I hear you, and I understand where you’re coming from, but I disagree. I think it’s important to openly criticise what Bayern are doing here.
Footballers getting political
- Thread starter duffer
- Start date
I hear you, and I understand where you’re coming from, but I disagree. I think it’s important to openly criticise what Bayern are doing here.
So, we're OK with footballers thanking their gods and whatever, but having a political position is somehow still not a good thing.
What should they have learned during that time? Your post is vague.
Probably referring to the WW2, even though it was 78 years ago, but he rounded it up probably.
One is symbolism towards make belief sky fairies, the other is having an opinion on reality.
That's obvious. I just don't understand what the poster thinks the club should have learned from that time.
But is still political nonetheless, just hidden behind religious jargon. You are standing for something that defends specific values and ways of living, and tries to create a huge group of people in order to be in a very powerful position.
I'm ok with both. But I reserve myself the right to be critical towards what is being said and how it is being said. Giving people the option to express themselves is important. But it is also important to understand that this in no way absolves anyone from criticism, or consequences even. So in case of Mazraoui, I absolutely believe he should have the right to state what he believes in. But this does not mean that I'm not going to be critical of his views. And I'm incredibly critical of those.
Not because he voiced sympathy for the civilians in Palestine. I believe that is justified and actually share this sympathy. The issue here was this part of the statement:
"God, help our oppressed brothers in Palestine to achieve victory". Considering the two parties at war, the Hamas and Israel, this statement very, very likely constitutes support for the actions of the Hamas, as they are the ones fighting and trying to achieve victory. This is a problematic statement, as it can be interpreted in a way that denies the right of Israel to exist. It is especially problematic if you make this statement as a Bayern player. The club has a strong Jewish past. Former club president and honorary president Kurt Landauer was actually imprisoned at Dachau, in the aftermath of the November pogroms, for example. This strongly influences the values Bayern as a club and community conducts itself by (or should conduct itself by). So voicing an opinion like the one Mazraoui voiced, was always going to be an issue, as it is completely contrary to what Bayern (claims to) stand(s) for. And as a private institution, Bayern have every right to ask questions about an opinion like this.
Now in the end it is very important to me to point out, that as of right now, Mazraoui has not been penalized in any way I know of. He has been asked to clarify his statement and did so. He has then clearly stated to condemn any form of terrorism. While I have a hard time to believing this to be true, I acknowledge that this statement must be enough in order to justify keeping him at the club. My doubts about his honesty extend beyond this issue and stem from his conduct before these events. But the statement in itself is acceptable. Bayern have accepted it. Nobody was punished, nobody's right to free speech was infringed on. Mazraoui didn't have to clarify anything and was free to stand by his words. He choose not to and clarified them.
But earlier today you said that we should criticise what was said and not what wasn't said. You were very clear about that, so my friend, which is it? It seems to me that you're applying a standard for Mazraoui that you are unwilling to do for Bayern when they're essentially expressing the same sentiment but for opposing sides.
"as it can be interpreted in a way"
No absolutes there. And there is a reason for that. I find it very important in these matters to make clear what happens to be interpretation and what happens to be factual. I think I did so fairly with my post here and my criticism towards you. If you had made clear that your criticism doesn't constitute a factual reciting of what Bayern said, which you did by writing: "[...]while they in the same statement publicly state their support for the murder of little children?", I would not have cared. I would have disagreed, but I would not have cared enough to respond.
Fair enough but it does feel like you’re being a tad bit pedantic when it’s clear that it was my interpretation of Bayern’s words, especially when I posted Bayern’s statement in its entirety, which included no such words.
Thanks. I looked for it but couldn't find it. It does seem like Germany doesn't allow anything supporting Palestine.
I recommend reading what I wrote again, because I pointed out that their opportunities may get limited as a consequence of them standing by their principles and opinions. Pros and cons, they're adults. And celebrities know the balance of power they have, and there is often a price to pay for doing what you think is right, in exchange for a disproportionate degree of attention received to whatever you are standing by.
Also fundamentally, company rules shouldn't govern what you do outside of your workplace unless it affects your work. Most of the clubs are acting vigorously because they don't want some public backlash connecting them to the player's opinion. Which I understand, but it's not unanimously the 'correct' choice. You wouldn't know what a McDonald's employee does on their own social media, they're unlikely to become national news stories.
Just yesterday there was an authorized demonstration with thousands of attendees in Düsseldorf.
In terms of football:
The problem for football clubs is that there is no clear line of separation between Palestine and Hamas. So simple statements can be interpreted in several different ways and that gets PR people nervous.
There's little ambiguity on El Ghazi's case however, as "from the river to the sea" is frowned upon by the law and thus an automatic disciplinary case.
It is openly known that Israel has caused a lot of antibodies in a lot of middle east countries since a long time ago, specially for Arab speaking countries who seem to be the most loud voices. Hiring someone from the Maghreb region, a region where Arabs assimilated the locals into their culture due to a long lasting empire, is clearly asking for this kind of issues in times like this.
It would be clear as water that someone with his background would support the Palestinians point of view. His phrase was quite open to interpretation, you cannot clearly say he has openly supported terrorism and the killing of civilians. He might claim otherwise and there's no way to deny it, unless Mazraoui himself steps forward and make an IG post wearing Hamas "merchandise".
What he posted might sound dubious for non-Maghreb people, but it makes total sense if you bare in mind where he comes from.
For me and you, he was out of line. But for most of his friends, family and acquaintances, he probably did the right thing. It all depends which side do you lean.
If Bayern wants to keep their consistency they can easily suspend the player and transfer list him to mark a position saying the club do not share the same values. It might get them some criticism, but at least they are being consistent with the values they defend.
From the BBC....
"The Football Association will write to clubs advising players should not use the phrase "from river to the sea" in social media posts as it is "considered offensive to many".
It comes after Leicester City's Hamza Choudhury apologised for using the phrase in a post on X.
Critics say the phrase implies the destruction of Israel, but some pro-Palestinian protesters disagree.
The FA also says it will "seek police guidance" if a player uses it again."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/67283593
"The Football Association will write to clubs advising players should not use the phrase "from river to the sea" in social media posts as it is "considered offensive to many".
It comes after Leicester City's Hamza Choudhury apologised for using the phrase in a post on X.
Critics say the phrase implies the destruction of Israel, but some pro-Palestinian protesters disagree.
The FA also says it will "seek police guidance" if a player uses it again."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/67283593
Mainz have treated the El Ghazi situation terribly.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/67338002
Anwar El Ghazi takes legal action against Mainz over dismissal for Israel-Gaza posts
Anwar El Ghazi takes legal action against Mainz over dismissal for Israel-Gaza posts
Gets a payout from Mainz and has joined Cardiff. Fair play to him, Mainz along with their country has been appalling on this issue.
Seems to me like the Germans are treading so carefully around the subject of the Palestine genocide to not be branded anti-semites, due to the country's let's say colorful history, so much so they actually went off the rails in the opposing direction.
Good on El Ghazi to get his career back on track after this fiasco.
They'll end up with a goal and an assist.
Good on him.
Hero
Class.
Great to see. The blind support of Israel/demonisation of any criticism of the state is a shame to see.
More footballers, or anyone with a platform, should follow this example instead of being a puppet.
1. Footballers are employees, what they say reflect on the brand and reputation of their employer and can easily damage their employer financially, so any big employer stipulates that employees cannot make declarations that can hurm the employer. It is not silencing. Listening to some of you makes one wonder if you have ever worked for any large employer
2. Some opinions are more controversial than just having an innocent political opinion. Had somebody said he supports Labor on their economic issues - people may not mind But had he said he supports Nazis and is a Swastika fan - would you still defend his right for free expression? Few would. While I categorically don't think saying you are pro-Israel is the same, you can clearly see many people here think it is the same, and there are many more in the world who also do, so brands whose existence depend on fan bases and good will of supporters cannot allow their employees (footballers) to ruin the brand. There is nothing surprising about it
If this whole situation wasn't so tragic, this response from him is actually hilarious.
Silenced and sacked by his club for his stance. Gets paid out by the club and the club inadvertently financially support the cause they sacked him for speaking out for publicly. Oh, then the club politely gets called out for trying to avoid paying. And then he with full tongue in cheek says he hopes Mainz feel good about supporting this cause. And of course, they can't come out and say they don't support helping kids.
This, truly is poetic justice.
This is what happens when you handle a situation so badly, you get exposed for being clowns, there is no comeback.If this whole situation wasn't so tragic, this response from him is actually hilarious.
Silenced and sacked by his club for his stance. Gets paid out by the club and the club inadvertently financially support the cause they sacked him for speaking out for publicly. Oh, then the club politely gets called out for trying to avoid paying. And then he with full tongue in cheek says he hopes Mainz feel good about supporting this cause. And of course, they can't come out and say they don't support helping kids.
This, truly is poetic justice.
Well done to him.