FA: Shove the rainbow up your ***

comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by Mamba - I filter right back (U1282)
posted 14 hours, 20 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 2 hours, 56 minutes ago
comment by Cinciwolf-----JA606 NFL fantasy champ 2023 (U11551)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 6 minutes ago
This is madness btw:

while the 2030 World Cup is set to be awarded to unopposed co-hosts Spain, Morocco and Portugal, with early matches also being played in Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay.




Do think we will have a future where there are 64 nations in the world cup played across 4 continents (basically 4 16 team WCs at once, with the winners of each playing off in a super final week)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Seems crazy to me that they didn't just base ot in south America. But yeah, money talks
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Apparently this was done to cheat the system FIFA themselves set up to ensure each confederation got to host the tournament.

The last world cup in Qatar was Asia's tournament so, officially, it was supposed to go to North America, South America, Africa, and Europe before going back to Asia. This would mean the next Asian world cup wouldn't be until 2042.

2026 in North America was set, but they wanted to give 2034 to Saudi for the money. So they accepted a joint bid between Spain, Portugal and Morocco for 2030, which let them claim it was Europe and Africa both getting to host.

They then decided to play three matches in South America so that they could claim that Soith America had also hosted a World Cup and so it was rightfully Asia's turn again in 2034.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not entirely accurate. There is a shortage of countries willing or able to host and each federation having it's turn wasn't entirely feasible. That's why you are seeing joint but unchallenged bids to host.

They even announced this change in approach a few years back and said they would be going in the direction of countries hosting jointly. Them taking bribes is just standard practice which they do all the time. They didn't do it because it's Saudi.

Also, FIFA is literally run from Europe and almost always led by Europeans and is eternally corrupt as fack and so this corruption is European corruption but people become so vocal and climb high horses.

Unfortunately there's lot of dishonesty IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, they announced ced the change in approach, right around the time that the Saudi bid was materialising. You aren't really disputing what I said. They changed their own rules as a result of wanting the Saudi money.

Also, your rant about FIFA being based in Europe is weird, since:

1. Fifa was founded in Europe.

2. Fifa has begun the process of moving to the USA.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not a rant, just a respectful opinion. I don't see how these two point counter my "rant" anyway. FIFA is run in Europe, almost entirely by Europeans and is eternally corrupt. FIFA has a long history of changing things to fit what they want, this Saudi deal isn't any different IMO. I wasn't exactly disputing your point, as I said, I only felt it was not entirely accurate and added my thoughts.

I've already discuss this issue on the Tranny thread and I don't have the will to repeat myself.

comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 10 hours, 33 minutes ago
comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 3 hours, 19 minutes ago
comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
I don't get all the uproar. Like that captain the other week refusing to wear a pride armband. On what basis MUST he wear it? He's not contractually obliged to is he??


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody claimed he must wear it. The FA doesn't state that all captains must wear it. They questioned why he didn't and disagreed with his excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is his religion not important then? What about his beliefs?? Why are they less important than the beliefs of the radical left???
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think made up gods and subsequent rules from books created centuries ago are as important as real people, no.

I also don't think it's radical to support people, just a normal decent thing for people to do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When you can tell me why he MUST wear the pride armband, get back to me.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody said he MUST.

In fact he didn't so that should tell you that without it needing explained.

comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 13 hours, 30 minutes ago
comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 3 hours, 19 minutes ago
comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
I don't get all the uproar. Like that captain the other week refusing to wear a pride armband. On what basis MUST he wear it? He's not contractually obliged to is he??


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody claimed he must wear it. The FA doesn't state that all captains must wear it. They questioned why he didn't and disagreed with his excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is his religion not important then? What about his beliefs?? Why are they less important than the beliefs of the radical left???
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think made up gods and subsequent rules from books created centuries ago are as important as real people, no.

I also don't think it's radical to support people, just a normal decent thing for people to do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Isnt having the freedom to choose also a normal decent thing.

He's made a silent choice, which is only being made less silent because he's been questioned on that choice. It's not as if he's wearing an armband that says homosexuals will burn in hell, he's just not actively promoting them

comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 16 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 3 hours, 19 minutes ago
comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
I don't get all the uproar. Like that captain the other week refusing to wear a pride armband. On what basis MUST he wear it? He's not contractually obliged to is he??


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody claimed he must wear it. The FA doesn't state that all captains must wear it. They questioned why he didn't and disagreed with his excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is his religion not important then? What about his beliefs?? Why are they less important than the beliefs of the radical left???
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sure his club make an effort to accomodate and respect his beliefs, such as prayer rooms and time to prey, plus adhering to his diet in accordance with his beliefs. Rightly so, however asking what about his beliefs is a daft question.

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 13 hours, 30 minutes ago
comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 3 hours, 19 minutes ago
comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
I don't get all the uproar. Like that captain the other week refusing to wear a pride armband. On what basis MUST he wear it? He's not contractually obliged to is he??


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody claimed he must wear it. The FA doesn't state that all captains must wear it. They questioned why he didn't and disagreed with his excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is his religion not important then? What about his beliefs?? Why are they less important than the beliefs of the radical left???
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think made up gods and subsequent rules from books created centuries ago are as important as real people, no.

I also don't think it's radical to support people, just a normal decent thing for people to do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Isnt having the freedom to choose also a normal decent thing.

He's made a silent choice, which is only being made less silent because he's been questioned on that choice. It's not as if he's wearing an armband that says homosexuals will burn in hell, he's just not actively promoting them
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I don't think it's decent to refuse to promote equality when you are in a great position to make a difference. I also don't think it's a massive deal. He had a choice, he used it but I certainly don't think it was the decent thing to do.

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 10 hours, 16 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 13 hours, 30 minutes ago
comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 3 hours, 19 minutes ago
comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
I don't get all the uproar. Like that captain the other week refusing to wear a pride armband. On what basis MUST he wear it? He's not contractually obliged to is he??


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody claimed he must wear it. The FA doesn't state that all captains must wear it. They questioned why he didn't and disagreed with his excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is his religion not important then? What about his beliefs?? Why are they less important than the beliefs of the radical left???
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think made up gods and subsequent rules from books created centuries ago are as important as real people, no.

I also don't think it's radical to support people, just a normal decent thing for people to do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Isnt having the freedom to choose also a normal decent thing.

He's made a silent choice, which is only being made less silent because he's been questioned on that choice. It's not as if he's wearing an armband that says homosexuals will burn in hell, he's just not actively promoting them
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree, personally if ANY group tried to bully me into doing this I would definitely not do it - even if I agreed with the cause, I mean seriously, f&&& right off... 🤷🏻‍♂️

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 10 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 13 hours, 30 minutes ago
comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 3 hours, 19 minutes ago
comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
I don't get all the uproar. Like that captain the other week refusing to wear a pride armband. On what basis MUST he wear it? He's not contractually obliged to is he??


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody claimed he must wear it. The FA doesn't state that all captains must wear it. They questioned why he didn't and disagreed with his excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is his religion not important then? What about his beliefs?? Why are they less important than the beliefs of the radical left???
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think made up gods and subsequent rules from books created centuries ago are as important as real people, no.

I also don't think it's radical to support people, just a normal decent thing for people to do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Isnt having the freedom to choose also a normal decent thing.

He's made a silent choice, which is only being made less silent because he's been questioned on that choice. It's not as if he's wearing an armband that says homosexuals will burn in hell, he's just not actively promoting them
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I assume you are talking about Ipswich's Sam Morsy, and yes 100% he is entitled to his beliefs just odd that he had no issues promoting gambling at previous clubs... odd as his religion would be against that?

itsa tuff situashun with lotsa gray area n moral ishoes

comment by Samus (Isle of) Arran (U22669)
posted 11 hours, 3 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 10 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 13 hours, 30 minutes ago
comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 3 hours, 19 minutes ago
comment by Slack Alice (U9489)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
I don't get all the uproar. Like that captain the other week refusing to wear a pride armband. On what basis MUST he wear it? He's not contractually obliged to is he??


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody claimed he must wear it. The FA doesn't state that all captains must wear it. They questioned why he didn't and disagreed with his excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is his religion not important then? What about his beliefs?? Why are they less important than the beliefs of the radical left???
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think made up gods and subsequent rules from books created centuries ago are as important as real people, no.

I also don't think it's radical to support people, just a normal decent thing for people to do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Isnt having the freedom to choose also a normal decent thing.

He's made a silent choice, which is only being made less silent because he's been questioned on that choice. It's not as if he's wearing an armband that says homosexuals will burn in hell, he's just not actively promoting them
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I assume you are talking about Ipswich's Sam Morsy, and yes 100% he is entitled to his beliefs just odd that he had no issues promoting gambling at previous clubs... odd as his religion would be against that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is nonsense because he is contractually obliged to wear Ipswich kit. He isn't obliged in any way shape or form to wear a pride armband.

Argument dismissed.