By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Now that the club has confirmed Morsy chose not to wear the armband, how do our LGBTQ fans feel about this? Like I say I would continue the interesting conversation we were having but that thread is locked.
In the spirit of reconciliation and happiness at the end of the Banter Era (RIP) and as a result of promotion I have cleared out my ignore list. Look forwards to reading your posts!
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:26 - Dec 3 by FrimleyBlue
Yes I'm accepting and supporting the sponsor by wearing the shirt. I'm advertising their company by wearing it so yes it Is supporting it. Just like morsy was supporting and being part of the advertising of betting companies.
Blimey. Not once, when have I donned a Town shirt, have I thought to myself that I'm endorsing this sponsor.
That throws up some interesting stuff. So everyone wearing the current shirts loves all of Ed Sheeran's music. And Rommers is in an interesting position - when he was wearing the name Marcus Evans across his chest, he was endorsing him while at the same time slagging him off on here!
This debate has made people lose their mind. Sadly.
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
-3
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:35 - Dec 3 with 1288 views
Can we stop using words like "support" and "promote"?
The rainbow isn't to sell the idea of homosexually like it's a product to be consumed as a shirt sponsor. It is not designed to convert you within a capitalist system to become a gay.
It is a statement of equality and human rights for all. I can't imagine why Morsy wouldn't want to show himself on the side of equality, especially as I expect he too has suffered abuse or has had his life impacted by those who do not want equality.
So, as a logic experiment, let's presume that Sam himself doesn't think it stands for equality but, in fact, it stands for "supporting" or "promoting" as many here repeat. If he thinks that, then he is refusing to wear it because he thinks being LGBTQ is "wrong" in some way.
So, I really can't find any way to defend him on this.
[Post edited 3 Dec 2024 8:41]
10
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:35 - Dec 3 with 1278 views
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:27 - Dec 3 by The_Flashing_Smile
I have supported those from the community in this thread. I've written one long post to one praising their bravery.
I don't know why you've added all this other stuff. I have accepted his stance is wrong. I have simply asked this morning - on the wearing a gambling sponsor point - whether that is strictly against the rules, because I don't know.
“Praising their bravery”
Do you not think it’s sad that you have to describe like that? Do you not think it’s sad that the club captain cannot accept a show of solidarity with a group of people?
Do you not see how it’s just so unwelcoming, how it gives credence to the homophobia? How it could be devastating to see a club you love accept it?
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:33 - Dec 3 by The_Flashing_Smile
Blimey. Not once, when have I donned a Town shirt, have I thought to myself that I'm endorsing this sponsor.
That throws up some interesting stuff. So everyone wearing the current shirts loves all of Ed Sheeran's music. And Rommers is in an interesting position - when he was wearing the name Marcus Evans across his chest, he was endorsing him while at the same time slagging him off on here!
This debate has made people lose their mind. Sadly.
I think it’s Watford that are selling replica shirts without the sponsor on now due to the backlash about the gambling sponsor.
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:31 - Dec 3 by textbackup
Isn’t the point though that he DIDNT have to wear it? If his god/religion was THAT precious to him, as I understand it is, then he could have walked away from that club/contract. He made a choice, in both situations.
Personally, and I know I come across as heartless many times on here, but I feel a bit sad for our gay supporter base that might now feel isolated or distant from the club.they were here before SM, and will be here after him. Slight stain on what’s been a wonderful few years.
[Post edited 3 Dec 2024 8:33]
I totally agree with your second bit.
On your first bit, yes you do have to wear the club's shirt if you want to stay employed. Ok, he could've tore up his contract... but that's a hell of a big thing to do - unprecedented in fact - and would massively hamper any future employment in football.
But I say again, having your team's sponsor on the shirt doesn't mean you personally endorse that sponsor. I'm an Ipswich fan for life and now and again I wear my colours because that's my team's shirt. I don't have any say in the sponsor and I don't endorse it just because I'm wearing it.
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
1
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:39 - Dec 3 with 1248 views
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:14 - Dec 3 by waveneyblue
Right, let's get one thing sorted here.
My point all the way along has been the right to choose whether to support something.
Its got nothing to do with whether I think he is right or wrong to do so, I've mentioned that.
With regards to your "unsettling observation" (give me strength), I think its absolutely horrific that people feel that they have to hide their sexuality and experience issues over it.
Everybody should be able to live their lives how they wish.
However, that doesn't mean that that everybody has to support them regardless of their personal beliefs. (This being the case of Morsy, not myself before you leap to another unsettling observation).
Please don't alledge things about me in the future.
Thanks.
I haven’t “alleged” anything, I have merely expressed my observation that you’ve contributed many posts in this thread defending Morsy from “having” to wear an armband because of his religion (which is that homosexuality is a sin) whilst failing to acknowledge, support or empathize with 3 of your fellow fans sharing their actual experience and feelings on the subject.
I have pondered your motivates for that, as I’m sure others have. Equally many are also probably pondering why Morsy feels able to wear a shirt promoting betting with a club who were paying his wages from their budget which had benefitted from the betting companies money yet he cannot bring himself to wear a simple and symbolic armband to support a marginalized group.
Defend not Deflect
1
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:40 - Dec 3 with 1237 views
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:20 - Dec 3 by waveneyblue
Is this true?
The reason I ask is that the only acknowledgement of this i find on the web, is you mentioning it 2 years ago in exactly the same debate.
[Post edited 3 Dec 2024 8:30]
Yes it's true, Darren Pratley was the club captain but barely starting so had captained them generally when he had played.
Idris had been captain for 8 out of 9 games (wasn't when Pratley played in one) leading up to the Derby game which was their Rainbow Laces fixture, for that game Tom James wore the captains armband for the only time that season. After this Idris was captain for one more game a few months later
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:32 - Dec 3 by FrimleyBlue
Yet you ask a question. Don't get the answer you want so down arrow it. And carry on.
I downarrowed you because I disagree that every time you've worn an Ipswich shirt over the years you have been endorsing that sponsor. I think you're just saying you have to win the argument. I bet before today you never gave it a moment's thought.
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:21 - Dec 3 by The_Flashing_Smile
I'm not looking for an angle to defend him. I've already changed my position and don't support him. Keep up if you're still determined to have a pop at me.
I was asking a genuine question. You've just repeated what Joe and another poster said - but from my POV (as a non-Muslim) having a betting sponsor on a football shirt doesn't indicate that the wearer is promoting it. I asked Joe if he was promoting Magical Vegas when he worse those shirts and surprise surprise he's gone silent.
Wearing an armband is deliberately promoting something. Having to wear your team's shirt, which happens to have a sponsor, does not mean you endorse that sponsor and everything they do. Wind your neck in.
Just to consider an additional angle
The club paying his wages will have received a substantial amount of money for sponsoring the shirts. That money is part of the overall income which is used to pay outgoings.
By wearing the shirt he is not only promoting betting but financially benefiting from it.
It’s pretty big mental gymnastics/hypocrisy (for him or anyone else) to justify that against his religious views
5
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:44 - Dec 3 with 1203 views
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:33 - Dec 3 by The_Flashing_Smile
Blimey. Not once, when have I donned a Town shirt, have I thought to myself that I'm endorsing this sponsor.
That throws up some interesting stuff. So everyone wearing the current shirts loves all of Ed Sheeran's music. And Rommers is in an interesting position - when he was wearing the name Marcus Evans across his chest, he was endorsing him while at the same time slagging him off on here!
This debate has made people lose their mind. Sadly.
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:44 - Dec 3 by itfcjoe
It’s wild. It’s well known that many town fans boycotted Magical Vegas shirts, and increasingly ME by the end of it, opting for retro replicas. Other fans boycott gambling logos as protest. There’s a reason that ES shirts sold so well.
Who said: "Colin Healy made Cesc Fabregas look like Colin Healy"? | We miss you TLA
0
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:47 - Dec 3 with 1171 views
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:33 - Dec 3 by Swailsey
Sorry but you’ve again made this thread the Dolly show. It’s incredibly frustrating and insulting to the people who have shared their experiences here. Your insistence of trying to challenge every person in a victim-like state is completely unnecessary.
Please reflect on how you are coming across.
I don’t understand the mental gymnastics you’re trying to apply and I think they’re in poor taste. I’ll leave it there as I have already failed in not engaging with you further like I said I would.
You've not explained a single thing here, just whined and acted like you're the victim. Talk to me. Tell me what I've said wrong this morning. Specifics, not this whiney bullsh!t.
I've asked a simple question because I don't know, and people (like yourself) are up in arms. It's not the Dolly show. If someone had just answered "No, they can't even wear gambling logos" or "Yep, fair point, it is a grey area" then that would've been the end of it. Instead people lost their minds and went steaming in thinking I was trying to excuse Morsy. I'm not. I think he's wrong. I don't know how many times I have to say it.
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
-2
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:48 - Dec 3 with 1160 views
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 07:25 - Dec 3 by itfcjoe
By not publicly supporting it, he is publicly rejecting it - there’s no middle ground on this one.
There’s been a lot of word salads on this thread by people trying to talk around why the non-acceptance of a basic small gesture of inclusion isn’t a big deal. It’s being spelled out why it is, and why also this viewpoint from fans is hurtful
"By not publicly supporting it, he is publicly rejecting it - there’s no middle ground on this one."
for me this illustrates what a ridiculous position this style of campaigning creates. setting up a test - either wear this scrap of material or you're a very bad person - is divisive. having something which is set up on the basis of opt-out rather than opt-in undermines free choice and sets people up for a social media pile on and moralistic opprobrium if they do opt-out. much better to have opt-in campaigns where prominent people take part willingly and enthusiastically. better still have campaigns where people use their own words to articulate what they support and why they support it - rather than a very blunt and opaque piece of multi-coloured fabric which does i'm afraid demonstrably mean different things to different people (you may insist it shouldn't but it does).
campaigns which seek t persuade people should always allow there to be middle ground - for example, where people condemn discrimination and bigotry and demand that everyone be treated with respect and dignity but don't feel able to support the precise form of statement which is being compelled.
good campaigns definitely allow for middle ground, they avoid putting people in the position where they are 'either for us or against us'. good campaigns allow for differences amongst people who agree about an awful lot and they actively try to create shared ground not to emphasise differences. what forcing people to wear particular laces has done, and this thread has shown and the wider media coverage has shown, is emphasise division when almost everyone agrees that discrimination and bigotry has no place in football or anywhere else.
[Post edited 3 Dec 2024 8:50]
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
6
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:49 - Dec 3 with 1146 views
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:47 - Dec 3 by The_Flashing_Smile
You've not explained a single thing here, just whined and acted like you're the victim. Talk to me. Tell me what I've said wrong this morning. Specifics, not this whiney bullsh!t.
I've asked a simple question because I don't know, and people (like yourself) are up in arms. It's not the Dolly show. If someone had just answered "No, they can't even wear gambling logos" or "Yep, fair point, it is a grey area" then that would've been the end of it. Instead people lost their minds and went steaming in thinking I was trying to excuse Morsy. I'm not. I think he's wrong. I don't know how many times I have to say it.
People are just asking you to join the dots between wearing one thing whilst not partaking and it being fine and doing the same with something else.
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:39 - Dec 3 by The_Flashing_Smile
I totally agree with your second bit.
On your first bit, yes you do have to wear the club's shirt if you want to stay employed. Ok, he could've tore up his contract... but that's a hell of a big thing to do - unprecedented in fact - and would massively hamper any future employment in football.
But I say again, having your team's sponsor on the shirt doesn't mean you personally endorse that sponsor. I'm an Ipswich fan for life and now and again I wear my colours because that's my team's shirt. I don't have any say in the sponsor and I don't endorse it just because I'm wearing it.
And that’s the part that doesn’t sit right with me. Had SM as a proper honest gentleman, but this stinks of hypocritical behaviour to me.
If your morals and beliefs are put on such a pedestal then why not lead the way, try and change the world, take the stance ‘I’m not wearing that logo, I’m not comfortable in doing so’ (like he has opted to do with the rainbow armband)
By him seemingly picking and choosing what is ok, and not following to the letter of the law, I think leaves him wide open
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 07:59 - Dec 3 by waveneyblue
Are you thick?
Go into ANY line of work and treat them differently because of their beliefs and see what happens.
But he would still be picked to play as a footballer, so Town aren't breaking any law.
Unless it's written into his contract to be the captain, then he wouldn't have a legal case.
The captain role is a choice of the manager. Morsy's contract will be based on representing the club values. Town could have removed him as captain for the game but still played him, on the basis refusing to wear the rainbow armband was against his contract to represent the clubs values.
When I worked I was involved in 2 cases where employees were sacked and tried the 'against my religion" and both lost. Because they were happy to sign their contract which said they would follow the companies values. Morsy not wearing the rainbow armband was stating he's against the LGBTQ+ community.
As I said unless the club has allowed him to include a clause in his contract related to religion and/or captain, and shame on them if they have, then they should have said wear it or lose it. No one player is bigger than the club
In the same way fans rightly condemned players not taking the knee and/or fans who criticised players taking the knee, Morsy not wearing the rainbow armband deserves the same criticism. It's basically shouting the LGBTQ+ community isn't welcome at Ipswich Town.
7
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:52 - Dec 3 with 1100 views
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:48 - Dec 3 by lowhouseblue
"By not publicly supporting it, he is publicly rejecting it - there’s no middle ground on this one."
for me this illustrates what a ridiculous position this style of campaigning creates. setting up a test - either wear this scrap of material or you're a very bad person - is divisive. having something which is set up on the basis of opt-out rather than opt-in undermines free choice and sets people up for a social media pile on and moralistic opprobrium if they do opt-out. much better to have opt-in campaigns where prominent people take part willingly and enthusiastically. better still have campaigns where people use their own words to articulate what they support and why they support it - rather than a very blunt and opaque piece of multi-coloured fabric which does i'm afraid demonstrably mean different things to different people (you may insist it shouldn't but it does).
campaigns which seek t persuade people should always allow there to be middle ground - for example, where people condemn discrimination and bigotry and demand that everyone be treated with respect and dignity but don't feel able to support the precise form of statement which is being compelled.
good campaigns definitely allow for middle ground, they avoid putting people in the position where they are 'either for us or against us'. good campaigns allow for differences amongst people who agree about an awful lot and they actively try to create shared ground not to emphasise differences. what forcing people to wear particular laces has done, and this thread has shown and the wider media coverage has shown, is emphasise division when almost everyone agrees that discrimination and bigotry has no place in football or anywhere else.
[Post edited 3 Dec 2024 8:50]
It's just a lot of words to say not a lot there, maybe it is opt in, and everyone else has decided to opt in and that's what makes it appear as it is? We don't know that's not the case and if it was opt in or opt out it makes no difference if all bar 1 person is doing it - that leaves them in a position of their choice being an outlier and investigated in the same way it would lead to questioning of a lone captain deciding to wear a rainbow armband next week on his own vs his peers.
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:47 - Dec 3 by The_Flashing_Smile
You've not explained a single thing here, just whined and acted like you're the victim. Talk to me. Tell me what I've said wrong this morning. Specifics, not this whiney bullsh!t.
I've asked a simple question because I don't know, and people (like yourself) are up in arms. It's not the Dolly show. If someone had just answered "No, they can't even wear gambling logos" or "Yep, fair point, it is a grey area" then that would've been the end of it. Instead people lost their minds and went steaming in thinking I was trying to excuse Morsy. I'm not. I think he's wrong. I don't know how many times I have to say it.
It's not all about you.
3
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:52 - Dec 3 with 1100 views
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:35 - Dec 3 by NewcyBlue
“Praising their bravery”
Do you not think it’s sad that you have to describe like that? Do you not think it’s sad that the club captain cannot accept a show of solidarity with a group of people?
Do you not see how it’s just so unwelcoming, how it gives credence to the homophobia? How it could be devastating to see a club you love accept it?
Yes it is sad. Both how I've had to describe it and Morsy's stance. Yes it is unwelcoming and yes it gives credence to homophobia. It's a real shame.
Where have I said otherwise to any of this since I revised my position some time ago (actually after pointofblue posted yesterday)?
I've asked a simple question this morning to understand the Muslim faith.
Why are you not able to read what I've actually written?
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
-2
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:54 - Dec 3 with 1075 views
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:38 - Dec 3 by NewcyBlue
I think it’s Watford that are selling replica shirts without the sponsor on now due to the backlash about the gambling sponsor.
Great idea. It doesn't follow, though, that someone wearing a regular shirt supports that sponsor, whatever it might be. I've seen Rich wearing a Magical Vegas Town shirt on Blue Monday. I didn't think to myself "Ooh, promoting gambling on Blue Monday now?!"
Sam Morsy's ill-judged rainbow armband statement was bad enough. The club supporting his position is nothing short of a PR disaster. It's been reported all over the world! Quite apart from damaging the club's reputation - the issue itself needs to be looked at. If a player isn't comfortable saying that "Ipswich Town welcomes players, fans and visitors of any and all sexual orientation" then that player has no business wearing the shirt. Let alone being the "captain". Just think of the impact of Morsy's bigoted views on young emerging players who happen to be gay or whatever 'non-traditional' sexual orientation they feel comfortable with. Welcome?? I don't think so. You can't do tolerance 'a la carte' - Morsy is wrong and should keep his unpleasant prejudices to himself. Or not be captain. Or not even show up. Love him as a footballer. But very very disappointed in him as a leader.
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:33 - Dec 3 by The_Flashing_Smile
Blimey. Not once, when have I donned a Town shirt, have I thought to myself that I'm endorsing this sponsor.
That throws up some interesting stuff. So everyone wearing the current shirts loves all of Ed Sheeran's music. And Rommers is in an interesting position - when he was wearing the name Marcus Evans across his chest, he was endorsing him while at the same time slagging him off on here!
This debate has made people lose their mind. Sadly.
No you would he supporting and endorsing eds tour. As an individual you may not like his music but you were helping to advertise his tour.
Same as M.E. you would have been endorsing and advertising the ME group. Again you may individually not like the man who owns it. But you were happy enough to endorse his company.
What did you personally think you were doing wearing a town shirt with a sponsor on it. Why does a sponsor pay to have their name on the shirt..... the answer is to get advertising and you've given them that advertising which itself is support for them as you are helping them.
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:57 - Dec 3 by The_Flashing_Smile
Great idea. It doesn't follow, though, that someone wearing a regular shirt supports that sponsor, whatever it might be. I've seen Rich wearing a Magical Vegas Town shirt on Blue Monday. I didn't think to myself "Ooh, promoting gambling on Blue Monday now?!"
But he is doing so, whether he wants to or not - it's implicit and literally what these sponsors are paying for.
How many people on this board had heard of Magical Vegas in January 2018 compared to now?
EDIT - Not explicitly promoting, but giving exposure to in return for cash to themselves indirectly
My armband thread has been locked for whatever reason on 08:57 - Dec 3 by The_Flashing_Smile
Great idea. It doesn't follow, though, that someone wearing a regular shirt supports that sponsor, whatever it might be. I've seen Rich wearing a Magical Vegas Town shirt on Blue Monday. I didn't think to myself "Ooh, promoting gambling on Blue Monday now?!"
Or some people may actually want a shirt without the sponsor because they wouldn’t buy it with that particular sponsor on for a particular reason.
I have a Magical Vegas orange away shirt and must admit I’ve looked into how to get the sponsorship off it.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
