James McClean M Wrexham b.1989

[GypsyBlackCat]

Because you don't have to move halfway around the world whenever you disagree with something? I think the Irish state and establishment has been and continues to be abhorrent on many levels. It doesn't make me a hypocrite to still live here. If you stopped seeing things in black and white for a moment you might realise protesting the institutions of state doesn't amount to a rejection of the entire country and all of its inhabitants.

I'm not looking at it from a black and white view, I'm looking at from different angles. IMO, the days of the Troubles are over. That's why we have the Peace Process, The Good Friday Argeement and Power Sharing. I don't see the point in being bitter towards the British government or the Royal family. For me it's better to work together and teach young people about the past so we don't repeat it. Show then that despite the horrible past we can move forward together and build a better future. That's just my views and beliefs.

James McClean has his and that's fine. I don't agree with him. He views GSTQ and the Union Jack and symbols of an oppressive state that terrorized his homeland. I can understand that. At the same time I realize that GSTQ and the Union Jack means everything to them. The homes, family etc. So I can understand how they'll feel insulted. Surely people understand that?

http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/james-mcclean-has-got-to-turn-towards-the-flag-like-everyone-else-tony-pulis-on-england-flag-snub-31392538.html

Tony Pulis tells him he has to face the flag like everyone else.

[Crosby87]

Jaysus it made the huffington post!

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/07/20/james-mcclean-turns-back-on-british-national-anthem_n_7830658.html

[DeLorean]

Firstly, I think he could have stayed facing the flag and just looked down, like the NI lads did in Danny's photo. It would have been far more discrete and I don't think anybody could have rationally accused him of anything, on either side. That said, it's his call really, if he felt uncomfortable facing it he was under no real obligation to do so.


But he must know that people will not agree with him and call him a hypocrite?

No doubt, it's almost as if he feels more of an obligation to his friends, neighbours, family members and ancestors than he does to some hot headed strangers with internet access or the British press.


I'm sure he knows that innocent people on both sides died (21 in Birmingham) and this is seen as supporting the IRA?

I'm sure he does too, but he's not asking anybody to stand respectfully in front of a tricolour while Amhrán na bhFiann is banging out. He's simply refraining from doing the opposite.


I'm not looking at it from a black and white view, I'm looking at from different angles. IMO, the days of the Troubles are over. That's why we have the Peace Process, The Good Friday Argeement and Power Sharing. I don't see the point in being bitter towards the British government or the Royal family. For me it's better to work together and teach young people about the past so we don't repeat it. Show then that despite the horrible past we can move forward together and build a better future. That's just my views and beliefs.

James couldn't have put it better himself, well maybe...


I am not a war monger, or anti-British, or a terrorist or any of the accusations levelled at me in the past. I am a peaceful guy, I believe everyone should live side by side, whatever their religious or political beliefs which I respect and ask for people to respect mine in return. Since last year, I am a father and I want my daughter to grow up in a peaceful world, like any parent.

[Crosby87]

Wait....he's NOT a terrorist? :bomb:

[jbyrne]

mcclean has not been any more disrespectful to the english flag than those who follow England and scrawl their towns and local pubs name across their flag. its probably the same people jumping up and down about this.

all a fuss over nothing.

[TheOneWhoKnocks]

Thank God you responded to that before I saw it. You've saved me a suspension! :p

You really can't help yourself, can you? Several people already pointed out that I may have missed the point a little bit before I had a greater sense of the bigger picture - I even acknowledged so myself. There is no need for you to chime in with a daft passive-aggressive jibe that doesn't contribute anything to the discussion.

God knows I think some of your missives are a little bit long-winded and out there, but I don't insult you.

Grow up.

[TheOneWhoKnocks]

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/jul/21/west-brom-tony-pulis-james-mcclean

Just out of interest, do the Italians, Spanish, French & Germans play their national anthems before their domestic cup finals?

[Wolfman]

Seriously, this is a total non-story. He didn't insult their flag or anthem. A slow news week.

[tricky_colour]

Wait....he's NOT a terrorist? :bomb:

Made some suicidal runs from time to time, fit in well with our suicidal defending :p

[tricky_colour]

It is a none story really, he is as entitled to his opinion as anyone else, I mean this is West Brom ffs not North Korea.

[GypsyBlackCat]

Firstly, I think he could have stayed facing the flag and just looked down, like the NI lads did in Danny's photo. It would have been far more discrete and I don't think anybody could have rationally accused him of anything, on either side. That said, it's his call really, if he felt uncomfortable facing it he was under no real obligation to do so.



No doubt, it's almost as if he feels more of an obligation to his friends, neighbours, family members and ancestors than he does to some hot headed strangers with internet access or the British press.



I'm sure he does too, but he's not asking anybody to stand respectfully in front of a tricolour while Amhrán na bhFiann is banging out. He's simply refraining from doing the opposite.



James couldn't have put it better himself, well maybe...



I understand that. But he is under obligation to stand and face the flag when representing West Brom, as Tony Pulis stated yesterday


“I had a chat with him and explained what we do as a football club and the way we are and I think he’s fine with everything.“He’s got to turn towards the flag like everybody else has and he recognises that. He thought he was OK to close his eyes and put his head down in respect of both anthems.

Respect is a two way street, if you want people to respect your views you have to respect theirs. Maybe he was maybe he wasn't. But from the pictures it did look like he was making a point and insulting the flag and anthem. I can see both points of views.

The matter has been handle brilliantly by Pulis. He didn't slated the player but made it clear where the club stands on this. He also gave the old 'He's not a bad lad' gem. And now the matter is put to bed.

[Wolfman]

Hopefully. Complete drivel in the media, on all sides.

[OwlsFan]

Interesting that a writer from the Daily Telegraph stands up for McLean http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/11753541/James-McCleans-flag-snub-starts-an-undignified-race-to-be-offended.html

[DeLorean]

I understand that. But he is under obligation to stand and face the flag when representing West Brom, as Tony Pulis stated yesterday

The matter has been handle brilliantly by Pulis. He didn't slated the player but made it clear where the club stands on this. He also gave the old 'He's not a bad lad' gem. And now the matter is put to bed.

It seems to me like Pulis isn't even remotely fussed about the whole thing but realised he had to say something. He said James understands, relatively safe in the knowledge that this situation may never even present itself again, while McClean is a West Brom player or while he's managing at the club. I find it kind of hard to believe McClean, for all his principles, would just say, "oh right boss, I didn't realise it was insulting not to face the flag, I will in future". He really should have just faced it in the first place if he's that uncommitted to his stance.


Respect is a two way street, if you want people to respect your views you have to respect theirs. Maybe he was maybe he wasn't. But from the pictures it did look like he was making a point and insulting the flag and anthem. I can see both points of views.

I can only think of it in the terms of somebody doing the same to the tricolour over here. I don't think I'd be even slightly offended, especially if, as recently as last November, they documented their views in the public domain in a very respectful way.

I still think he should have probably faced the flag though overall, but I don't really think it was all that disrespectful, more unnecessarily drawing attention to himself.

[GypsyBlackCat]

It seems to me like Pulis isn't even remotely fussed about the whole thing but realised he had to say something. He said James understands, relatively safe in the knowledge that this situation may never even present itself again, while McClean is a West Brom player or while he's managing at the club. I find it kind of hard to believe McClean, for all his principles, would just say, "oh right boss, I didn't realise it was insulting not to face the flag, I will in future". He really should have just faced it in the first place if he's that uncommitted to his stance.



I can only think of it in the terms of somebody doing the same to the tricolour over here. I don't think I'd be even slightly offended, especially if, as recently as last November, they documented their views in the public domain in a very respectful way.

I still think he should have probably faced the flag though overall, but I don't really think it was all that disrespectful, more unnecessarily drawing attention to himself.

Martin Johnson did something like that during an Six Nations game. I didn't find it offensive but it was disrespectful. I think Johnson was more of an ar$e than politic statement.

I'd imagine Pulis wants to keep what happened in house. He might of had a chat to him or he might have gave him the hairdryer treatment. I think he was more annoyed that the player let him down. He put some faith in McClean and then this thing blew up and he's getting attention for all the wrong reasons. I wouldn't say it was a 'rebuke'. But it's dealt with now.

[jbyrne]

Interesting that a writer from the Daily Telegraph stands up for McLean http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/11753541/James-McCleans-flag-snub-starts-an-undignified-race-to-be-offended.html

this is funny "A Derry MP advised West Brom to sack McClean, adding that “he’s not worth the trouble”." as the unnamed politician probably has no problem attending 12th July bonfires which more times than not have an Irish flag on top

[Wolfman]

Think that link's already up on here?

[osarusan]

Tony Pulis: 'He’s got to turn towards the flag like everybody else has and he recognises that. He thought he was OK to close his eyes and put his head down in respect of both anthems.'

Does that suggest McClean actually argued that what he did was his way of respecting the anthems (:D) or does it mean 'just get through them'?

[jbyrne]

Tony Pulis: 'He’s got to turn towards the flag like everybody else has and he recognises that. He thought he was OK to close his eyes and put his head down in respect of both anthems.'

Does that suggest McClean actually argued that what he did was his way of respecting the anthems (:D) or does it mean 'just get through them'?

big shock here where the English team entirely refuse to face their flag and instead set up to do the conga...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yV0SoeEDuk

[Gather round]

this is funny "A Derry MP advised West Brom to sack McClean, adding that “he’s not worth the trouble”." as the unnamed politician probably has no problem attending 12th July bonfires which more times than not have an Irish flag on top

Nice free publicity for that clown Gregory Campbell.

At the very least he should treat McClean to a curry & yogurt when they're both next in town.

[osarusan]

big shock here where the English team entirely refuse to face their flag and instead set up to do the conga...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yV0SoeEDuk
The thing is that I am not sure the English team has a tradition of turning to face their flag - just from what I recall, they, and many other teams, just stay facing the way they are.

No idea why the West Brom team made up of players of different nationalities turned at all.

[Stuttgart88]

I think we have had a tradition of facing our flag since Jack Charlton introduced it as a motivational tactic. I think we're very unusual in that regard, it's definitely not the norm.

[GypsyBlackCat]

The thing is that I am not sure the English team has a tradition of turning to face their flag - just from what I recall, they, and many other teams, just stay facing the way they are.

No idea why the West Brom team made up of players of different nationalities turned at all.

Maybe that's what happened. They all turned the wrong way and McClean was the only one facing the right way!

[BonnieShels]

I think we have had a tradition of facing our flag since Jack Charlton introduced it as a motivational tactic. I think we're very unusual in that regard, it's definitely not the norm.

Protocol states we should face the flag when the anthem is played.


When the National Anthem is played in the presence of the National Flag, all present should face the National Flag, stand to attention and salute it, remaining at the salute until the last note of the Anthem.
http://www.military.ie/info-centre/defence-forces-history/the-national-flag/

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/special-reports/protocol-the-dos-and-the-donts-31064482.html

www.taoiseach.gov.ie/upload/publications/1104.pdf

[Spudulika]

Isn't it interesting that this breaks around the same time as a Nazi-saluting Princess Elizabeth is front page of the sun. I just don't understand the fuss. I understand what he did and why he did it and he is as entitled to do it as the boys in Mexico did. And remember the Aussie (I think it was) who was also a medalist was hammered for congratulating them! A political/personal statement is the right of any person to make. No matter how we personally might not agree with or understand it. The OTT carry on the year before last over a kiss between 2 Russian athletes on the podium was in Europe and the USA, in Russia it just didn't matter, they had won medals. Then last year the madness in Sochi over having rainbow painted nails and badges, the locals just ignored it and watched the sport.

Unfortunately the majority of meeja are currently covering "events" not sports and so find it boring, or are patently unable, to report on what matters (sports) and choose to focus on what their editors will cream themselves over - scandal!

I personally wouldn't have behaved as James did and had to endure GSTQ, Flower of Scotland and the bloody Italian dirge and each time just wanted to go back to the dressing room and rest.

[bennocelt]

Isn't it interesting that this breaks around the same time as a Nazi-saluting Princess Elizabeth is front page of the sun. I just don't understand the fuss. I understand what he did and why he did it and he is as entitled to do it as the boys in Mexico did. And remember the Aussie (I think it was) who was also a medalist was hammered for congratulating them! A political/personal statement is the right of any person to make. No matter how we personally might not agree with or understand it. The OTT carry on the year before last over a kiss between 2 Russian athletes on the podium was in Europe and the USA, in Russia it just didn't matter, they had won medals. Then last year the madness in Sochi over having rainbow painted nails and badges, the locals just ignored it and watched the sport.
.

I might have missed this in the thread, but whats this story?

[MeathDrog]

I might have missed this in the thread, but whats this story?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Olympics_Black_Power_salute

[tetsujin1979]

I might have missed this in the thread, but whats this story?
think it's a reference to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Olympics_Black_Power_salute
The reference to Mexico City was what made me think of it, the two incidents have nothing in common. Peter Norman (the Aussie) came up with them sharing the pair of gloves.

[bennocelt]

Oh yeah forgot about that...............jeez this thread

[DannyInvincible]

I understand that. But he is under obligation to stand and face the flag when representing West Brom, as Tony Pulis stated yesterday

It's unlikely the peculiar circumstances will ever arise again, unless WBA make a cup final whilst McClean is in the starting line-up, but such an obligation would be completely out-of-order in any other place of work. If it's actually anything other than mere rhetoric to appease the outraged and, if enforced upon McClean and it had a detrimental effect upon his employment through reprimanding or some such on account of his conscientious objection, I'd imagine he'd have a good case for breach of his rights/direct discrimination on basis of belief under employment law. The Human Rights and Equality Acts apply in the workplace too. If my employer was instructing me in such a manner, I'd be flabbergasted. It would be utterly inappropriate.


Respect is a two way street, if you want people to respect your views you have to respect theirs. Maybe he was maybe he wasn't. But from the pictures it did look like he was making a point and insulting the flag and anthem. I can see both points of views.

He wasn't disprespecting it. He was respectfully disengaging (by bowing his head, closing his eyes and keeping quiet). If you could accept he was respectfully disengaging, would you concede at least some respect for his position?


The thing is that I am not sure the English team has a tradition of turning to face their flag - just from what I recall, they, and many other teams, just stay facing the way they are.

No idea why the West Brom team made up of players of different nationalities turned at all.

Aye, I thought that bizarre myself. From memory, the England team always face forward. I'm sure I've even seen them linked with arms round one another on occasion too.


I think we have had a tradition of facing our flag since Jack Charlton introduced it as a motivational tactic. I think we're very unusual in that regard, it's definitely not the norm.

Was that introduced by Charlton? In spite of the guideline document from the Department of Taoiseach that Bonnie mentions above, the Irish rugby team stand arm-in-arm rather than face the flag when the anthem is played. Not that the guideline document lays out statutory requirements, but interesting all the same. It also advises that all present should salute the flag until the final note. Don't think I've ever seen any team anywhere of any nationality ever do that! Very militaristic.

Personally, I like the camaraderie apparent in the arms-round-shoulders approach to anthems. It's more stirring.

This bit is interesting too:


The National Flag should never be defaced by placing slogans, logos, lettering or pictures of any kind on it, for example at sporting events.

http://www.esplanadehotel.ie/sites/1821/wwwroot/irishfanspoznan3.jpg

Oops...

[nigel-harps1954]

Spanish national team players don't even sing their national anthem.

[SalvadorSanchez]

ok....

1. WBA knew what they were getting when the signed him... poppy kerfuffle and all over last few years...
2. Didn't disrespect the Flag / Queen / Country / Prince George / Davina McCall or any other British national treasure... respectful non participation I think it's called...
3. Did they know there was going to be anthems? Surely they did or they're disorganized amateurs...
4. If they did know, why didn't Jimbo discuss it with Pulis?
5. If they did know, why start him and put in him in that position? no anthem after 30mins / half time... eh boys?
6. He could have faced the flag and kept his head down.... or not... he didn't turn his back or do anything or say anything..
7. Apart from the likes of Freddie Kanouté there seems to be very few footballers with principles nowadays... so a man taking a stand is actually admirable..
8. To be fair... Cameron apologized for Bloody Sunday... maybe we need to strat the moving on process little by little
9. As a man born in Derry why shouldn't he play in England? UK was happy to create and retain NI all these years since 1922, why shouldn't he earn a living there?
10. How many countries/anthems/presidents have been deliberately and egregiously disrespected by UK football fans for no reason other than the opportunity presents itself..?

[DannyInvincible]

8. To be fair... Cameron apologized for Bloody Sunday... maybe we need to strat the moving on process little by little

Things are moving on from the dark days and people/communities are reconciling. Certainly that is true. However, I think it is important to understand the context of the gesture so that we can actually try and interpret/discuss it properly. The gesture is ultimately rooted, not in bitterness or hate, but in a self-respecting fear of appearing subservient. Niall McGinn explained this on behalf of those nationalist lads who do the same thing when lining out for NI. James evidently doesn't hate the English or British; he gets along fine with them every day of living here. Likewise, he has no issues with his team-mates from NI and gets on perfectly well with them.

This fear or insecurity of appearing subservient, however, is very naturally more pronounced in a society moving on from a conflict that involved two "mutually exclusive" or incompatible sides attempting to violently out-balance, domineer and subjugate one another. For nationalists in the north, 'GSTQ' remains a very real symbol of those who, not just in living memory, but also contemporarily, gladly lord it over you and who crudely and insularly see your falling one step behind as a progressive leap for them. They measure their success by your failure. If you're a nationalist who is secure enough to be able to overlook that, great, but I will defend the likes of McClean if stepping above that is something over which he still has strong emotional and logical reservations. I won't hold him to blame for a reluctance to psychologically/apparently subjugate himself to an ideology of supremacy. Why should be feel bad for it?

Eamonn McCann's critical analysis of Saville is well worth a listen, by the way, if you're interested:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x83lt5zDRbg

[DannyInvincible]

Spanish national team players don't even sing their national anthem.

Always worth re-posting some expert opinion:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXfGAlc4i4w

[seanfhear]

Things are moving on from the dark days and people/communities are reconciling. Certainly that is true. However, I think it is important to understand the context of the gesture so that we can actually try and interpret/discuss it properly. The gesture is ultimately rooted, not in bitterness or hate, but in a self-respecting fear of appearing subservient. Niall McGinn explained this on behalf of those nationalist lads who do the same thing when lining out for NI. James evidently doesn't hate the English or British; he gets along fine with them every day of living here. Likewise, he has no issues with his team-mates from NI and gets on perfectly well with them.

This fear or insecurity of appearing subservient, however, is very naturally more pronounced in a society moving on from a conflict that involved two "mutually exclusive" or incompatible sides attempting to violently out-balance, domineer and subjugate one another. For nationalists in the north, 'GSTQ' remains a very real symbol of those who, not just in living memory, but also contemporarily, gladly lord it over you and who crudely and insularly see your falling one step behind as a progressive leap for them. They measure their success by your failure. If you're a nationalist who is secure enough to be able to overlook that, great, but I will defend the likes of McClean if stepping above that is something over which he still has strong emotional and logical reservations. I won't hold him to blame for a reluctance to psychologically/apparently subjugate himself to an ideology of supremacy. Why should be feel bad for it?

Eamonn McCann's critical analysis of Saville is well worth a listen, by the way, if you're interested:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x83lt5zDRbgEamonn McCann was spot on on his thoughts on the Saville inquiry there.

[Crosby87]

http://www.esplanadehotel.ie/sites/1821/wwwroot/irishfanspoznan3.jpg

Oops...

Is Jaws Tours what that Aussie surfer was on the other day?

[back of the net]

I think we have had a tradition of facing our flag since Jack Charlton introduced it as a motivational tactic. I think we're very unusual in that regard, it's definitely not the norm.

One thing that bugs me is that the flag isn't above the south stand at home games and players don't face that way....pretty sure they did in jacks days. Now For anthem players face north stand..I. e away fans end.

[tricky_colour]

Interesting one here


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EY7F5j0PTIM

Wayne Rooney is not singing (unsurprisingly being from an Irish family ;) )

Also Gary Neville, indeed Gary seems to have his head bowed which seems to be the polite form of protest?

His stance is very much like this, maybe Gary is an anti-Royalist, but like Ian Brown of the Stone Roses (also form Manchester like Neville)

This seems to back up that idea, granted it is only a forum post.
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?p=18835018

Not seen much mention of that in the British media, the sort of thing they would likely gloss over.


Well I read once that Gary Neville in particular is a nationalist and so refuses to sing the anthem because he doesn't believe in the royal family.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CKXW5gzWUAAaqf4.png

This article seems to go along with that.


Wayne Rooney (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/wayne-rooney/) did not sing the national anthem at the start of his England career while Gary Neville, now an England coach, refused to join in as he said he preferred "focusing on the match" instead.

See he is not just not singing he has his head bowed.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/08/20/article-2028324-025A1A0D0000044D-263_468x286.jpg

[GypsyBlackCat]

It's unlikely the peculiar circumstances will ever arise again, unless WBA make a cup final whilst McClean is in the starting line-up, but such an obligation would be completely out-of-order in any other place of work. If it's actually anything other than mere rhetoric to appease the outraged and, if enforced upon McClean and it had a detrimental effect upon his employment through reprimanding or some such on account of his conscientious objection, I'd imagine he'd have a good case for breach of his rights/direct discrimination on basis of belief under employment law. The Human Rights and Equality Acts apply in the workplace too. If my employer was instructing me in such a manner, I'd be flabbergasted. It would be utterly inappropriate.



He wasn't disprespecting it. He was respectfully disengaging (by bowing his head, closing his eyes and keeping quiet). If you could accept he was respectfully disengaging, would you concede at least some respect for his position?




I respect his beliefs but I don't agree with them. To McClean GSTQ and the flag mean something different but to me it doesn't. It represents my mother's family and my friends and also the people of Britain. I can also see why people would be offended and take it up the wrong way and feel insulted.

As for the top bit, let's look at it this way. If you work in the catering business and one of your employee's tells you before hand that they wouldn't serve at a same-sex wedding because of their beliefs would you let them? Or what about the situation Newcastle found themselves in with Pa**** Cisse when he said he wouldn't wear the jersey because Wonga were the sponsors and it went against his religious values?

Pulis was making the point that we work together as a team and no one is bigger than WBA etc. He also pointed out that he gets on well with the rest of the squad even the two Northern Ireland lads, so that shows there was no bad blood in the camp and McClean isn't a raving 'Up the RA' Republican. Tony Pulis is right. We all have a personal beliefs but when you put on that West Brom shirt and walk on the pitch you leave them in the dressing room.

[BonnieShels]

Was that introduced by Charlton? In spite of the guideline document from the Department of Taoiseach that Bonnie mentions above, the Irish rugby team stand arm-in-arm rather than face the flag when the anthem is played. Not that the guideline document lays out statutory requirements, but interesting all the same. It also advises that all present should salute the flag until the final note. Don't think I've ever seen any team anywhere of any nationality ever do that! Very militaristic.

Personally, I like the camaraderie apparent in the arms-round-shoulders approach to anthems. It's more stirring.


I like how we face the flag and prefer to to be honest.

Given the provenance of some in the rugby squad in general I would say it would be a tough one to implement them facing the flag.

[DeLorean]

http://www.esplanadehotel.ie/sites/1821/wwwroot/irishfanspoznan3.jpg

I love the 'YOU'RE THE MEASURE OF OUR DREAMS' one.

[Charlie Darwin]

As for the top bit, let's look at it this way. If you work in the catering business and one of your employee's tells you before hand that they wouldn't serve at a same-sex wedding because of their beliefs would you let them?
No, same as I wouldn't let McClean refuse to serve at a wedding of two British people. But then those are completely different to the issue of not bowing your head during a song.

[GypsyBlackCat]

No, same as I wouldn't let McClean refuse to serve at a wedding of two British people. But then those are completely different to the issue of not bowing your head during a song.

I was responding to Danny's claims in regards to Pulis comments that:
'such an obligation would be completely out-of-order in any other place of work. If it's actually anything other than mere rhetoric to appease the outraged and, if enforced upon McClean and it had a detrimental effect upon his employment through reprimanding or some such on account of his conscientious objection, I'd imagine he'd have a good case for breach of his rights/direct discrimination on basis of belief under employment law. The Human Rights and Equality Acts apply in the workplace too. If my employer was instructing me in such a manner, I'd be flabbergasted. It would be utterly inappropriate.'

So, if Cisse didn't want to wear the Wonga logo Newcastle United FC shouldn't have told him he had to? That's my point.

[DannyInvincible]

As for the top bit, let's look at it this way. If you work in the catering business and one of your employee's tells you before hand that they wouldn't serve at a same-sex wedding because of their beliefs would you let them?

In an ideal world, I think the liberal position would be to respect that (as much as I might personally disagree with such a position). Perhaps their conscience/beliefs would be protected under employment law. It's not a great analogy though; catering at an event upon request would presumably be an integral part of the catering job roll for which they've signed a contract (not that the signing of a contract necessarily washes all employee's rights away either, mind). In McClean's case, paying reverence to 'GSTQ' isn't part of his job roll. If the wedding catering issue was really such a strong objection on conscience/religious grounds and compromise was viable, perhaps another employee could be found to do that particular job or the job could be sub-contracted (as was seemingly approved by the judge in the recent Ashers Bakery case (http://www.equalityni.org/ECNI/media/ECNI/Cases%20and%20Settlements/2015/Lee-v-Ashers_Judgement.pdf) in Belfast when a Christian-run bakery refused the provision of a cake celebrating same-sex marriage, although the case isn't directly relevant either as it dealt with and upheld a case of alleged customer discrimination as opposed to employee discrimination).


Pulis was making the point that we work together as a team and no one is bigger than WBA etc.... We all have a personal beliefs but when you put on that West Brom shirt and walk on the pitch you leave them in the dressing room.

Nobody was trying to be bigger than West Brom. If West Brom want personal beliefs left in the dressing room, that's fine, but that obviously isn't their policy if they're intent on engaging in overtly political spectacles such as anthem-playing and poppy celebration. And, as I've said, whatever about what Pulis might want to enforce, WBA, as an employer, are still subject to employment law like any other employer and are obliged not to mistreat, reprimand or dismiss their employees on grounds contrary to employment law.

[DannyInvincible]

I was responding to Danny's claims in regards to Pulis comments that:
'such an obligation would be completely out-of-order in any other place of work. If it's actually anything other than mere rhetoric to appease the outraged and, if enforced upon McClean and it had a detrimental effect upon his employment through reprimanding or some such on account of his conscientious objection, I'd imagine he'd have a good case for breach of his rights/direct discrimination on basis of belief under employment law. The Human Rights and Equality Acts apply in the workplace too. If my employer was instructing me in such a manner, I'd be flabbergasted. It would be utterly inappropriate.'

So, if Cisse didn't want to wear the Wonga logo Newcastle United FC shouldn't have told him he had to? That's my point.

I'm not sure what would have happened there. Cisse might well have had a case if he stood his ground and Newcastle enforced their policy to the detriment of his employment. I can't say for sure as I simply don't know how a judge might have decided if such a case had ever been made.

[GypsyBlackCat]

Nobody was trying to be bigger than West Brom. If West Brom want personal beliefs left in the dressing room, that's fine, but that obviously isn't their policy if they're intent on engaging in overtly political spectacles such as anthem-playing and poppy celebration. And, as I've said, whatever about what Pulis might want to enforce, WBA, as an employer, are still subject to employment law like any other employer and are obliged not to mistreat, reprimand or dismiss their employees on grounds contrary to employment law.

I wouldn't call it 'overtly political spectacles'. It's the custom in America to play national anthems before sporting events and the Poppy isn't regarded by many as a political symbol. The Poppy is to honour British services men, many who have played football and/or football fans. I don't think many people view it like that only the right-wing Britain First types. But surely McClean must have know that when he moved to England that there was a chance that he'd make it to a cup final?

[DannyInvincible]

I wouldn't call it 'overtly political spectacles'. It's the custom in America to play national anthems before sporting events and the Poppy isn't regarded by many as a political symbol. The Poppy is to honour British services men, many who have played football and/or football fans. I don't think many people view it like that only the right-wing Britain First types. But surely McClean must have know that when he moved to England that there was a chance that he'd make it to a cup final?

It's undeniably overtly political; all national anthems, flags and symbols in furtherance of a particular ideal are. I don't know how someone could argue otherwise.

I'm sure McClean was and is aware of the possibility; he can just put his head down if he wishes to disengage, as is perfectly reasonable.

[BonnieShels]

So how has James been doing this pre-season outside of the goal?

[Closed Account]

So how has James been doing this pre-season outside of the goal?Quiet, he's been keeping his head down.

[Charlie Darwin]

I was responding to Danny's claims in regards to Pulis comments that:
'such an obligation would be completely out-of-order in any other place of work. If it's actually anything other than mere rhetoric to appease the outraged and, if enforced upon McClean and it had a detrimental effect upon his employment through reprimanding or some such on account of his conscientious objection, I'd imagine he'd have a good case for breach of his rights/direct discrimination on basis of belief under employment law. The Human Rights and Equality Acts apply in the workplace too. If my employer was instructing me in such a manner, I'd be flabbergasted. It would be utterly inappropriate.'

So, if Cisse didn't want to wear the Wonga logo Newcastle United FC shouldn't have told him he had to? That's my point.
Well I wouldn't know enough to speak confidently on employment law but conscientious objection is well-established in the workplace so he could certainly have a case that it's an unreasonable demand to make of him.