Idrissa Gueye refuses to wear shirt with rainbow number

by   |   18/05/2022  144 Comments  [Jump to last]

I see a lot of questions being asked in France after Idrissa Gueye refused to play for PSG last week because of rainbow-coloured numbers on their jerseys to join the fight against homophobia.

In the corresponding fixture last season, he cried off with a bug? Shame on him – I've lost all respect for him.

Great to see Harry Kane and other professionals support Jake Daniels.

Former Everton player Idrissa Gueye 'REFUSED to play in rainbow colours as his club PSG backed the fight against homophobia', with manager Mauricio Pochettino blaming his absence on 'personal reasons'

back Return to Talking Points index  :  Add your Comments »

Reader Comments (144)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer

Kieran Kinsella
1 Posted 17/05/2022 at 18:34:10

Bigger issue than Gueye may be the hypocrisy of PSG who are owned by Qatar where you won't find any rainbow shirts.

Will Mabon
2 Posted 17/05/2022 at 20:40:49

I of course have no idea of Gueye's actual position. It's possible his actions are related to the principle of football/sport being increasingly used as a vehicle for political and social messages of change - with dissenters almost automatically subject to accusation of the relevant -ism.

I say this because it's my own view. It is unfair to impose the role of ambassador upon people this way. Particularly in an environment where they are subjected to justifying their position at the risk of their whole career and reputation.

Perhaps Gueye does indeed object to the intent, who knows. Should he not openly voice that or insult anyone publicly, then he is allowed to believe what he wishes.

Mike Gaynes
3 Posted 17/05/2022 at 23:18:03
Christy and Will, not much doubt about his beliefs. Gueye is a devout Muslim from one of the most homophobic nations on the planet. Senegal flatly outlaws homosexual contact and has been known to prosecute people for engaging in it.

This afternoon, the president of Senegal personally expressed his support for Gueye's actions and for his religious beliefs.

From the New York Times: "According to the team source with knowledge of PSG's internal conversations over the weekend, club officials had told Gueye that the team was committed to the campaign and that he had no option but wear the same jersey as the rest of his teammates if he wanted to play. When Gueye decided he would not, he was sent to the stands for the game, according to a person with knowledge of the incident."

There have been some suggestions here about bringing Gana back to Goodison this summer when he's out of contract. This would seem to eliminate that possibility.

Will Mabon
4 Posted 17/05/2022 at 00:00:05
I wouldn't pretend for a minute there's a straightforward answer, Mike. It's a huge area that would support and require huge discussion. Maybe for another time!

I will say just this for example, which reflects in no way my view of religion. If there was currently started a campaign to support the rights of people to openly practice Christianity, that required shirt messages or logos, and Gueye and other Muslims refused to wear them... I'd bet you my house they would not be forced to wear them, nor penalized.

This growing piggy-backing of "Messages" onto sport is fraught, and the compulsion to partake is not the way to get people to be more open and accepting of the various "Differences" among us.

Mike Gaynes
5 Posted 18/05/2022 at 01:56:48
Will, certainly there's no hard-and-fast rules about it, nor a clear line. But there's no "compulsion to partake" involved.

Gueye's employer, who pays him and provides his uniform, dictated that the players would wear a particular uniform for a game. Gueye declined and therefore did not dress. He wasn't fined, or fired, or forced to profess beliefs he does not share... just given the day off for not wearing the shirt his employer directed. It's entirely his choice. And choices have consequences.

My point is that his views would not be welcomed in the Premier League today. I don't think he can come back to Everton.

Ernie Baywood
6 Posted 18/05/2022 at 05:06:20
Mike, Idrissa hasn't shared any views. He's done nothing at all to offend.

I didn't raise arms against Russia. I didn't even change my Facebook profile pic to a Ukraine flag. It doesn't mean I'm pro-Russia or anti-Ukraine.

If people don't want to participate, or if they hold contrary beliefs, then why should anyone else care? As long as Idrissa is not running around shouting anti-homosexual abuse, then he's not really causing any problems.

Mike Gaynes
7 Posted 18/05/2022 at 06:50:01
Ernie, not true. He may have done nothing to offend you, but he certainly has offended people.

Eric Arassus, the president of France LGBT+ Sports Federation: “Idrissa Gueye is a great player, but religion is not a part of the sport. Every player took part (in the rainbow shirt initiative), except him. He should be sanctioned. Gueye’s excuses show that the club (PSG) and league let homophobia happen.”

Rouge Direct, a French anti-homophobia organization: “Homophobia is not an opinion but a crime. The LFP and PSG must ask Gueye for explanations and very quickly. And sanction him if necessary.”

Travis Yoesting, footy columnist for the Houston Chronicle and The18:

"LGBTQ+ rights are human rights. Though many try to politicize the issue, human rights should not be up for political debate, just as freedom of religion should not be up for debate. If Gueye refuses to play in a uniform supporting those human rights, then he should be subject to sanctions. PSG has reportedly said it is handling the issue internally, but there has been no public statement on the matter, implying complicity.

"While Gueye could try to hide behind his faith as an excuse, the truth is every other player was fine with the rainbow colors, including many other Muslims and Christians, two religions that don’t exactly have great track records when it comes to LGBTQ+ rights. In the past, Gueye has seemingly been fine wearing gambling or alcohol sponsors from his time in England with Everton and Aston Villa, but it seems LGBTQ+ rights are a step too far."

You may not agree with the views of these organizations and commentators, but they exist and are deeply felt. In many eyes, Gueye has aligned himself with intolerance and is therefore damaged goods.

Danny O’Neill
8 Posted 18/05/2022 at 07:05:31
Genuinely what has he done or not done?

I haven't looked.

Robert Tressell
9 Posted 18/05/2022 at 07:17:08
As it happens, I don't think Gueye was coming back to Everton anyway. Why do we always want our old players back?

And anyway, if he doesn't like the rainbow shirt he should hear how his name is pronounced.

More seriously, I'm glad his teammates (including other Muslims) just got on with it. Surely the sport should be past all this by now. Ridiculous that the young lad at Blackpool coming out is even a story in this day and age.

Ernie Baywood
10 Posted 18/05/2022 at 08:25:07
Congratulations on your lack of tolerance. One man's silent and peaceful stance (did he broadcast any view or announce anything?) has led to people criticising and discrediting him with the "oh, he wore alcohol and gambling sponsors". Let's not pretend those comments are anything else... They're designed to claim he's not even a good Muslim so he must just hate gay people. And you're repeating them!

And Mike, I still don't see any offence in those releases. I see righteousness, which isn't the same. They want him flogged for not participating in what they want him to participate in.

I don't care what people do. They're all fine to me. Equal rights for all? Absolutely. Gay marriage, why not?

Is it great that we have campaigns to support a range of different forms of discrimination? Absolutely.

But a Muslim doesn't want to align himself with the LGBTQIA+ movement? Okay, well keep it to yourself, treat people fairly, and we won't have an issue.

I just don't see the offence he could possibly cause, unless people are desperately trying to find something to be offended about. He said and did literally nothing!

Tony Hill
11 Posted 18/05/2022 at 08:42:11
Ah yes. Freedom shall consist in the freedom to agree with us. Because we’re right, as every decent person knows.

So goes the slippery, lethal, modern liberal mind.

Dave Abrahams
12 Posted 18/05/2022 at 08:53:36

Amen to that, live and let live.

Danny O’Neill
13 Posted 18/05/2022 at 08:53:51
So Gueye didn't join in on something others were supporting? I don't join the media bandwagon of supporting Liverpool. Okay, for me that's genetic, but you get my point.

I'm all for a free society and freedom of choice of opinion - obviously within reason. I've been to parts of the world where they simply haven't and still don't have that freedom.

Otherwise we'd all vote for the same political party and support the same football team. Simplistic view, but probably not far off. If it's not his thing, it's not his thing. It doesn't make him a bigot.

It's like the knee thing. Why is it excepted and people get outraged if individuals don't choose to do it? Why is it expected? And before anyone kicks off, do not accuse me of being biased other than my allegiance to Everton.

We have become a very outraged society, influenced by a liberal media. Outraged by things that really shouldn't bother us. We call it courage and I get that. It takes a lot of courage to come out, using the Blackpool player as an example.

But when you've seen young lads physically vomiting, crying and having to be convinced they need to walk out of the gate in Sangin, Helmand Province because they saw what happened to their mates 2 days ago it puts courage into perspective.

Sorry if that sounds dramatic and I know courage comes in different forms, but this society of ours is really concerning me.

Not as much as Everton, but it still frustrates me.

Peter Carpenter
14 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:01:43
Wasn't Idrissa the only Gueye in the Villa at one time?
Brian Harrison
15 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:33:53
There was a time when football was a break from what was going on in the World, where now it's very much embroiled in everything that is going on in the World.

I have never been concerned over a player's religious beliefs or his political beliefs, or his opinion on anything; all I was concerned with was his performance in a Blue shirt. But now we have nation states owning football clubs and many have appalling human rights issues which should have precluded them ever having ownership of a club in this country.

We have other owners whose wealth and where it came from has also been questioned, but again the powers that be thought it would be right for these people to have ownership of clubs.

Now money is the over-riding factor in owning a football club, and while money is exceptionally important for someone wanting to own a football club, it shouldn't be at the exclusion of other issues that are more important than just money.

I know we can't turn the clock back but it worries me just where football is going, players are becoming even richer while the fans paying to watch are becoming poorer.

Danny O’Neill
16 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:46:12
It's not where football is going Brian. It's where football has gone.

Now, for balance, the Sir John Moores backed Merseyside Millionaires can't cry wolf too loud.

But in the past decades, it has taken a more sinister turn. Basically, we now have nation state backed clubs even if that has been by proxy.

I have literally thought of this as I'm typing, so no context, but given what I've just typed, I wonder if the politics is influencing the perceived corruption?

And I'm talking at Premier League level. FIFA and UEFA have been corrupt for as long as I can remember.

Christine Foster
17 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:50:48
I think some are missing an important point regarding Gueye, he is a role model that many will look up to or could be used as a justification for others' intolerance or homophobia.

Therein lies the problem of high profile role models and their responsibility. They have ridiculously high pay, their every word or action is documented and analyzed, media slants put on every action.

In short, they are not their own people, they are not you or me, whose views mean little to anyone outside our circle. It's why organisation's employ PR to carry the message, whatever it is, to a hungry audience. It's done to mitigate any damage to a player's or a club's reputation.

Brian Harrison
18 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:55:08

I am not against wealthy people owning football clubs, I just question how they earned that money.

You mention Sir John Moores… well, everybody knew were his wealth came from and, unlike many of today's owners, he paid taxes in this country. Sir John built his business by selling football pools coupons initially in Manchester and then the business grew through hard work into making Sir John one of the wealthiest men in the country.

Also, Sir John didn't plough millions into the club like Abramovich did at Chelsea; Sir John loaned Everton money to buy players on interest-free loans, which was all paid back to him.

So yes, we were called the Mersey Millionaires but the club were financially sound and never in debt, so I have no embarrassment over how the then owner obtained his wealth or how the club was allowed to prosper under his stewardship.

Ernie Baywood
19 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:56:26
Brian, selfishly I prefer to try not to worry about it.

I obviously do, but if it got too far, I fear my love of sports would be over.

I'll be hoping Anthony Joshua can find a way against Usyk when they participate in a blatant sportswashing event in Saudi Arabia.

Everton are backed by whoever lurks in the background but on Thursday and Sunday that won't be on my mind.

It's not right though.

Danny O’Neill
20 Posted 18/05/2022 at 09:59:31
Christine, I always respect your views.

But to counter your post, where is the line on enforced compliance?

There is a fine line between tolerance and enforcement.

I'm a tolerant person who will give my view and respect those of others regardless of whether they agree with me or not. But I won't impose it on someone.

Otherwise everyone would be an Evertonian.

I find Liberalism interesting. Portrayed as tolerant and nicey-nicey. Until someone disagrees with them. Then they get nasty and outraged.

Ernie Baywood
21 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:04:36
Christine, I understand and agree with that.

Except Gueye didn't say or do anything. He's being attacked for not doing something. He hasn't expressed any view for people to follow.

That's wrong. The media and, let's be honest, the LGBTQIA+ mafia, are on a mission. They'll ruin this kid based on his religion, and all in the name of tolerance. So it's okay then.

Christine Foster
22 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:05:03
Ernie, Dave, shoe on the other foot. The LGBT community would tell you that they are beaten, killed and discriminated for being who they are.

They don't have to do anything to anyone, their very existence offends some, even without as you say, saying or literally doing anything. That's the society we live in.

As much as one may believe in live and let live, there is a significant wedge of society that don't believe that.

Martin Mason
23 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:10:11
I fully support Gueye's stance on not wearing the LGBT rainbow colours. LGBTQ is an artificial construct with an agenda only to advance activism in those fields.

As a Muslim, he is absolutely entitled to refuse to comply as all of the components are haram. Ridiculous of course but he must be allowed to exercise his religious rights.

I'd switch the TV off if the screen was full of rainbows (is that LGBTQ or NHS rainbow?)

I refuse to watch players taking the knee at the start of a game too, the point was made long ago but is a joke now. They are fully entitled to do it of course.

Christine Foster
24 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:17:42
Danny, I agree, but no matter what law is passed by any government, it's either accepted by the many or seen as enforced compliance by the few. It's democracy. Don't like the law, change the government.

Ernie, that's the very point I was trying to make, by him refusing to wear the shirt, the situation and message should have been managed. Instead, you end up with wild speculation by anyone and everyone including media and social networks, which is totally out of proportion, hurting the player and club.

I respect him for his belief and his choice but people in the limelight have everything they do or don't do dissected for different agendas.

Danny O’Neill
25 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:23:13
Sorry Christine, I can't agree with that at all.

We are a very tolerant society. Very much more so than the one I grew up in during the 70s and 80s.

Yes, there are still idiots but they are generally the exception. I live in arguably the most multi-cultural city on the planet. I coached lads from west African, Somalian, Irish and Kazakhstani backgrounds as well as those from the local council estates. Never any issues in building them into a team. Contrary to perceptions, even in the military I would absolutely claim it to be one of the most accepting organisations of diversity since the 90s. We've moved on but some can't accept it and still look for faults.

There are places in the world we have both probably been to that are genuinely not tolerant (I won't list them), but where you and I live are not one of them.

We are letting the BBC led liberal outrage at just about everything take over the world. It doesn't mean we should not always strive for improvement, but we also shouldn't beat ourselves up about different opinions, and the progress we have made.

Especially when nothing has been said or done, as is the situation here. He chose not to participate. That's it for me.

Ernie Baywood
26 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:28:19
Christine - that's completely valid. Raise awareness, push for better protections, educate. There are so many good things happening. We're living in a period of unprecedented change...

But this is vengeful beating up of the guy who didn't do anything. He's an easy target. Who's going to help the black Muslim kid?

Christine Foster
27 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:31:14
I respect your view, Danny, and in general terms, I agree with it. Most people aren't bothered and are extremely tolerant of difference. Sadly as you say, there is a section that is intolerant, be it homophobia or racism.

As I said, I respect Gueye's decision, but as a club, it should have been managed better.

Christine Foster
28 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:35:17
Ernie, totally agree, as above in my reply to Danny, the message or lack of it should have been managed to prevent damage to Gueye or the club.
Kim Vivian
29 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:35:29
Why have PSG decided to use their players' shirt numbers to 'supposedly' support the LGBT agenda? I abhor homophobia but it seems weirdly hypocritical for a club owned by an emir of an extremely homophobic state to be doing this.

I respect Idrissa Gueye's beliefs and people are saying he has burnt his bridges in respect of any potential return even to the Premier League. However, his beliefs are no different to what they were before, and by extension therefore he potentially could have been sanctioned for them before.

So this liberal anti-Gueye stance is simply not right, whether you agree with him or not.

In my opinion.

Steve Brown
30 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:35:37
Agree, this is not a religious issue.

The issue here is what defines a proactive action, in relation to the club's definition of discrimination.

For example, if the club required that all employees undertake mandatory training on discrimination per their Code of Conduct, then Gueye would be in breach of contract by refusing to take part.

Standard employment contracts require workers to comply with the company's policies and procedures, such as mandatory training. Of course, the legality of that can only be tested via case law.

My own take on it is that he has not breached his terms of employment unless PSG's policies set out clear guidelines on the dress code, ie, wear what we require of you on a case by case basis. I doubt that is the case.

Without having read PSG's D&I policy, he has probably breached the intent of the policy if not the legal wording. Given that means he is not aligned with the values, behaviour and culture of his employer, that might lead them to decide he should continue his career elsewhere.

Jerome Shields
31 Posted 18/05/2022 at 10:41:31
Everyone has equal rights under the law as they have equal rights to say yes or no, according to their personnel beliefs to what they are asked to do. The latter is broadly recognised in the right to religious or belief freedoms in most civilised societies and taken account of in lawful decisions.

Of course there are attempts to fudge this when it does not suit certain parties with different agendas. Particularly where there is media backing and a reluctance to accept No as meaning No.

Gueye has the right to say no and the right to expect his decision will be respected.

Michael Lynch
32 Posted 18/05/2022 at 11:12:11
Doesn't it say everything you need to know about the performative nature of the game's anti-homophobia stance that, despite all the rainbow laces and three cheers for Jake Daniels smuggery, he's the first active professional footballer in the world to come out?

Clearly football is a hostile environment to be gay – although, interestingly, not lesbian as there are a number of out players in the womens game – despite all the rainbows and rhetoric.

And Gareth Southgate saying the group are so supportive of gay rights that they will make their feelings known at the World Cup (more rainbow laces I presume), is not stopping them going to the homophobic host country is it?

Gueye supposedly not wanting to wear a rainbow number on his shirt because his magic pixie in the sky tells him homosexuality is wrong is pretty irrelevant because this is all just virtue signalling anyway.

Meanwhile, not a dickie bird was said when the Spurs crowd loudly and consistently sang "Yid Army" in their local derby last week. I know they use the excuse of "It's a Jewish club and we're reclaiming the insult", but that is utter bollocks. I would imagine only about 5% (if that) of the Spurs support is Jewish, so it's a bit like me singing "Nigger Army" at Everton because I once saw a black fan in the crowd.

Christy Ring
33 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:03:24
Everyone is entitled to their views, I'm Irish Catholic, but I'm able to make up my own mind and totally disgusted with our church over issues regarding sexuality, people being discriminated and abused because of their sexuality is wrong.

Gueye refused to play for his club because the rainbow colours on his jersey, which was to highlight antihomophobia, that's nothing to do with religion, it shows he has no respect for those people, and for people to come on here and say he's entitled to say no, and should be respected for it, shows how you believe also.

Kevin Prytherch
34 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:41:42
Does Gueye also refuse to take the knee before games? If not, and he picks and chooses the political statements to participate in then it shows something about his beliefs.

If he doesn’t participate in any, then he can’t really be criticised.

Christine Foster
35 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:43:39
Christy, being Liverpool Irish Catholic, I totally endorse the abhorrent stance our church has taken, but there will be millions who will not see it that way because the Pope told them so. We are assuming Gueye has taken a similar stance because of his religion, and what he is told by his religious leaders.

The problem of course is that the church and its leaders change views over generations, what was a mortal sin then is okay now… at the whim of a leader?

So you, me may or may not be good Catholics by not agreeing with everything we are instructed to believe. Thousands adhere to religious interpretations… Gueye is probably no different. I don't agree with his decision but I respect it is his to make.

Christine Foster
36 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:47:54
Reflection always a good I said before.. this discussion best had over several drinks! Me done...
Kevin Molloy
37 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:48:05
It's great, isn't it, being lectured to by the owners of football on what are the appropriate cultural norms to adopt? But make sure you only jump when asked.

No awkward questions when the circus turns up in Qatar later this year… Watch that grandstanding pillock Southgate say not one fucking word about his feelings then.

They can all shove it. A person's politics or religion are a private matter, progressives don't get to bully everyone else into line all the time.

Len Hawkins
38 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:53:08

There is no reflection at Everton FC it is patently obvious all the Mirrors have been smashed.

Brian Williams
39 Posted 18/05/2022 at 12:55:36
It shows he has no respect for those people, and for people to come on here and say he's entitled to say no, and should be respected for it, shows how you believe also.

You're making too many assumptions in the statement I've cut and pasted above. You know nothing about how Gueye feels towards "those people" and you know nothing about whether "it shows how you believe also."

You've made up your mind on what you think, not what you know. Always a dodgy stance.

Robert Tressell
40 Posted 18/05/2022 at 14:00:24
Given that there are 73 professional clubs, each of which will have squads (including youth etc) of about 30 players and 2% of the population is gay - it means that there are always roughly 45 gay professional footballers in the UK at any one time.

Since I can only think of the kid at Blackpool and the US player at Leeds a few years ago who were 'out' while playing, there's obviously an issue.

I said earlier that Gueye has been fairly restrained about it all - so these comments aren't really directed at him but football generally.

I heard an interview with Ian Holloway about it a few years ago in which he said something like he hoped players would come out and be themselves because it's not nice to be alone. I liked that.

Souness (for all he is a massive bellend) has also made encouraging remarks.

Gay kids got loads of grief when I was at school and homophobic abuse was the insult of choice generally. I feel ashamed of my own use of this kind of language in the past when it was just 'banter'. Hopefully it's improved in schools. Football is really far behind though - so I guess the liberal press / woke brigade etc aren't so forceful as is made out.

Anyway, we can all continue to disagree in the close season perhaps. There's a big game coming.

Charles Brewer
41 Posted 18/05/2022 at 14:40:21
Robert, given the number of and widespread distribution of openly gay men I think the issue is more one of "Oh, really. Who cares? Isn't there anything more interesting about you than that?" nowadays, far more than of hostility.

My reaction to the Blackpool footballer was more: "Is this another Rashford or DCL whose agent has told him to try to boost his career and earning power through something other than talent?"

BLM is being exposed as a large scale scam with the leaders distributing the funds to family (a bit like the Bidens and Clintons) - but the EPL continues to require absolute obedience before each match.

Idrissa Gueye is perfectly right to resist being made to show support for something which (I suppose) he has no time for.

I would hope that most people would refuse to wear outward emblems of support for any cause if the reason for wearing them was authority imposed diktat and not personal choice, even if they supported the cause.

Danny O’Neill
42 Posted 18/05/2022 at 14:40:51
I like your opening statement @25, Christy, and your comments on the wrongs of discrimination, but would disagree with your accusative closing remarks.

Ian Jones
43 Posted 18/05/2022 at 15:00:17
I have thought for some time that a whole bunch of gay players would probably join together and make their announcement as a group rather than perhaps individually. On reflection, that idea would have probably got more attention.

Fair play to Jake. Good timing too. As for Idrissa Gueye, love to see him back at Everton.

Robert Tressell
44 Posted 18/05/2022 at 15:03:08
Charles # 36, society has moved on as you say, but I don't believe football has particularly.

A lot of people won't bat an eyelid at the Jake Daniels thing, true, and that's probably a good thing. But I'd agree with you more if there were hundreds of other examples going back many years. There aren't though. Like I say I can only think of two. Fashanu too, I guess (before my time) and he killed himself didn't he?

Henrik Lyngsie
45 Posted 18/05/2022 at 15:17:04
Ian Jones 43 exactly my thought as well. In fact I anticipate a group of players to come out during the World Cup in Qatar. Would there be a better opportunity than to do it in a Country who does not allow it and everybody is watching.
Graham Mockford
46 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:03:53
He absolutely has the right not to endorse a political message he doesn’t agree with.

In the same way James Maclean had the right not to wear the poppy.

Funnily enough a lot of those criticising Gueye would support Maclean and vice versa.

Stan Schofield
47 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:16:12
Given that Gana has not broken the law in relation to this issue, the only criterion that I consider relevant to whether Gana might return to Everton, is whether he’d be of significant benefit to us on the pitch. If the assessment is not, then he shouldn’t return, but if the assessment is that he would, then a return to Everton would be good.

We could certainly do with him at the moment!

Ed Prytherch
48 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:25:22
From the BBC website

"Crystal Palace's Cheikhou Kouyate and Watford's Ismaila Sarr have posted on social media in apparent support of their Senegal team-mate's stance.

Kouyate posted a picture of himself alongside Gueye on Instagram, with a caption calling Gueye "a real man". Watford winger Sarr posted a picture of him and Gueye accompanied by three heart emojis and the caption "100%"."

So the question of whether Idrissa would be welcome back in the prem is an open question.

Mike Gaynes
49 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:30:33
Charles #41, are you really of the opinion that coming out as gay is a lucrative career move?

And more to the point, why do you doubt Daniels' honesty when he says he came out so he wouldn't have to live a lie?

Why do you ascribe a crass profit motive to it?

And by the way, your own crass political cracks look pretty hypocritical, considering the presidential family you undoubtedly support lined its collective pockets to the tune of over a billion dollars in four corrupt years. The Trump Organization directly skimmed $151 million in taxpayer revenue just for Bleach Boy's golf vacations, and Jivanka reported $500 million income and a $500 million real estate bailout loan from business activities inside the White House itself. So slide your political slant someplace else.

Graham Mockford
50 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:54:15

Out of interest, do you support Kapernick’s right not to stand for the National Anthem?

Tony Abrahams
51 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:56:12
A world without hatred seems impossible, and so does a world where people can live and let live.

I worry for mankind, because slowly but surely, free thinking is getting eradicated imo. Hopefully Gana Gueye gives his reason for not wanting to wear the rainbow colours, because he always came across as a very hard working and respectful human-being, whenever he represented Everton, and his opinion might not be fueled by hatred.

Martin Mason
52 Posted 18/05/2022 at 16:57:21
Mike Gaynes@7 My feeling about that quote is that there are no such thing as LGBTQ or even human "rights". Rights are confused with privileges afforded to any group by the rest of humanity. If individuals have rights then society at large does too.
Martin Mason
53 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:00:37
With regard to the issue under discussion, if the player is not forbidden to refuse to wear the number by his contract or by law then he can refuse to wear it. Because of religion? Isn't it sad that it still exists in the 21st century?
Gary Jones
54 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:02:45
Wow, we've gone already from whether Gueye was right to wear a slogan / emblem he doesn't want to the full on “Biden vs Trump” shite already. Exactly why all politics should be kept out of sport.

The world is dividing into two very entrenched camps. One that believes in big government, globalist socialism, enforced woke ideology and that both social media and the general people need to be ruled and governed. The other are often nationalistic, anti-New World Order, low rules, capitalist, believe wokism has lines, and support free speech (even if offensive).

Apparently one is called a “liberal” but I got no fucking clue anymore which or why? To most in one of those camps, the others a Nazi, Commie, Fascist, or something else filled with hatred. The merest mention or sniff and they're all over it (à la Mike). Funnily enough demonstrating their own prejudices and intolerance.

It'd be a hope too far to say “keep all the political shit” out of football altogether. It's even a hope too far to ask it to stay off these forums… but how about some mutual respect? If Gana wants to not wear something, good luck to him. If someone wants to criticise him for doing so, fill yer boots.

Dale Self
55 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:07:49
I agree Gueye has the right to refuse to wear the kit as it was not specified in his contract. I reserve the right to despise him as he has disqualified himself from the set of people who deserve any consideration. Should he choose to come to the mic and explain I will reconsider my position, until then Bye-ya Gueye.

And Gary, you've not exacty set yourself up as an arbitrator on this matter. Show some patience for others to say what they want. Then slam them if you see fit, whatever.

Ed Prytherch
56 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:12:58
Gary #54 You have my vote.
Kevin Molloy
57 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:25:34
Dale your post is a good example of cancel culture in action. Set up a test, force everyone to obey upon pain of ostracism. What a lovely tolerant society. This is the thin end of the wedge, in a couple of years it will be in Gueye's contract that he has to bend the knee, on pain of cancellation. And onwards we move to a more tolerant society, sort of.
Graham Mockford
58 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:26:27
Martin 52

So I don’t have a human right to expression, freedom from political imprisonment, freedom from torture, right to equality before the law etc etc

I’m expected to see that as a privilege?

Catch your self on feller.

Brent Stephens
59 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:32:06
Robert #40 talking about "the woke brigade", there's a hilarious James O'Brien interview with somebody who is anti-woke.


Gary Jones
60 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:33:03
Dale, I waited over 50 posts, and until the entrenched views started to do what they absolutely always do……veer off onto an ever widening attack on each other’s tranches.

How many posts would be “showing patience” in your view? When are you arbitrating that I am allowed to express my view to “stay on the subject and don’t slip into entrenched” stone throwing?

Mike Gaynes
61 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:34:20
Gary #54, not exactly a great example of keeping politics out of sport right there.

In my view, politics is a part of every aspect of life today.

And if the Gueye situation wasn't a political issue, his nation's president and politicians wouldn't have inserted themselves into the debate. Clearly it is.

Gary Jones
62 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:35:32
Kevin, well said. Dale’s even attacking those who try to “arbitrate”… how dare anyone just not do as Dale thinks they should.

Absolute Nazis the lot… cancel them!!! SMH.

Dale Self
63 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:37:49
It's the summary overview that I was choking on Gary. I have no problem with your posts as long as you can bear the response.

Kevin, where did I cancel Gueye? What the hell is that about. I have a right to support whatever I wish just like Gueye don't I? Idrissa doesn't want to wear a particular kit and reveals a dimension of himself that I don't support and I take a proportionate action in response.

I think you're using 'cancel culture' to mean what you want it to mean in a rather fluid way that really isn't how English is supposed to be used. But I'm a colonial, what do I know?

Dale Self
64 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:40:05
Gary, are you really going to recycle that sad Vlad Nazi thing? Cmon, maaaaaaan. I thought you had better material than that.

By the way, watch yourself. It's a slow day at work and I have time for this. Your move.

Shane Corcoran
65 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:42:01
I’m very disappointed that nobody acknowledged Peter Carpenter’s post.
Alan McGuffog
66 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:43:20
Going off on a tangent. We lost the media in the early 60s that lot had a Panorama special about how bloody wonderful the Kop was. We were being g demonised for smashing up football specials. ( not that there was much to smash up )
So now it's former Everton player blah blah blah what the hell has this got to do with us ?
I'm expecting former Gwladys St season ticket holder, Fred West, buried lots of people under his patio.
Guess it's inevitable...they are the Prince Charmings we have to be the Ugly Sisters.
Mike Gaynes
67 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:46:15
Shane, you're right. It went over my head as I was scrolling through, but it's a gem of a pun.
Gary Jones
68 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:47:21
Dale - you’ve embarrassed yourself enough already. Cant even answer simple questions.
Gary Jones
69 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:51:12
Mike - unfortunately, to those in the trenches, EVERYTHING is about furthering their political cause. The fact you and Dale are both jumping on someone trying to say “keep on subject” shows just how pathetically deep seated the idealisms are. Sad.
Jay Harris
70 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:54:49
I log onto ToffeeWeb and with the threat of relegation and a vital 3 points tomorrow I find Evertonians dominating the posts with arguments over Idrissa Gueye sticking to his principles. OMG we are supposed to be together not scoring points about political correctness.
Gary Jones
71 Posted 18/05/2022 at 17:55:30
Brent - anyone who quotes an Obrian radio interview as ‘funny’ is at least a little bizarre.

I’ll raise you……

Andrew Taylor
72 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:01:04
Here's the thing - I don't see this as about politics. Standing against homophobia or racism is not politics. Being black or being gay is not a lifestyle or political choice. It's how you are born. So being intolerant and hating black or gay people - which has been common in football since forever and sadly still is, if perhaps a little less so - is just about hating people. That's not politics or religion, and religion or politics is not a valid defense against racism or homophobia. I would not want him back at our club.

Idrissa Gueye is not a slave, so he was not and cannot be compelled to play for PSG. But if he does then he needs to wear the team shirt. If he doesn't want to play in the team shirt then he should not be paid.

At the same time, PSG should not seek to sportswash the homophobia of their owners' regime, and states or their puppets should not be allowed to own football clubs.

Gary Jones
73 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:01:36
Sorry folks, I'm getting pulled in by the entrenched hatred of even those who try to “arbitrate” (since that is clearly not sharing the view….and, well, how dare they….). It's not what I intended .

So, Dale & Mike, have fun with your cancelling culture and use of sport to further your personal views. Hope it works out for you and makes you good fun to be around.

Dale Self
74 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:04:14
Hey I'm back, so Gary...what was the question?

I think Andrew gets it.

Brent Stephens
75 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:06:24
Gary, in citing the interview I wasn't expressing a preference for either side. The hilarity is in the way in which they take contrary, seeminlgly-entrenched stances. Which is what's happening in parts of this thread.
Mike Gaynes
76 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:09:15
Gary, how exactly did I "jump" or "cancel" you? Where in this conversation did I post something that bruised your sensitivities?

Bill Gall
77 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:09:29
My own opinion on this matter is it is the fault of P.S.G management or owners. If they wish to support various organizations they can do it through media outlets or in the case of LGBQT or any other organization that has one, a flag can be shown at the ground with a statement of their support.
Putting it on the players shirt is forcing him to say he supports whatever the support is for. Whatever a players beliefs are, they are personnel, and I doubt if it is in his contract that he has to support various beliefs to play for the team.
P.S.G should have informed the players of what the shirt represented, days before a game for their players reaction.
No one is against the club for supporting different minorities, but they should realize not everyone is in support.
Gary Jones
78 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:13:46
Something wrong with the form post (or the poster!) there @TWEditors for some reason my post at 71 has somehow ended up embedding post 72 instead of the I tried to post to Brent……

Dale - the giveaway is it’s the bits ending in a “?” But please don’t worry about responding. I have zero remaining interest in getting pulled in further. Not because I don’t want the debate, but because I may as well go have it with the dog or wallpaper than someone in either one of the two trenches I noted originally.

Gary Jones
79 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:15:46
No Brent, I simply said obrian isn’t funny in any way, shape or form…’s someone who is. The only one talking it “contrary” is you.
Dale Self
80 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:18:45
Ah Gary, don't be like that mate. It's all a bit of fun. I don't expect to convince anyone of anything but I am charmed that you think I and others have that ability. We're just stating our opinions. But you're not trying to cancel us by refusing to get 'pulled in' are you?
Brent Stephens
81 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:20:12
Some find the interview funny. Some don't. Not a big deal.
Gary Jones
82 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:28:16
Mike - only one with “sensitivities bruised” here was you, when Charles stupidly whistled your pavlovs whistle, and dared to suggest your political side profited from it. Seems I did too, by suggesting sport and politics kept apart.

I imagine that by that statement, what you REALLY mean is “sport is ok to further MY POLITICS”. Are you a fan of “let’s go Brandon”? That ok?

Dale Self
83 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:31:19
So uh, what was that question Gary? It wasn't about Pavlov was it? If so, I missed that.

Back to the actual issue. I think Andrew and Bill get it right that the club got it wrong and it may be clumsy precisely because it lacks integrity.

Will Mabon
84 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:31:25
Shane @ 65 - "Me too". (Geddit?). Pete's was a smart one, and better still, I didn't see anyone attack him for the joke.

Gary Jones
85 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:34:37
Brent, I imagine the number of people who find that interview “funny” are very much limited to those who share the majority of the public schoolboy socialists particularly entrenched views…..personally I’d rather have Dave Chapelle, Billy Connolly, Bill Burr, Chubby Brown, et al. Each to their own tho I guess.
Brent Stephens
86 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:37:40
Will #84 "Me Too"! Very good.
Peter Carpenter
87 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:43:21
Thank you Shane, thank you, thank you very much.
Christy Ring
88 Posted 18/05/2022 at 18:59:39
When you see his compatriot Kouyate come out in support of Gueye and call him a "Real Man", you can read into what he means, and for people to say Gueye should be respected for his beliefs, this has nothing to do with religion.

Homophobia is a crime, not a belief, and the rainbow was an anti-homophobia emblem and he was the only player to refuse to wear the jersey, how can you defend or support his stance?

Graham Mockford
89 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:01:04

Each to their own indeed.

I mean those that find Chubby Brown “funny” are very much limited to those who share the majority of the racist, homophobic, misogynist comedian’s particularly entrenched views.

Hope you see what I did there

Peter Carpenter
90 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:09:42
Jay (70) at least this issue has taken our minds off the date with destiny tomorrow, just 24 hours and 36 minutes away now.
By the way, has anyone found their hotel yet?
Graham Mockford
91 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:13:32

Whilst I have absolutely no truck with homophobic views, Gueye has the right to view homosexuality however he wishes. He doesn’t have the right to discriminate, make homophobic comments or incite hatred.

It’s a really important distinction. Telling people how to think is so illiberal and just gives fuel to those who do want to create division.

Will Mabon
92 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:15:45
Mike @ 5:

"My point is that his views would not be welcomed in the Premier League today. I don't think he can come back to Everton."

Across the whole spectrum of football including fans and participants, I'd guess, welcomed by some, unwelcome to others. This is the reality.

Should it ever happen, the likely ensuing all-media battle for supremacy would be as predictable as the dawning day.

If by Premier League you mean the confluence of those that consider him wrong and not entitled to his views and beliefs; should they "Win", then maybe so.

The result would be yet another nail in the coffin of genuine tolerance, and further consolidation of drama and division.

Brian Williams
93 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:16:00
Ahhh ToffeeWeb. Pontification at it's very best.
Brian Williams
94 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:24:15
Btw in answer to anyone found their hotel yet? My guess would be Thornton Manor. Having said that I believe they're travelling up on the day of the match now.
Dale Self
95 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:30:27
Sorry but it is still rather slow at work so this: The concept of tolerance being applied without considering a subject's practice of tolerance seems misguided. I guess we are going a bit Buddhist on this one or can someone from the purity side break that down for me?
Derek Moore
96 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:33:10
I see it more as increasing intolerance of intolerance itself. And surely this can only be a good thing.
Will Mabon
97 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:38:39
Brian - looks like Palace have been reading TW...
Brent Stephens
98 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:43:22
Derek #96 a tolerant defence of intolerance and an intolerance of it at the same time. Love ya (tolerantly)!
Stan Schofield
99 Posted 18/05/2022 at 19:57:14
It strikes me as ironic that Gana, who I understand is a Muslim from Senegal, is being criticised by people in ‘Western’ countries like ours. It looks like a bit of neo-Imperialist, or neo-Colonialist, preaching in the self-righteous tone of the old missionaries with their firm sense of moral rectitude.

It looks akin to affluent people in the West, who’ve been happily burning fossil fuels since the Industrial Revolution, telling developing countries that they shouldn’t do it.

I guess Imperialism and Colonialism, and associated arrogance, never really go away.

Will Mabon
100 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:16:40
"It looks akin to affluent people in the West, who’ve been happily burning fossil fuels since the Industrial Revolution, telling developing countries that they shouldn’t do it."

Dunno, Stan - I'm seeing it more as the West itself getting whacked with that one and similar.

If you're right though, then China has longed ceased any categorization as developing.

Stan Schofield
101 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:22:22
Will, isn’t the West ‘self-whacking’ itself on that one? Then telling the developing world to do the same?

Christy@88: I don’t think homophobia per se is a crime. Spreading homophobic views and inciting hatred is a crime, but having homophobic opinions, so long as they remain unexpressed, is not. There is no regulation of thought.

Will Mabon
102 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:40:07
Stan, what I think basically, is that the type and use of energy globally is and will continue to be, dependent upon the globally envisaged future role of various countries and regions. The "Practicalities" and realities will reflect it separate to the political line.

For a period, China was commissioning a new coal-fired power plant almost by the week. Barely heard a peep. (Albeit the technology and operation of such plants is far advanced from older types).

It continues too - and more large scale use of coal within the steel industry. OK where it suits...

Will Mabon
103 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:41:28
"There is no regulation of thought."

They're trying, Stan.

Dale Self
104 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:43:13
There is nothing imperialist or colonial (resenting that phrase btw being a yank) about refusing to support someone who has taken an action that can be fairly viewed as homophobic. Gana can do that and I can respond without any evidence of imperialist motivations. Perhaps he is not a homophobe or is not anti-gay, just doing what his good book says he should.

Okay, fine, step up to the mic and say s;o otherwise, it looks like homophobia wrapped in sports washing.

Will Mabon
105 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:51:30
Dale, your speculation may be correct - but if Gueye stepped to the mic and said that, the outcome would be?

He might privately be a raging anti-gay hater in mind, that says nothing of it in public, or in no way ever materially acts upon it.

Which would be worse?

Stan Schofield
106 Posted 18/05/2022 at 20:59:43
Dale@104: You might view his ‘action’ as homophobic, but I don’t see any evidence of it. I think it’s quite a stretch to say “fairly viewed”. “Viewed by Dale Self” perhaps, but “Fairly viewed”, given that you don’t know the guy (or in this case, Gueye) and he hasn’t made any statements publically?
Dale Self
107 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:03:16
Stan, Gueye refused to wear a kit because it highlighted a rainbow which is universally recognized as a pro-gay symbol. Gueye gave no other reason for refusing to wear the kit. Poch blames 'personal reasons'. Sorry mate but that is evidence, circumstantial but evidence nonetheless.
Dale Self
108 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:07:30
Will, he has taken an action that does indeed materialize his private opinions regarding a kit publicly worn representing a public football club. He's not hiding out here. If he is somehow caught in a moral dilemma he has the opportunity to clear that up as a public figure who has taken an action commonly recognized as at odds with the gay community which are some of the club's supporters.
Stan Schofield
109 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:10:36
Dale, Gana might not be ‘pro-gay’, but if so that does not necessary imply that he is ‘anti-gay’. What is most important here is ‘reason’ or ‘logic’. Without that, confusion reigns, as it tends to do in debates on social media, with their tendency to become polarised into ‘for’ and ‘against’ extremes.

If Gana were ‘anti-gay’, that would be nobody else’s business provided he does not express it and incite hatred. And so far as I am aware, he hasn’t.

Si Cooper
110 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:25:06
“I fully support Gueye's stance on not wearing the LGBT rainbow colours. LGBTQ is an artificial construct with an agenda only to advance activism in those fields.

As a Muslim, he is absolutely entitled to refuse to comply as all of the components are haram. Ridiculous of course but he must be allowed to exercise his religious rights.”

“My feeling about that quote is that there are no such thing as LGBTQ or even human "rights". Rights are confused with privileges afforded to any group by the rest of humanity. If individuals have rights then society at large does too.”

Ah, Martin Mason, going with whatever definition suits his own peculiar ‘take' on things.

Which human organisations are NOT artificial constructs? There must be a hierarchy of rights. If my right to religious freedom led me to a situation where I was in danger of denying someone a more basic right because of a religious point of view, then I would question that point of view.

Which is exactly what I did when I was of an age to understand the conflicts between the Catholic Church and general societal acceptance, and I've simply learnt to ignore anything that doesn't fit with the Christian (as expressed by Jesus himself) parts.

I was perhaps fortunate that all of my parish priests have appeared to be tolerant, inclusive and progressive. It is my view that some parts of the Bible are essentially from a survival manual published by an oppressed and persecuted group of people who needed guidelines that kept their population healthy (avoid pork and you avoid the potentially deadly pork tapeworm) and increasing in number.

At the least, Idrissa Gueye should understand that simply supporting an anti-homophobia message doesn't automatically mean that someone can be said to be actively pro-homosexuality. I am against Islamophobia but I'm not a Muslim.

Duncan McDine
111 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:33:47
Wonder what the reaction would be if someone like ex-redshite sewer rat Mr Suarez had done the same. If Gana (who most of us are still fond of) did it for the reasons stated above, then he’s a shithouse and needs to be educated. Prejudice has no place in football (unless you’re talking about Kopites - who are ALL gobshites).
Dale Self
112 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:45:28
Stan, not trying to be provocative but I don't think you can credibly claim that Gueye has not expressed that he is at least not comfortable with gays to the point of refusing to wear a rainbow. Whether he would support others who are more zealous in their opposition, we don't know, but we also don't know that he is a benevolent refuser in this case.

This is not his doing to some extent and I understand that. However, this is where you earn your big public bucks by being a stand-up person and state your beliefs or state why this is a difficult situation for you.

To express a refusal and leave everyone to their own conclusions is not a neutral action that deserves a pass with no accountability. He is a public figure and did not hand in a sick note for this game, he knew the interpretation was obvious.

Graham Mockford
113 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:45:59

What does 'actively pro-homosexuality' mean? The guy obviously doesn't think homosexuality is right.

We might not agree with his opinion, I don't, but he's made no comment on the matter, he just doesn't want to be asked to promote it.

It's his right. You cannot tell people what they should think based on your moral agenda. You can object to them being hateful.

Stan Schofield
114 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:47:31
Duncan, it would incite the same responses from me as I’ve given above. Just because he likes biting other players’ ears and racial abusing, doesn’t mean he’s a bad bloke. He just has very bad traits on the field of play, including being a cheat.
Stan Schofield
115 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:51:41
Dale@112: Gana earns his ‘big public bucks’ by virtue of being very very good at what he does on a football field. That’s it. He doesn’t get paid for his personal views or traits outwith that. He can refuse to play any time he likes, and of course suffer any financial penalties if his actions are contrary to his contractual obligations.
Will Mabon
116 Posted 18/05/2022 at 21:57:09
Dale, the crux of the matter in my opinion, remains a pressure upon Gueye to have a public "Position".

Just as we are all ostensibly allowed our own thoughts and beliefs, so should we be allowed the option of sharing them, mindful as we are more and more nowadays of the implications.

This whole thing shines a light upon the growing culture of being forced to be outwardly pro or anti to a growing list of causes, beliefs, campaigns and so on. It's about being seen to be in a camp and then judged for it, or used as a tool to further stir the argument.

These camps are often simplistic and polarized in nature and no quarter is given. It's nasty "Out there" and the sensible and only working option is often to stay away.

Not for no reason were politics and religion recommended as excluded from polite conversation; it's emotive. Nowadays it seems nothing is off the table, and woe betide those that are unwilling or unable to navigate it and construct a workable response; which could be any of us, in certain circumstances.

There is no place for people to needlessly harm and discriminate against others. Forcing them to be a sandwich board for a litany of causes is another thing entirely.

Will Mabon
117 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:05:52
I hadn't updated before my last post, typed on & off over a long period. Sorry if I seem to've plagiarized others' points.

Dale @ 107:

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on being forced to wear the equivalent of a rainbow badge/logo as you go about your business. Whether it's something you believe in, are without opinion, or strongly disagree with.

Are you prepared to outsource your input to this in all aspects?

Dale Self
118 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:21:57
I guess that is difficult for Gueye but again I emphasize that this comes with the territory of being a public figure who takes public money. While some privacy in the interpretation of actions is understandable this topic is not short of public interest and when the action is observable to the public there should be some accountability.

Either the club or the player should address the issue and I'm not sure which. I'm not claiming to have the right answer here – just making clear that my support depends on some clarity when controversial actions run against my preferences.

Gueye can do whatever PSG will allow him to do and I can respond however I wish as long as I am not doing anything illicit. My personal belief is that, if the club set this up without his knowledge, he should be given an out – not a chance to say or signal his personal position but a complete non-response and non-performance. That way, he gets his way and no-one gets insulted.

Ernie Baywood
119 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:23:49
My work held an IDAHOBIT (was probably once a catchy name) morning tea on the 17th. I didn't attend. Should I be concerned that I'm a homophobe? Because I really didn't think I was.

Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever attended any kind of rally or protest either and I've been aware of plenty. I could be all sorts of things without ever knowing!

Dave Lynch
120 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:29:50
Ask this...why do LGBT+ feel that they have to push their agenda/cause? Anybody with an ounce of decency will just live and let live.

The harder they push and attempt to involve sports teams and other high profile bodies the more fuel they add to the haters mindset.

Graham Mockford
121 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:44:13

Because there is an awful lot of people without an ounce of decency.

Brian Williams
122 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:47:07
What's this public money that Gueye takes? He gets paid a salary from his employer, PSG in this case, just the same as 99% of the population.

It's not public money just because people pay to watch the game. If that's the case, the person on the till in Tesco's takes the public's money.

Not a valid point in any way, shape, or form, IMHO.

Derek Thomas
123 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:49:30
* Puts on Devil's Advocate tin hat, so which is it? You 'respect' All people's points of view – or just the ones that are:
i) currently in vogue, or ii) that you happen to agree with.

How far away is not wanting to wear a shirt with a rainbow collar, from my point blank refusal to even think about buying a red jumper – let alone wear the fuckin' thing?

How different is Christensen's Cup Final morning withdrawal – for as yet unspecified reasons?

All people's views and reasons matter – or nobody's do. See Voltaire's quote.

Homosexuality, abortion or, for that matter, wearing a red jumper; it's legal – not compulsory.

Dale Self
124 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:51:31
Football clubs don't receive stadium funding from the local community and state? And football councils don't take up positions to advance what is seen as community issues?

And just to validate the position, here is a quote from the French Football Federation council president Patrick Anton:

"By refusing to take part in this operation, you are validating discriminatory behavior [and] the rejection of others, and not just against those in the LGBTQ+ movement," Anton continued.

"The impact of soccer in society and the way players are role models for those who admire them gives all of us a personal sense of responsibility. We hope this letter makes you conscious of the fact you need to clarify your position, or to make amends."

Sounds kind of like a public thing there.

Si Cooper
125 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:53:04
Graham (113),

It simply means that, if he is a rational person, he shouldn't worry that by wearing the rainbow numbers kit he is setting himself apart from his religious beliefs, unless his personal belief is that he has to actively speak out against homosexuality or stop people from being gay.

I'd have thought that most of us can distinguish between not necessarily being ‘pro' something and being happy with others being persecuted because of it.

As a heterosexual man, I don't see how I can actually ‘promote' a sexuality I don't personally share but I have absolutely no problem with acknowledging that there are a range of sexualities and supporting the view that people should be free to be what they are and do as they will as long as it is consensual and not harmful to others.

Dave Lynch, the only ‘stance' I can see is one of promoting tolerance and removing discrimination. Anyone that ‘hates' that can take a running jump.

Graham Mockford
126 Posted 18/05/2022 at 22:59:05

So how about James Maclean not wearing the poppy?

Dale Self
127 Posted 18/05/2022 at 23:02:44
From the tone of Anton's letter to Gueye I'm starting to believe that Idrissa had fair notice of this event and it may even be generally mentioned as part of a contractual expectation of participation. He has opted out of another similar event and is being called out publicly by the FFF president for this no-show. I think there were expectations that he was contractually obligated to do something other than what he chose. Speculative of course but take a look, I think that sticks.
Will Mabon
128 Posted 18/05/2022 at 23:11:42
Dale, that statement from Patrick Anton if correctly quoted, is a disgrace IMO.

Just what I meant earlier - people are being railroaded into being a public mouthpiece irrespective of their own personal views or freedom to not partake.

Refuse, and you become a pariah, framed as an active oppressor or supporter of the opposite position.

Very unsavoury - and increasingly dangerous.

Si Cooper
129 Posted 18/05/2022 at 23:21:09
Graham (126),

Where have I mentioned James Maclean and the poppy? Do you think I must have some firm position on that; otherwise, all my statements on here are null and void?

To be honest I'd have to check that out in more detail. Off the top of my head, that does seem to be about taking a political stance and would clearly represent wanting to advocate a particular position.

It is also about making a statement about what you believe the poppy as an emblem of remembrance actually represents, rather than what the majority of people probably believe it stands for.

Personally, I can wear a poppy to show my appreciation for all who have died serving in the military without thinking I am supporting all the bad things which have occurred historically. If others can't then that is up to them.

One thing that has not really been mentioned (although I have brought it up on other threads): France are a secular republic and religious practices are not necessarily as tolerated as they would be in other countries. Doesn't mean they can persecute religious beliefs, just that it doesn't afford much leverage.

Dale Self
130 Posted 18/05/2022 at 23:37:21
Will, note that Anton would not be taking that tone if it were as you described. To force someone to do something under threat of sanction would be despicable but it appears that Gueye was not unaware of this, shall we say, 'professional' request.

I think Anton has lawyers that would advise him to not harass a player who has simply exercised their right of refusal of an offer. This tone suggests something rather specific was expected of Gueye.

Additionally, Pochettino has already dropped the 'personal issue' line, further implicating Gueye as the shit-starter here. It looks like Gueye made a commitment of some sort to participate – otherwise, why would the FFF president be going after him publicly?

And please don't say it was imperialism that caused him to say that.

Si Cooper
131 Posted 18/05/2022 at 23:42:59
“Forcing them to be a sandwich board for a litany of causes is another thing entirely.”

Will, the cause here is for tolerance for and removing discrimination against those of the LGBQT+ communities, not for advocating being LGBQT+ is for everyone or better than anything else.

Your post would suggest you are conflating separate things.

Don Alexander
132 Posted 18/05/2022 at 00:02:06
In a free civilised world, as full of religion as it maybe is, but with mercifully few extremist countries to match, it's important to accept that nobody has the right not to feel offended.

Free speech means being able to read and then respond, and really respond, to those of different opinion, no matter how extreme.

Our ex-lad just needs education that his country and elements of his faith forcefully prohibit.

Will Mabon
133 Posted 19/05/2022 at 00:32:28

I'm not conflating anything. You might be confusing something though - your post makes no sense.

Si Cooper
134 Posted 19/05/2022 at 01:03:09
Will, enlighten me. What don't you understand?

They are not made to wear ‘sandwich boards' above and beyond the kit they always wear with all manner of promotional emblems on all occasions.

For a player to actively refuse to wear something that doesn't actually put him in the position of being an advocate for something his religion prohibits really only makes sense if he believes it does make him an advocate for it.

The cause is anti-homophobia / anti-discrimination, whereas the sponsors logos were actually trying to promote consumption of things Islam also prohibits. He can't accept one and reject the other without being hypocritical.

Being anti-Islamophobic doesn't make me a Muslim or a Muslim missionary.

Ernie Baywood
135 Posted 19/05/2022 at 08:48:57
Si. So he's a hypocrite then. That's not illegal either.

I just don't get the race to reach the most righteous position possible. He doesn't want to associate himself with something. Life goes on.

It's not like he's out preaching hatred. That was left to those in authority who are scared witless that the alphabets might come after them next if they don't publicly condemn him.

As for him 'actively refusing'... I'm envisaging a lot of hand gestures. Close? Better or worse?

Brian Williams
136 Posted 19/05/2022 at 09:09:18
I just don't get the race to reach the most righteous position possible.

Amen to that Ernie!

Nail on head there.

Stan Schofield
137 Posted 19/05/2022 at 09:25:53
One or two have said on this thread that Gana needs some education. Such an assertion is both arrogant and stupid, because those making it don’t know what is in Gana’s mind, and despite that they have the impertinence say what he should do.

All Gana needs to do is act upon his own best judgement. For others not to realise this represents the ignorance of those who are naive enough to think they know better than he does. It is ignorance that needs reducing, including this type of ignorance.

If Gana’s thought-response to those criticising him were “Oh, shut up, you pseudo-moralists keeping up appearances by jumping on your fashionable bandwagons”, I’d agree with him.

Brian Williams
138 Posted 19/05/2022 at 10:04:44
it's important to accept that nobody has the right NOT to feel offended.

What the fuck does that mean?

Of course people have the right NOT to feel offended.

What a ridiculous statement.

Will Mabon
139 Posted 19/05/2022 at 16:55:13

My last paragraph in that post from which you cited the last line, is self explanatory. It means:

- I don't agree with discrimination.
- I also don't think people should be forced to wear any kind of political messaging against their will.
- I used "Sandwich board" as a metaphor, i.e. as a form of advertising a cause by messages or symbolism on a person's clothing.

How on earth you got to me being confused about the issue at hand here, or conflating anything from that, I have no idea.

Dave Lynch
140 Posted 19/05/2022 at 17:30:38
I have 4 boys, one of whom is gaye and I love him very much.

I remember when he was about 18, I asked him was he going to a pride march in Liverpool, he looked at me in horror and said he has no need to go and parade himself or his sexuality in front of anybody, "im me dad" he stated, "not a fucking freak show for people to look at".

I asked him earlier about the Gana "thing"... he thought for a moment and said... "wish we still had him"... I laughed my head off.

Andrew Taylor
141 Posted 19/05/2022 at 17:47:15
Charles Brewer
142 Posted 19/05/2022 at 18:14:17
Mike (from much earlier). Of course, I support Kaepernick's "right" not to respect the US National Anthem or flag. Why wouldn't I?

I also support the right of supporters to boo him, and if the clubs think he will lose them money, the right to sack him within the terms of his contract.

Si Cooper
143 Posted 20/05/2022 at 00:20:58
Will (139), if you don’t understand that no-one is being ‘political’ by being anti-discrimination then I can’t help you understand.
Idrissa Gueye was not asked to actively promote homosexuality so he shouldn’t have a problem unless he thinks his mortal soul will be damaged unless he actively supports persecution of homosexuals.
Ernie, you are right, I suspect he might be a bit of a hypocrite. I’m not actually bothered about the legality of the situation and have not made a comment about whether I think he should be punished for his stance.
Will Mabon
144 Posted 20/05/2022 at 02:30:53

so now your problem seems to have evolved to the use of the word political. OK, just re-read without that word, as just "Messaging".

Everyone knows what is meant by the concept of "Political". Including you.

I have said not one thing that could be construed as a distinction between promoting homosexuality as against promoting the acceptance of it - you raised that.

I'll ask you again - how did you extract all this from the single line of mine that you quoted?

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.

About these ads

© ToffeeWeb