James McClean

Odhinn wrote: »

I may have taken you up wrongly. My bad.

I have no problem with McLean, or anyone not wearing a poppy. But respect goes both ways.

McLean has made some poor choices and he needs to understand that those choices reflect badly on him and give the trolls more fuel.

Ronan Curtis wore a shamrock poppy last year, which raised some questions along the lines of “what is that”. When people understood why he wore it, zero ****s were given. He didn’t follow it up by turning his back on the England flag, or posting pictures of himself in a balaclava though.

ForestFire

partyguinness wrote: »

I will ask again. Where has McLean suffered 'discrimination'? Abuse from the stands- yes. Discrimination? Get your head out of your ass.

So poor old James he is being persecuted and discriminated for his 'beliefs'? Right so. I wonder what the Rohingyas in Myanmar and the Uighars in China think of that notion.

Shall we petition the UN on behalf of poor old downtrodden James...:rolleyes:

Firstly:-
Since 2011 McClean has been clear in his reasons for not wanting to wear a poppy on his shirt, out of respect for those who lost their lives in Bloody Sunday in 1972.

As well as being abused at games and online he has also received death threats and bullets in the post.

"people are saying they hope my three young children attract Covid and die."

So what is the difference in this and the abuse McGoldrick got (Which is rightly condemned)

iebamm2580

partyguinness wrote: »

Jesus wept. I have said nothing of the sort. I have never said he has not suffered discrimination. I have no idea if he has...all we know it that he has suffered personal abuse because of Poppy stance and all sorts of bile flow from that. Fine. But that ain't discrimination.

My entire consistant point has been..and I will write it slowly: The abuse meated out to McClean (there you go...feel better?) from the stands and Twitter etc does not constitute discrimination.

Not saying it is right and in an ideal world it would not happen but it is personal abuse pure and simple but trying to inflate it into discrimination akin to what BAME players and sections of society generally suffer is downright ludicrous.

Posters who peddle that narrative really have not got a clue what they are talking about and have not seen real discrimination and bigotry.

I will write this slowly, abuse meated out to mcgoldrick and other black players on social media amounts to abuse and not discrimination.

https://twitter.com/odranwaldo/status/1282807762339209216?s=20

ForestFire wrote: »

Firstly:-
Since 2011 McClean has been clear in his reasons for not wanting to wear a poppy on his shirt, out of respect for those who lost their lives in Bloody Sunday in 1972.

As well as being abused at games and online he has also received death threats and bullets in the post.

"people are saying they hope my three young children attract Covid and die."

So what is the difference in this and the abuse McGoldrick got (Which is rightly condemned)

The abuse McGoldrick (which I will not repeat) was racially charged.

"I hope you children die from Covid and generic death threats etc"- Oh wow some keyboard warrior on Twitter throwing out some generic abuse which players and all sort of public figures get on a daily basis and just brush it off.

I had no idea McClean was so precious. Not a good trait when you are on Twitter so often.

I fully agree and respect with his Poppy stance. It is a pity a few other Irish players do not follow him. Maybe they have decided they just do not need the agro and well, they are not from Derry.

Getting abuse because of your Poppy stance and getting racially charged insults are not in the same ball park. Sure they both count as abuse at its basic level but when you bring in racially loaded phrases then that is a game changer.

I agree that all forms of abuse should be stamped out and perhaps that is McClean's point but comparing it racially charged abuse is not the same IMO.

Junkyard Tom

Brock Turnpike wrote: »

Where's the extract from? Ewan McKenna?

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

https://twitter.com/odranwaldo/status/1282807762339209216?s=20

That is a rather bizarre analogy.

There are a few obvious fundamental differences between McClean and Kaepernick.

Remember Kaepernick has received grief from all sections of society- from the President down to his own club and other teams that refused to employ him. He lost his livelihood

Black people are dying on a weekly basis at the hands of the police. They suffer abuse from far-right vigilantes, the KKK etc etc and suffer all sorts of abuse and discrimination.

McClean has not suffered anything like the same fall out. McClean's abuse is confined to barely literate moronic football supporters. I didn’t hear Theresa May or David Cameron out slagging off McClean. McClean has not lost his job. In fact he has secured lucrative transfers.

I for one do not accept, for one second that McClean and Kaepernick are even on the same planet. In fact, it cringeworthy. The ‘football supporters’ are being afforded far too much credit here. They need to be seen for what they are- morons best ignored. No more and no less.

Kaepernick took a principled stand against current injustices against an entire section of US society. McClean stance relates to an incident in the early 70s- which of course should not be forgotten and British state still have a lot to answer for.

Outside of the small world of professional football nobody has a clue who James McClean is or what he is on about. Large swathes of the western world know about Kaeparnick.

Rock77

partyguinness wrote: »

That is a rather bizarre analogy.

There are a few obvious fundamental differences between McClean and Kaepernick.

Remember Kaepernick has received grief from all sections of society- from the President down to his own club and other teams that refused to employ him. He lost his livelihood

Black people are dying on a weekly basis at the hands of the police. They suffer abuse from far-right vigilantes, the KKK etc etc and suffer all sorts of abuse and discrimination.

McClean has not suffered anything like the same fall out. McClean's abuse is confined to barely literate moronic football supporters. I didn’t hear Theresa May or David Cameron out slagging off McClean. McClean has not lost his job. In fact he has secured lucrative transfers.

I for one do not accept, for one second that McClean and Kaepernick are even on the same planet. In fact, it cringeworthy. The ‘football supporters’ are being afforded far too much credit here. They need to be seen for what they are- morons best ignored. No more and no less.

Kaepernick took a principled stand against current injustices against an entire section of US society. McClean stance relates to an incident in the early 70s- which of course should not be forgotten and British state still have a lot to answer for.

Outside of the small world of professional football nobody has a clue who James McClean is or what he is on about. Large swathes of the western world know about Kaeparnick.

I’m struggling to agree with your point.. or maybe even understand it..

Are you saying the abuse McClean gets is not as bad as black people get because it’s from football fans and they are idiots?
But then you are saying David McGoldrick gets abused worse than James..

Surely death threats and abusive mail to you and your family are the same whether it’s because of your politics, skin colour or sexuality.

Is your overall point that this kind of abuse should be accepted by McClean because he speaks out?
Are you saying he should just keep his mouth shut and his head down so he doesn’t receive the abuse?

Are you saying abuse about skin colour is worse than abuse about your politics?

I think what a lot of people here are saying is it’s all the same. Abuse from anyone, football fans included should not be tolerated. The ‘ah he brings it on himself’ line is not good enough to be honest

NIMAN

It was interesting to hear the Sheff Utd manager on the radio today condemning the abuse McGoldrick got. And of course rightly so.

But his wording was significant. He said that no abuse was acceptable. How it's not ok for anyone to give abuse without accepting responsibility for it and should be held accountable.

I think we'd all agree with this.

So where are all these players, managers, pundits etc when a player is getting abuse week in and week out, bullets in the post etc? Total silence from them all.

Hypocrites the lot of them.

RandomViewer

partyguinness wrote: »

Perhaps if he kept his mouth shut and his views to himself it would make his life a lot easier. He cannot achieve anything by going on like this.

I can't help but think that he draws it on himself. He is either incredibly dumb or incredibly naive

Launching into an anti-Poppy/oppressed Derry tirade every so often when you live and work in Stoke and West Bromwich is just not clever. I know these places and they not exactly bastions of tolerance and inclusivity. Brexit voting, Daily Mail reading bigoted White Trash would be a very generous generalisation. These areas recorded some of the highest ‘Vote Leave’ votes.

It is not dissimilar to living and working in Alabama or Mississippi and publicly mouthing off against guns or NASCAR or the Confederate flag. You are drawing a world of grief on yourself. And for what exactly?

Ever hear of Edmund Burke?

RoboRat

Getting abuse because of your Poppy stance and getting racially charged insults are not in the same ball park.

They're both abuse and if you think he is being abused solely because of his 'poppy stance' you're being naive. Matic didn't get abused and neither did Callum Wilson - both are barely covered by the media so why is it ok to stigmatise McClean every year. I'm not saying it's the same as what the BLM movement is about, neither was he, but he was just highlighting the hypocrisy that exists which I certainly agree with.

Having played football in England many years ago, albeit at lower levels, I experienced plenty of abuse on the pitch. I was called a Paddy Bastard, Fenian, Terrorist and much more for no reason other than being Irish. I also had an arguement with a team mate for not wearing a poppy and had to defend my reasoning, which is absolutely ridiculous.

McClean doesn't want to wear the poppy, which is his choice, but the media make a big song and dance about it and stir the pot every year. Personally, if it was me, I would release the statement once and leave it but the media can't help themselves and he can't help biting.

McClean can't change where is is from and if he wore the poppy he would be hated by the people of Creggan. It's where he is from and he cannot change that.

You can say "getting abuse because of your Poppy stance and getting racially charged insults are not in the same ball park" and I can say that getting punched in your face is not the same as getting kicked in your bollocks. Both are abuse and both are wrong. It's bad enough dealing with the neanderthal football supporters, but when the media are stirring the pot, there should be questions asked.

No one should be forced to wear a poppy and he hasn’t worn one so obviously he hasn’t been forced. From being on some of the football boards from West Brom, Wigan and stoke in the past a lot of their fans were quite supportive of his decision regarding the poppy issue.

However, after some of his social media outpourings things changed for the worse. Some of the things he posted were either naive or just downright silly. So for some of these fans their perception of him has changed from sympathy to hostility. And opposition fans now have another stick to beat him with to wind him up.

Abuse he receives on social media regarding his kids etc is pathetic. But social media is a complete cesspit anyway so he has no monopoly there. People abuse everyone and post things they would never say in public.

The question remains as to why he in particular gets singled out. My opinion is that some of his his posts on social media have been very unwise and like a red rag to a bull for some. People are entitled to their opinions on matters but making these opinions public when you are for example a professional footballer can be unwise.

Like my kids, he probably needs the internet taken off him.

partyguinness wrote: »

McLean gets personal abuse.

Is it based on race colour or creed?
Does it cross the line into discrimination?

Show me where he suffers discrimination.

He is English speaking white, straight and male. All things considered he is privileged.

Black players get abuse because of the color of their skin- not their fault.

McLean can choose to keep his mouth shut and his views to himself. He chooses not to- he gets a volley of abuse for it.

McGolderick etc do not have that same luxury or choice.

Ah wise up would ye. As a POC from the Bogside I can 100% say that what James experiences is discrimination. Funnily enough, having lived in England I never once had something said regarding race but for being Irish,aye loads of **** was said then.

Absolute bollocks of a post.

circadian wrote: »

Ah wise up would ye. As a POC from the Bogside I can 100% say that what James experiences is discrimination. .

Discrimination based on what? Nationality? Religion? Or perhaps his perceived politics??

dundalkfc10

Aegir wrote: »

I have no problem with McLean, or anyone not wearing a poppy. But respect goes both ways.

McLean has made some poor choices and he needs to understand that those choices reflect badly on him and give the trolls more fuel.

Ronan Curtis wore a shamrock poppy last year, which raised some questions along the lines of “what is that”. When people understood why he wore it, zero ****s were given. He didn’t follow it up by turning his back on the England flag, or posting pictures of himself in a balaclava though.

McLean? I don't think Kenny McLean has an issue with the poppy. He's a Rangers fan

partyguinness wrote: »

Jesus wept. I have said nothing of the sort. I have never said he has not suffered discrimination. I have no idea if he has...all we know it that he has suffered personal abuse because of Poppy stance and all sorts of bile flow from that. Fine. But that ain't discrimination.

My entire consistant point has been..and I will write it slowly: The abuse meated out to McClean (there you go...feel better?) from the stands and Twitter etc does not constitute discrimination.

Not saying it is right and in an ideal world it would not happen but it is personal abuse pure and simple but trying to inflate it into discrimination akin to what BAME players and sections of society generally suffer is downright ludicrous.

Posters who peddle that narrative really have not got a clue what they are talking about and have not seen real discrimination and bigotry.

Ok, so the abuse he gets doesn't constitute discrimination. Why then, does the abuse McGoldrick get qualify as discrimination, in your opinion? What elevates that above personal abuse?

jm08

timthumbni wrote: »

No one should be forced to wear a poppy and he hasn’t worn one so obviously he hasn’t been forced. From being on some of the football boards from West Brom, Wigan and stoke in the past a lot of their fans were quite supportive of his decision regarding the poppy issue.

However, after some of his social media outpourings things changed for the worse. Some of the things he posted were either naive or just downright silly. So for some of these fans their perception of him has changed from sympathy to hostility. And opposition fans now have another stick to beat him with to wind him up.

Abuse he receives on social media regarding his kids etc is pathetic. But social media is a complete cesspit anyway so he has no monopoly there. People abuse everyone and post things they would never say in public.

The question remains as to why he in particular gets singled out. My opinion is that some of his his posts on social media have been very unwise and like a red rag to a bull for some. People are entitled to their opinions on matters but making these opinions public when you are for example a professional footballer can be unwise.

Like my kids, he probably needs the internet taken off him.

That sounds like the rape defence of ''she was wearing a short skirt, so asking for it.''

Junkyard Tom

partyguinness wrote: »

That is a rather bizarre analogy.

The 'Ungrateful Savage' aspect is on the button. McClean is absolutely hated by Unionists in the north because he's an 'uppity Fenian' taking the 'Queen's Shilling'. Sure, he's a bit of a gobshite but then he kicks a football around for a living, it's not like he's a government minister or something.

jm08 wrote: »

That sounds like the rape defence of ''she was wearing a short skirt, so asking for it.''

Absolute nonsense.

Didn’t his club fine him for one of his more stupid postings on social media? I’m not sure which one as he has “let off” a few times online. Maybe the history lesson one possibly. It’s this and other ones that has led to him getting pelters more so than the poppy aspect specifically.

His portrayal of the most oppressed person ever isn’t really that convincing either to be honest. As I said he probably needs to lay off the internet or at the very least have someone edit him before posting.

If you’re Irish then you’re seen as a fair target by the Brits and that needs to change. He’s 100% correct.

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

If you’re Irish then you’re seen as a fair target by the Brits and that needs to change. He’s 100% correct.

Just him though? Plenty of irish footballers play professionally in the UK.

timthumbni wrote: »

Just him though? Plenty of irish footballers play professionally in the UK.

Every Irish person gets abuse in the UK.

bucketybuck

Deleted User wrote: »

Theres no difference to me in commeration and celebration

May as well throw the dictionary in the bin when lads are just deciding themselves what words actually mean...

Wouldn't even bother addressing some of the points made in this thread, its almost a microcosm of what McClean is talking about in fact. The sheer irony in saying that its all his own fault for not just keeping the head down, where do you even start with somebody who thinks that?

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Every Irish person gets abuse in the UK.

Really? Do you live in the UK?

I have lived here for 10 years and I have never encountered any form of abuse or joke or snide remark ever. No doubt some Irish do but to say everyone does is simply not true. There are no Irish people in my social circle or workplace.

Maybe it is because I work in the professional services industry rather than mucking around on a building site.

facehugger99

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Every Irish person gets abuse in the UK.

Patently bollox.

And I say that as someone who's lived a worked in the UK for many years with many Irish friends who have done the same.

There's a lot of lads with chips on their shoulders regarding the English and are dying to be offended.

If you're getting regularly abused in the UK, I suggest you are most likely the problem.

Pkiernan

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

If you’re Irish then you’re seen as a fair target by the Brits and that needs to change. He’s 100% correct.

Brits?

Classy!

Do you refer to people from Japan as Japs too?

pleasant Co.

Pkiernan wrote: »

Brits?

Classy!

Do you refer to people from Japan as Japs too?

Brits commonly refer to themselves as brits, it’s hardly derogatory if that’s the link you’re attempting to draw.