even have it loud and proud on their e-tickets to show that they're an inclusive club that cares for mostly everyone.
However don't make an attempt to advertise your allegiances vicariously by forcing one single person on your team into the social media spotlight. They may hold some differing views.

Or find someone else who is able to represent the club’s stated values.

 

[Commander]

Fair play to him, and the right decision by Utd. Forcing people to promote things that go against their beliefs is not the right way to move civilisations forward. And nor is shaming them publicly by having everyone else do it except them.

 

[NorthstandRacoon]

this is all creating so much drama. Why does footbal feel the need to offer itself up for all sorts of campaigns, Poppy's, rainbow laces, whatever next. Its football, either have the campaigns and allow for personal choice without question or don't involve it in the game.

Aren't footballers fined for showing political messages undershirts etc? So why force anyone to wear something they don;t agree with.

This.

 

[NorthstandRacoon]

Fair play to him, and the right decision by Utd. Forcing people to promote things that go against their beliefs is not the right way to move civilisations forward. And nor is shaming them publicly by having everyone else do it except them.

This, as much as I completely disagree with his beliefs.

 

[NorthstandRacoon]

Completely disagree with beliefs of those against LGBTQ communities, but, it's their opinion and it would be good to educate them. That's all we can do. Not fine and publicly decrying sportspeople for just standing up for what they believe in, wrong as it may be. Cannot believe there are fines being issued for those who disagree with this based on their (wrong) religious beliefs. We are meant to be an accepting liberal society ffs.

 

[Commander]

This, as much as I completely disagree with his beliefs.

Same. But the fact you feel you have to publicly state it is part of the problem.

 

[Jackthelad]

We have a pride month already. I don’t get why players are expected to have another month of LGBTQ awareness. Stonewall are quite a murky group as well.
None of this helps gay people. There are loads of minorities groups who don’t get their own campaigns.

 

[fly high]

We have a pride month already. I don’t get why players are expected to have another month of LGBTQ awareness. Stonewall are quite a murky group as well.
None of this helps gay people. There are loads of minorities groups who don’t get their own campaigns.

A friend absolutely hates the Q bit added, for him it is deeply offensive so no they don't represent him or his husband.

 

[Deadly Danson]

We have a pride month already. I don’t get why players are expected to have another month of LGBTQ awareness. Stonewall are quite a murky group as well.
None of this helps gay people. There are loads of minorities groups who don’t get their own campaigns.

 

[pigmanovich]

There are loads of minorities groups who don’t get their own campaigns.

I can’t think of a minority that’s less visible, and treated with more hostility, in football.

 

[Jackthelad]

A friend absolutely hates the Q bit added, for him it is deeply offensive so no they don't represent him or his husband.

There is loads debates different heated views among the gay community on it. My half brother who is gay hates how corporate it's all become.

 

[Mellotron]

Morsy has committed FIVE fouls, in the first 28 minutes of this game tonight, and somehow not yet carded.

This is what I was hoping to find in this thread when I opened it.

 

[Grizz]

A friend absolutely hates the Q bit added, for him it is deeply offensive so no they don't represent him or his husband.

But that's a them issue not a Stonewall issue. I grew up in a generation where being called queer was the ultimate gay slur, the word still gets my back up, I really struggle hearing it said out loud, but the newer generations of LGTBQ+ people don't see it that way. It's a way they feel comfortable identifying themselves and that should be embraced, it's progress, no matter how uncomfortable it makes me feel. As to Stonewall, their contribution to the Gay Rights movement can only be measured in the freedoms we have now. If it wasn't for organisations like them, we'd still be in the dark ages. People may not agree with them for everything they do, their stance on Trans Rights upsets a vocal few, but that should not tarnish their historical contribution.

As to Morsy. His decision, his beliefs, I'm not going to argue with him over it. Yep I think he's a hypocrite, I think if it was a kick out racism message, and anti-islamaphobia message he'd be all over it, but obviously his version of inclusivity stops there. Same with Guehi defacing his armband. No one questions your love for Jesus, but by doing what you're doing is letting down every one of your LGBTQ+ fans (of which there will be many). You're saying that they don't matter, you don't take this seriously and this is one the last serious barriers to inclusivity within football. And again, that's your right, but then just say, don't make me captain for this match. If you feel that strongly about us doing this, then allow an Ally to be the Captain and send out a strong message.

As a gay man it makes me so sad that in 2024 we're still dealing with this shit and unfortunately I think it's just going to get worse and go backwards.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I wouldn’t wear one. Not anti LGBTQ+

I just don’t like wearing statement items like that.

Am I a prick for that?

If your workplace had made a decision that, because it is public facing workplace and has a sort of community position, if not exactly a community role, and it wanted to signal support for a cause relating to inclusivity then....... well I will leave it for you to ponder

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Fair play to him, and the right decision by Utd. Forcing people to promote things that go against their beliefs is not the right way to move civilisations forward. And nor is shaming them publicly by having everyone else do it except them.

Can't remember whether I asked - do you support James McLean's refusal to wear a shirt emblazoned with a poppy? If you do I can't argue with you.

 

[Nitram]

Can't remember whether I asked - do you support James McLean's refusal to wear a shirt emblazoned with a poppy? If you do I can't argue with you.

I support James McLeans refusal to wear a poppy on the basis that my parents generation fought to provide freedom of choice and as part of that should be acceptance of James’s point of view.

However the reason I disagree with the stance taken by Man Utd and Ipswich is that a religion is being used to defend personal choice but the basis of this is flawed in my view.

Religion is a personal choice, sexuality is not, using religion to discriminate against people is backward and dangerous.
It should be called out in the workplace, and professional footballers fit into that criteria.

Ipswich along with many other clubs have done great work to build ties with the community, why collapse that support at the first obstacle. It’s cowardly.

https://www.itfc.co.uk/news/2024/december/03/club-supporting-rainbow-laces/

 

[Hometownglory]

There are hardly any, if any, openly gay footballers. I wonder why...