I would guarantee that it was not his intention when he signed the contract, but it wouldn't surprise me if he did something like this now that his name is getting dragged through the mud.
Jordan Henderson | New Athletic Interview: I strongly believe that me playing in Saudi Arabia is a positive thing
- Thread starter Adisa
- Start date
I would expect the same level of reaction every other player has gotten.
Eh?
Do you mean it's unreasonable that every single one of the players/managers who have recently signed for Saudi league teams hasn't been subjected to criticism over their decision specifically from a LGBT+ standpoint?
Well, they could have been. But it's pretty obvious why a player who actually has been associated with the LGBT+ cause, because of his own statements and actions, would be looked at more closely, no?
Should all be judged to the same standards.
It's ok for everyone else to go there for the money, but not JH, because he happened to publicly supported a cause.
Ronaldo supported save the children and Make a wish, why wasn't he held to those same standards? Why were people not saying the same things about that because of the bombings etc?
Money trumps morals...nothing new
The guy obviously doesn`t care that much and looks like his virtue signalling was just to boost his personal image
The guy obviously doesn`t care that much and looks like his virtue signalling was just to boost his personal image
Yes, but all this is nonsense (false equivalance, as people like to say, but it applies in this case), mate:
The people who have a problem with Henderson aren't fine with everyone else going there for money. *
They aren't applauding Ronaldo for going there either.
They are pointing out Henderson's particular hypocrisy, they aren't saying that everyone going there is a hypocrite specifically.
* I'm willing to bet that 99% of the people (on here) who even bother to call Henderson out for this move are also generally critical of anyone moving to the Saudi league (but Henderson is being called out for a specific and obvious reason).
Last edited:
He just did the typical Dipper thing. Moralise loudly, imply he is holier than thou. Then as soon as it suits, do the opposite.
It completely baffles me how someone who is absolutely clueless on every topic can still smugly act like they're the smartest person in every thread.
I will never understand people building profiles of random Caf people, because I promise you I won't remember you replied to me tomorrow.
Also, if the shoe doesn't fit.
So should Ronaldo have been called out for a very specific reason. Why support childrens rights and charities if your going to take a billion or so off people who dump bombs on kids?
People are generally critical, but only morally outraged because of a certain group want to feel victimised.
Anyway, enough going round in circles. Fair play to him for taking that money, people who feel it's wrong, should be looking further into the bigger ills of the world and realise that except for a handful of people closely connected to him and his family, it really doesn't make a jot of difference, not to their lives or anyone's elses.
Tagline seems appropriate!
What exactly are you getting at here?
Yes, he probably should have.
We're not talking about Ronaldo, though. We're talking about Henderson. There is a very specific reason why people are focusing on him.
The fact that people should have focused on Ronaldo in all sorts of ways (and yes, they absolutely should have - because he's a much bigger name than Henderson) isn't an argument against people focusing on Henderson now.
The entire "logic" is just fecked up, don't you see that? It's not random that people are targeting Henderson, for one thing. And the fact that people aren't targeting other...targets (for various reasons) is neither here nor there. The fact that people don't give a shit about X doesn't make it any less important to give a shit about Y.
Yeah, I see why. But, I think they should hold everyone else to the same standards. Just because he lent his voice to a cause it doesn't make him any better or worse than anyone else who's gone there.
They're all just going there for money, pure and simple. Nothing else really matters to them, they'll be richer than 99.9% of society for the rest of their lives and won't want for anything.
Liverpool fans.
Holding it against him achieves nothing. He looks stupid as it is and that's its own punishment. Not much can be said in addition to that, certainly making his life difficult in future because he's done it or continually casting asperions on him once this has blown over isn't the way to go for me.
Seem to be a lot of people that grandstand these days but don't do much good themselves. That's exactly what he was doing to begin with, grandstanding with no real backbone behind it - and now we see the roles reversed. Apparently everyone would make a different decision even though when push comes to shove many simply don't and that lack of doing good rather than simply talking about it is part of why society is in difficulty. We seem to be in a cycle of putting on these facades and nowhere better to see it than a forum or social media. Not to say that I'm any better but identifying this curious state of affairs where everyone chimes in with expert judgment on the way things should be and then proceed to be and do the exact opposite is a decent start to at least having some self awareness as a basis for improvement.
Better off just letting it go and accepting that's who he is. Maybe later in life he'll regret the way he handled it or choices he made or maybe he won't but that's the decision he's made and unless the fella has committed an offence that means he should be removed from society then crack on really...
Look, this makes no sense.
Of course it makes a difference that he "lent his voice to a cause".
That is precisely the reason why he's being targeted and questioned at the moment.
Whether it makes him "better or worse" than others (in your opinion, or mine) is another matter, but that (the blatant hypocrisy of it) is obviously the reason why he is being discussed here.
And Henderson answered it for himself for everyone to see and now criticise him
Ultimately he's a professional footballer and has been offered a high paying job in the middle east which many people have taken over the decades. Some people with similar stances to Henderson went to Qatar to cover the WC some objected. Corporations that support LGBT choose to work with Saudi, they're so intertwined with western business and sport like F1, boxing golf and so on. An individual can take the money and see the country first hand, perhaps bridges can be built over the decades with more and more western exposure and different people meeting in person rather than shunning.
Last edited:
Why do you keep bringing this up? No one has said that's ok either we just aren't talking about it because we are on a footy forum discussing Footballers signing for their league.
I'll pretend this really is what you meant...
How exactly do Liverpool supporters want to feel victimised in this situation?
So everyone who was happy to see Ronaldo go to the Saudi league. Everyone who watched the last World Cup. Got it.
I see. So because he's supported LGBT in the past he cannot join the Saudi league, but those who have not done so publicly are fine.
I get people calling him a hypocrite but it's still early and he'll no doubt be questioned about this. But Steven Gerrard is fine because he's never supported LGBT publicly.
Personally, I think they only totally clean move is not join the league, and this is not what-aboutism, it's an also, as well as being openly critical of corporate and governmental insanity home and abroad. There's plenty around. I've seen some players voice their opinions and you soon have hoards of idiots telling them to keep politics out of football.
Cristiano has supported the Palestinian struggle - people being occupied by a brainwashed and genocidal population. It so happens that those occupiers - in the Middle East - somehow are invited to be part of UEFA. You can criticise him for joining the Saudi league (for moral and sporting reasons) while also praising him for taking on the biggest taboo in the world to date. With Henderson, it's early days, but this does not negate what he's done in the past. It's not as if he has changed his views. My money is on him confirming his views when he'll eventually be asked.
What if he doesn't confirm his views?
You're right about the clean move being not to go there anyway.
Then slag away.
So he doesn't say anything now when the criticism is at its worst and they've just blacked out his rainbow armband in his announcement video, but he will once he's over there getting 100 grand a day and completely away from the abuse? Colour me skeptical on that one.
meh. I'm honestly not bothered by this at all. what he did is pretty much exactly what I think majority would've done, except they are never tested like Henderson was. activism that doesn't require anything from you, there are no personal sacrifices and you do nothing most of the time except wearing an armband is easy. which is why I never take loudest "activists" on the internet seriously, and it was the same same story in that general Qatar world cup thread.
it is easy to pretend we care and we are sooo invested when nothing is being asked from us except being loud on facebook or twitter. in reality, our society is full of Hendersons. people should know better than to give tons of praise to someone just because he's saying the stuff that sound nice. that's the easiest thing to do when you live in Europe.
it is easy to pretend we care and we are sooo invested when nothing is being asked from us except being loud on facebook or twitter. in reality, our society is full of Hendersons. people should know better than to give tons of praise to someone just because he's saying the stuff that sound nice. that's the easiest thing to do when you live in Europe.
Surprised he’s getting as much heat as he is. Not because he doesn’t deserve it, he does. But because anyone associated with Liverpool usually gets away with morally wrong things, the media tends to go easy on them.
Remember how "the working man's club" the "moral arbiters" tried to stiff the government during COVID?
exactly right, everyone has their price. Greed rules the world today. British government supplies billions of pounds worth of arms to SA, but people will still vote for them at next and future elections. The number of ex pats in the Arab world is vast, and, they are there for only one thing, money, and lots of it, will then return to UK and lord it over people here. Nothing will change.
To be fair you have expressed your opinion on these sort of topics enough for people to have a good idea of what you think. And most of the time it's very predictable what you'll come out with next, and indeed you can often do it very smugly.
To be fair he could have played in other leagues and still be very rich.
Also anyone expecting much out of him should read this again. Chances are he is not even aware of the correlation between playing in SA and his stance on LGBT
Also anyone expecting much out of him should read this again. Chances are he is not even aware of the correlation between playing in SA and his stance on LGBT
He gets some points for his favorite Sunderland player being a Trini
Scared of: nothing
I genuinely just can't be arsed going over it all again. I don't see why he should be publicly shamed for doing his best to make sure he looks after his family's financial future. Regardless of his previous roles and expressed views.
Just hold everyone who goes there to the same standard. Because he previously expressed views that are contrary to the laws and beliefs of the country he's going to work in, does not mean he now holds those same views. Just like Ronaldo going there doesn't mean he now supports the bombing of children. It also doesn't mean Stephen Gerrard thinks his old team mate Robbie Rogers should be executed.
People on the internet trying to be offended by this, really just need to look at the bigger picture and understand that. In the grand scheme of things JH going to SA for 700k a week, is going to make feck all difference to anyone's life except for a few people in his family and others closely associated with him. It will have zero impact on their life unless they know him personally.
He’s always been a cnut. feck him.
I'm sure it makes no difference to a Lgbtq person when one of their main public figure advocates cuts and runs to a country that would kill them for just being themselves.
Last edited:
A player who was incredibly vocal and supportive of LGBTQ fans and women playing football, who inspired the Liverpool LGBTQ fan group and became a hero to many of them. He’s turned his back on them and the beliefs he espoused it does affect people. Having a very high profile ally of a marginalised group show that his words were basically hot hair and nothing more than PR is incredibly disappointing.
Let’s just revisit this point he made:
"That’s where my own position on homophobia in football is rooted. Before I’m a footballer, I’m a parent, a husband, a son, a brother and a friend to the people in my life who matter so much to me. The idea that any of them would feel excluded from playing or attending a football match, simply for being and identifying as who they are, blows my mind."
I’m sorry but he was already on 200k a week. He’s already sorted his family’s future and amassed generational wealth. He’d have a career in management or punditry waiting for him. It’s pure greed and you can one hundred percent criticise someone for their hypocrisy.
I think it’s more telling that you don’t find it abhorrent.
Last edited:
I think we can all accept players going for the money. It is what it is, it would take a person of great morals and ethics to say no to it.
But when he was so public in his support, we can be public in our criticism.
Some people are perfectly fine with SA and they don't give a shit about the lgbt community, they just know they're no supposed to come out and say it. By defending these players with strawmen and whataboutism, they're somehow trying to justify to themselves why their own personal views are ok. It's a defense mechanism in a way.
If someone tells me they support lgbt rights but they're fine with what henderson is doing, they're lying about the first.