James McClean M Wrexham b.1989

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GypsyBlackCat

I've problem with people taking a symbol like the poppy and putting their own beliefs and views on it. Things like 'blood stained poppy' and 'proud to be British? - wear a poppy!' annoy me as it's not about original meaning of the poppy.

---

Would you agree that the original meaning of something can change over time and can mean different things to different people? Surely the entire scenario boils down to freedom and a single persons entirely valid freedom of choice not to wear a poppy.
I think you'd struggle to find a single bit of evidence that James has ever referred to it as a blood stained poppy and said anything negative about the casualties of WW1 or WW2. Despite the outrage he suffers, you have to give him credit for sticking to his beliefs. The outrage he'd suffer back in his own part of the world would be far less tolerable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joe_denilson

Would you agree that the original meaning of something can change over time and can mean different things to different people? Surely the entire scenario boils down to freedom and a single persons entirely valid freedom of choice not to wear a poppy.
I think you'd struggle to find a single bit of evidence that James has ever referred to it as a blood stained poppy and said anything negative about the casualties of WW1 or WW2. Despite the outrage he suffers, you have to give him credit for sticking to his beliefs. The outrage he'd suffer back in his own part of the world would be far less tolerable.

---

I agree and I'm not just talking about him. It's also the far-right, loyalist and nationalist groups like the EDL and Britain First. And here's the problem, the poppy was never meant to be a nationalist, political or religious symbol. It was to remember the dead from all sides and also new life and hope. Fair play to him for standing for his beliefs but I disagree with him. I don't see it as blood stain flower of British imperialism or as a proud British emblem as the far right like to call it.

He never called it a 'blood stain poppy' it's a line thrown out by people who oppose the poppy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GypsyBlackCat

That's like saying it's ok for ISIS to go around killing the infidels because that's the beliefs and views of the Qu'ran and Islam!

---

No, because that's murder. It's not really the same as having an opinion, no matter how much you don't like James McClean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GypsyBlackCat

I disagree with him. I don't see it as blood stain flower of British imperialism or as a proud British emblem as the far right like to call it.

---

And I agree with you. I don't see it as blood stained or a proud British Emblem either. I simply see it as a fund raising product in support of a good cause. Like a daffodil or pink ribbon. But James has made his case quite clear also and never mentions anything negative about it being a british symbol or anything as jingoistic as that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James McClean

Mr Whelan, for me to wear a poppy would be as much a gesture of disrespect for the innocent people who lost their lives in the Troubles – and Bloody Sunday especially - as I have in the past been accused of disrespecting the victims of WWI and WWII.

---

It's quite straightforward and the problem, to me, seems to have only arisen because of an ignorant assumption by people that a young lad from Derry not wearing a poppy automatically means he's a pro-IRA anti British neanderthal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

No, because that's murder. It's not really the same as having an opinion, no matter how much you don't like James McClean.

---

I'll admit I don't like McClean. I don't rate him as a player and don't like the lies he told about Sunderland and I disagree with his beliefs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joe_denilson

And I agree with you. I don't see it as blood stained or a proud British Emblem either. I simply see it as a fund raising product in support of a good cause. Like a daffodil or pink ribbon. But James has made his case quite clear also and never mentions anything negative about it being a british symbol or anything as jingoistic as that.

It's quite straightforward and the problem, to me, seems to have only arisen because of an ignorant assumption by people that a young lad from Derry not wearing a poppy automatically means he's a pro-IRA anti British neanderthal.

---

I agree but he doesn't help himself though with posting Wolftones songs on Twitter and the whole GSTQ queen. So when people see that they jump to conclusions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GypsyBlackCat

I'll admit I don't like McClean. I don't rate him as a player and don't like the lies he told about Sunderland and I disagree with his beliefs.

---

You're allowed disagree with his beliefs. The problem is you seem to have gone one further and refuse to believe it's even possible for somebody to see a very different symbolism in the poppy from how you see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

You're allowed disagree with his beliefs. The problem is you seem to have gone one further and refuse to believe it's even possible for somebody to see a very different symbolism in the poppy from how you see it.

---

I know he does and as I said British nationalist have a different view. But original mean of is the one that stands to me. Not the 'our brave boys over seas' or 'symbol of British imperialism'.

Please note that discussing McClean's choice to wear the poppy on this thread is fine. Bringing ISIS, the Easter lily, acts committed by the British army unrelated to McClean, etc is not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GypsyBlackCat

I know he does and as I said British nationalist have a different view. But original mean of is the one that stands to me. Not the 'our brave boys over seas' or 'symbol of British imperialism'.

---

But, as I said, it's a symbol. As soon as the British legion started spreading it around they lost control of how it would be perceived.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GypsyBlackCat

Read what I said. The mean and reason behind the poppy. You are linking all the atrocities carried out to the poppy. I my opinion that's wrong. I believe in the original mean of the poppy. The poppy became to emblem of The Royal British Legion. The funds raised go to ex-service personnel and their families. NOT to the British Army. Also it's not a symbol of war, imperialism or British nationalism as you put it. Even the RBL say this. McClean doesn't have to wear one if he doesn't want to but people have the right to question his motives and views. As far as I know, no one at Sunderland, Wigan, WBA or the FA have forced him to wear one.

You go on like 'James' is some kind of victim and is being bullied. But here's the thing, you connect all those atrocities to the poppy as well British nationalism then you must see it from the other way. McClean likes to post pro-Republican songs by The Wolftones about the IRA on Twitter or wearing an Easter Lilly which like the poppy has been taken over by Republicans and has been used by groups like the PIRA and CIRA. Not to mention his 6th form protest against GSTQ and their flag. Surely you must understand how that can come across to British people?

As I said, I don't mind if he doesn't wear a poppy I just don't agree with his reasons and I think he's got it wrong. I've no problem with the white poppy or the purple one. I understand the reasons behind them.

---

As DeLorean posted earlier before deleting, the RBL themselves state on their website:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Royal British Legion

The poppy is a powerful symbol – it is worn to commemorate the sacrifices of our Armed Forces and to show support to those still serving today and their loved ones.

---

That's an explicit expression of support for present and contemporary conflicts. David Cameron also connected it with support for modern conflicts at the official Tower of London memorial last year. Memories of the Troubles in the north are still very raw, whilst some legacy issues relating to the conduct of the British army remain far from resolved. Truth and transparency will breed trust and acceptance of or greater comfort with the symbols of the "other" that have long been viewed as contentious.

I never said it was a symbol of war, imperialism or British nationalism, nor would I say that. It has different meaning for different people. It's a subjective call (even in spite of what the RBL and Cameron say) and I've not made an objective declaration as to what it means because that would give my interpretation of it some sort of primacy that it doesn't have. I can acknowledge that it possesses a meaning of peace for you, but you must surely acknowledge that won't be universal. I was expressing the point that it is used, abused or exploited in a manner whereby it becomes loaded with militaristic baggage and thus has difficult connotations for persons from the nationalist community in the north especially (although I'm sure there are others around the world who might find it problematic also).

But James is a victim and is being bullied. Is he not? His personal politics, which aren't posing physical or mental harm to anyone, don't justify the abuse and bullying. The difference is that James doesn't abuse people who wish to don the poppy or celebrate/observe 'GSTQ'. He lets them get on with it. He is paid no such tolerance or respect, however, by those so keen to abuse him.

It must be early November again

Switching to football related matters.... I see Jim Joe tweeted on the Rangers and Sunderland games yesterday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GypsyBlackCat

I've problem with people taking a symbol like the poppy and putting their own beliefs and views on it. Things like 'blood stained poppy' and 'proud to be British? - wear a poppy!' annoy me as it's not about original meaning of the poppy.

---

once its been symbolically and societally hijacked - whoever is guilty of doing so - its original meaning kind of becomes irrelevant.

Now, where did I leave my swastika...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkStu

Now, where did I leave my swastika...?

---

I was tempted to mention it but didn't want to invoke Godwins Law. End of discussion imminent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkStu

once its been symbolically and societally hijacked - whoever is guilty of doing so - its original meaning kind of becomes irrelevant.

Now, where did I leave my swastika...?

---

When I was in London one weekend a place just down from where I was staying had it's windows smashed by an anti-fascist group. It turned out to be a shop ran by Hindus! :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GypsyBlackCat

I'll admit I don't like McClean. I don't rate him as a player and don't like the lies he told about Sunderland and I disagree with his beliefs.

---

At least you admit your bias and prejudices towards McClean which in general is the hallmark for those Irish and English people who have an antipathy towards McClean. But you also pepper your prejudices with mistruths. McClean's issue with the Sunderland club was with the press officers who advised him not to explain himself, he had no issue with MON who supported him 100%.
It's unfortunate that your empathy is directed at understanding the bigoted reactions fomented by british nationalists but be prejudiced and biased towards McClean, it cheapens the sincerity of your opinions
A truism going back thousands of years is that the fascist minded need to hate and find scapegoats for that hate. And then they blame the targets of their abuse for fomenting their urges to abuse.

Quote:

---

McClean doesn't have to wear one if he doesn't want to but people have the right to question his motives and views

---

By question do you mean a sit down and put a question to James or people have a right to direct foul mouthed, racist, anti-Irish abuse at him?
because as it turns out, he has answered eloquently re his motives and views, something which he was advised not to do at Sunderland.

But that's not the issue is it? the issue is the foul mouthed, racist, anti-Irish abuse directed at McClean during football matches by racists and the gormless.
Those fans who throw such abuse at players during a game should be targeted and banned from football and players who do likewise should also face sanctions, like that Broadfoot character who copped a 10 match ban for his choice of words towards McClean. The 10 match ban is an indication of just how this type of abuse is regarded in some quarters, as even more serious than any other racist/ethnic abuse incident, in football, in Europe. But there needs to be more consistency.

Quote:

---

When I was in London one weekend a place just down from where I was staying had it's windows smashed by an anti-fascist group. It turned out to be a shop ran by Hindus! http://foot.ie/threads/160177-James-...lies/frown.gif

---

I really don't get the relevance of that piece of hearsay, but it smells.

IMO the EPL and FA should follow the FIFA and Uefa stance such that no such emblems, symbols etc are allowed.

Maybe James should join Southampton, they weren't wearing poppies today. I wonder will they face a media storm now.

This is a bit old but I don't think it has been posted here but then I don't think too many people read the Daily Express,
seems mainly for semi-literate right wingers.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/615...Leicester-City

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by punkrocket

Maybe James should join Southampton, they weren't wearing poppies today. I wonder will they face a media storm now.

---

Was there any reason for this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by punkrocket

Maybe James should join Southampton, they weren't wearing poppies today. I wonder will they face a media storm now.

---

They wore them on their jerseys at the Bournemouth game, they're up for auction at the moment: http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/artic...h-2784622.aspx
don't know why they didn't wear them at the weekend, possibly because the Bournemouth game was at home?

No idea, maybe they've deep seated local antipathy to Portsmouth which bursts out in random ways every now and then.
That St Mary's connection looks dodgy as well.

Sums things up quite well.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/...emembrance-day

http://www.whoateallthepies.tv/wp-co...PA-8026650.jpg

http://www.whoateallthepies.tv/wp-co...A-12096125.jpg

Video of Tony's post-match interview with an ecstatic James here: http://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2015/...james-mcclean/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RTÉ Sport

“Bar my wee ‘uns being born, this is the greatest moment of my life,” a beaming McClean told RTÉ Sport.

“I was at the Euros four years ago, but I didn’t feel part of the team because I had nothing to do with the campaign.

“I’m over the moon - I can’t put into words how proud I am. I love this country and it’s just unbelievable.”

---

I felt sorry for him really in his appearance as he was trying so hard and just committing fouls as a consequence. Now, I wouldn't have been too happy if he got sent off as a consequence. He certainly has had greater impacts. How many frees did he commit? There was even one which wasn't given when he shouldered an opponent out of play :)

He is a great lad that has qualities and a fantastic attitude………….but he will get sent off if he is not cute enough to basically do the same thing without the roulette of a red card. That cannot be guaranteed but you just can't keep taking those chances .

no doubt about it though... when things go flat mccleans introduction from the bench certainly gives everything a lift. I thought long and mccleans introduction last night was exactly what was required at the time

How many times were we in still in possession after McClean had the ball would be an interesting stat, it would be a low percentage I reckon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbyrne

no doubt about it though... when things go flat mccleans introduction from the bench certainly gives everything a lift. I thought long and mccleans introduction last night was exactly what was required at the time

---

I thought he's shown a lot more composure for WBA this season. I think he's just so passionate about playing for Ireland that he wants to make an impact on the game too much and his gung-ho approach gets him in trouble.

Love that interview. He loves playing for Ireland as much as anyone.

The importance last night was that we had been under siege and pinned back for 20 minutes, I'd admit to feeling that anything bad could happen during this time, George Hamilton was a hairsbreadth from saying "danger here" on 5 occasions. We then won a free from some silly Bosnian mistake which allowed for a slow double substitution, rounds of applause etc then there was an injury, when the game finally got going, Bosnia were spent as an attacking threat which could pin us back.
Maybe McClean's nuisance value as a curve ball entry into the fray had some value in distracting the Bosnians from their task as he was in his all encompassing (Derry corner boy) hooligan mode, throwing bricks. He probably got that yellow card for dissent, not the actual foul.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbyrne

I thought long and mccleans introduction last night was exactly what was required at the time

---

completely agree. I also love that MON is not afraid to make an early sub or two. Often his changes come around the 60 minute mark which gives the players time to get into the game and find the rhythm. I think last nights were even earlier - maybe 55'?

One of the most exasperating things about Trap (and there were too many to mention) was waiting...and waiting...and waiting...for him to make a change. There were at least 2 or 3 games where there were no substitutions or just one sub. Absolutely ridiculous. Clueless stuff really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkStu

completely agree. I also love that MON is not afraid to make an early sub or two. Often his changes come around the 60 minute mark which gives the players time to get into the game and find the rhythm. I think last nights were even earlier - maybe 55'?

---

Aye, it was round 53 minutes or so when Long and McClean stepped up to come on. I remember looking and taking note after thinking it was quite early to make changes, but it showed initiative, courage and flexibility on O'Neill's part, which are all positive traits.

The Times gave McClean 9/10 for his performance against Arsenal on Saturday. Pulis singled him out for praise.

He got MOTM.

But more importantly, did he stand to attention for La Marseillaise?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeLorean

But more importantly, did he stand to attention for La Marseillaise?

---

And why wouldn't he :confused:?

Just mocking the fact that what he actually does on the pitch rarely makes the headlines his political preferences do.