• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

BLM and South African Players

Can you be a little clearer is it he doesn't support BLM for religious reasons or just taking the knee? Its just the use support.

I'm with you and Xypher BTW I far more suspect religion is convenient excuse rather than deep seated religious beliefs. Because if it was on purely on beliefs they'd be like Rokoduguni and find a different way to mark it rather than just refusing (absolute fair play to the guy BTW more should be made about as it calls to attention you can still do something).
I have edited to make it more clear. I will post a link to the article of him making these statements

Former Bulls, Sharks flank slams sports minister over 'Sale 8' criticism https://www.news24.com/sport/rugby/...ports-minister-over-sale-8-criticism-20200821
 
I would be extremely interested as to what World Rugby and the IOC would do if the ANC forbade Rassie from picking Lood De Jager and Faf De Klerk? I imagine there would be uproar as it would be a government picking a sporting team.

By the way I don't think the above will happen. I think it is just political posturing in order to look good and take the public's eye off other things that are going on within South Africa.

Ultimately, If taking the knee becomes compulsory then it loses all meaning and is no more than an act of subjection.
 
BLM is not an organisation and that is essentially part of the problem. You disagree with some groups who call themselves Black Lives Matter but the movement is not definied by those groups.

BLM has it's own website, and on the frontpage of that site, they are asking for donations. Isn't that basically a non-profit organisation then??

From Wikipedia

Wikipedia?? seriously? I can edit pages on Wikipedia, anyone can. How many times have people used Wikipedia as a source of reference and then others have used other sites as more accurate information?

BLM isn't hard to get behind,

It's every person's choice!! Don't try and force anyone to jump on a bandwagon...

Do you agree racism is wrong?

Yes
Do you agree that in most countries that police violence and racially motivated violence in general targets black people disproportionately?

No, but then again, I live in Africa where the black community is nearly 99% of our population. And over here, we feel the police aren't doing enough to stop crime, and perhaps using their powers more harshly, will bring better results.

This isn't a simple question ncurd. demographics, socio-economics, and various other factors need to be considered when asking this question. And the answer won't be the same in every country, purely because people will look at their own country/area as a source of reference and make an opinion from there.

Do you agree we should take steps to reduce the problems within society that cause this to happen?

Yes, but using a violent criminal as a poster boy for a movement that is using the race-card as their fuel to the fire, is perhaps not the right way to win support in many countries. There are way too many articles, posts, social media feeds out there now for people to not get behind this movement either.

It's still a choice.

Congratualtions you support BLM now we can have a proper conversation of what this should be about the steps we need to take but were all on the same page that steps need to be taken.

Guess I don't qualify them, does that now automatically disqualify me from having a discussion on this issue??
Evidence please

Evidence please

Well Renaldo Bothma has started this debate, and I think it's just a matter of time for others to join in. I might not be able to provide you with a link as to the religion being the reason, but I am in the same church groups as some of these guys so I guess it's because of that and that I've personally seen Lood and Faf in the same type of church as myself, that I tend to lean that this might be the reason.

As for the burning of bibles, that happened in Portland, Oregon, and there are a lot of websites posting about that.

As for the churches being vandalised, that happened in Boston.

**The news articles I read about these acts of the church and bible, might be reliable, it might not. I don't know enough about those news sites to say whether it's accurate or not, and will happily retract my remarks about this if someone would tell me that it's not true**
 
Wikipedia is one of the most accurate sources of information out there, it's heavily moderated, with citations given as evidence to the iformation provided and the idea just anyone edit it hasn't been true in over a decade. The idea it should be used is incredibly outdated and only ever really postulated when it says something someone doesn't want to agree with.

But I suppose anyone can buy a domain name (literally true) and postulate themselves as the one true voice on BLM is far more accurate.


I will address other stuff in a moment you clearly put effort it and it's only fair.
 
I've moved around a couple of your statements this is because they were kinda addressed in the same point or I felt they should be addressed separately. I assume anyone who has read this far has read the full post.
It's every person's choice!! Don't try and force anyone to jump on a bandwagon...
Who's forcing anyone? Nobody is forcing you to engage in this conversation, nobody is being forced to read what I write and nobody certainly is being forced to agree with me as you have shown. I have no power, you can technically ban me from the forum although I think that would be an egregious abuse of that power. What I am doing is challenging poeple's in my (and many others) view incorrect assumptions about BLM. Everyone is allowed thier opinion but that doesn't mean they shouldn't challenge if they are wrong.
No, but then again, I live in Africa where the black community is nearly 99% of our population.

This isn't a simple question ncurd. demographics, socio-economics, and various other factors need to be considered when asking this question. And the answer won't be the same in every country, purely because people will look at their own country/area as a source of reference and make an opinion from there.
You'll notice the bit where I said most countries? That's because I accept this is mostly European/North American (minus a couple of countries and probably plus a few in other areas usually countires with majority white-European populations) problem. Your mixing a simple problem with a simple solution. Does it target black people more than white people which is disproportionate to that actual population demographics? We have to accept that as basic fact before we can say why? and how? Denial of that problem stops us from coming up with solutions and its a core issue because I have so many conversations where refuse to belive there are issues and its all gone away.
Guess I don't qualify them, does that now automatically disqualify me from having a discussion on this issue??
Well your in denial of basic issue of does racially aggrevated violence effect black people I apprciate in SA things may be diffrent but its certainly an issue from where I'm from (where the players are making a living) and America and those facts are pretty much undeniable unless you really don't want to belive there is an issue. It makes it very hard to have a conversation if there is denial of a problem in the first place,
And over here, we feel the police aren't doing enough to stop crime, and perhaps using their powers more harshly, will bring better results.
Authoritarianism is never a good answer to any problem, I believe you tried it before. Ah well that is an opinion but can't say I like any authortarian states escalation of arms/powers never seams to work the way people want it to, We bought the army in to deal with the Irish and that worked so damned well....
Yes, but using a violent criminal as a poster boy for a movement that is using the race-card as their fuel to the fire, is perhaps not the right way to win support in many countries. There are way too many articles, posts, social media feeds out there now for people to not get behind this movement either.
Go watch the full video of George Floyd's arrest and ask yourself whether the actions were close to acceptable. If you think they were sorry I've lost all respect for you and I have no respect for anyone who thinks it was. It doesn't matter any factor to his previous record. The officers may have reason to subdue a suspect but he was quite clearly subdued long before his murder. If you think its acceptable or there isn't fair outrage because he was conviction for armed robbery I don't think you really believe in a fair justice system. And that is kind of the point the police in this instance had no reason to believe Flloyd at the time was a threat to them or members of the general public but did feel it okay to take his life. In some ways it has to be him because it is someone with a bad past because even though he had one he still didn't deserve to die.

This is not a new movement either, Kapernieck was kneeling long before this ever happened and was sparked by the extra-judicial of Mike Brown and Eric Garner back in 2014.
As for the burning of bibles, that happened in Portland, Oregon, and there are a lot of websites posting about that.

As for the churches being vandalised, that happened in Boston.

**The news articles I read about these acts of the church and bible, might be reliable, it might not. I don't know enough about those news sites to say whether it's accurate or not, and will happily retract my remarks about this if someone would tell me that it's not true**
You should retract the remarks because you haven't proivded any evidence to us just that you "read it". You complain about wikipedia which requires citations from good sources for the postulated facts within its information but can't be bothered with the same burden of proof yourself..[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
 
I've moved around a couple of your statements this is because they were kinda addressed in the same point or I felt they should be addressed separately. I assume anyone who has read this far has read the full post.

No problem, it's always good to discuss matters and argue, with someone who's views are different from mine. I hold no grudge here.

Who's forcing anyone? Nobody is forcing you to engage in this conversation, nobody is being forced to read what I write and nobody certainly is being forced to agree with me as you have shown. I have no power, you can technically ban me from the forum although I think that would be an egregious abuse of that power. What I am doing is challenging poeple's in my (and many others) view incorrect assumptions about BLM. Everyone is allowed thier opinion but that doesn't mean they shouldn't challenge if they are wrong.

The way you came across, could be constrained that it's impossible not to get behind the movement, and in essence forcing people to commit to something they don't want to. It's good that you are challenging people's minds on this matter, you are passionate about this, I get that. But just because they disagree with you, doesn't make them wrong. Both parties can have parts of being right, maybe not in totality, but partly.


You'll notice the bit where I said most countries? That's because I accept this is mostly European/North American (minus a couple of countries and probably plus a few in other areas usually countires with majority white-European populations) problem. Your mixing a simple problem with a simple solution. Does it target black people more than white people which is disproportionate to that actual population demographics? We have to accept that as basic fact before we can say why? and how? Denial of that problem stops us from coming up with solutions and its a core issue because I have so many conversations where refuse to belive there are issues and its all gone away.

Yeah, I get that you said most countries. I'm trying to add more paint to the picture, as it's just not as cut-and-dry as you want to make it. It has nothing to do with denial, it's more about personal experiences and history that is giving us a different point of view.


Well your in denial of basic issue of does racially aggrevated violence effect black people I apprciate in SA things may be diffrent but its certainly an issue from where I'm from (where the players are making a living) and America and those facts are pretty much undeniable unless you really don't want to belive there is an issue. It makes it very hard to have a conversation if there is denial of a problem in the first place,

The thing is though, BLM in USA is about police brutality against black people. In South Africa it's not about police brutality against black people. It's not denial, it's how the movement has changed since it was started, and what it's core value was, and how other nations are using this movement to campaign their own racial agenda.

Authoritarianism is never a good answer to any problem, I believe you tried it before. Ah well that is an opinion but can't say I like any authortarian states escalation of arms/powers never seams to work the way people want it to, We bought the army in to deal with the Irish and that worked so damned well....

Authority is governed by laws, and police have policies and procedures in place as to how to operate in every scenario. I wish the South African Police Service was as well trained as the american police officers. Hell, I wish our police officers was in the same physical shape as the American officers. in USA they have coffee and donuts. Over here they have KFC, and by the BUCKETS.

Escalation of arms/powers is again unique to each country. We have very strict gun laws, and you have to have a competency certificate, and have a license for each gun you own, and each person is limited to 4 guns, unless you are a registered hunter with a professional hunting license.

It also excluded the rights to be in possession of assault rifles. And only people in the security industry, police and military may carry assault rifles.

We bought the army in to deal with the Corona-virus... Each country use their powers of authority differently...

Go watch the full video of George Floyd's arrest and ask yourself whether the actions were close to acceptable. If you think they were sorry I've lost all respect for you and I have no respect for anyone who thinks it was. It doesn't matter any factor to his previous record. The officers may have reason to subdue a suspect but he was quite clearly subdued long before his murder. If you think its acceptable or there isn't fair outrage because he was conviction for armed robbery I don't think you really believe in a fair justice system. And that is kind of the point the police in this instance had no reason to believe Flloyd at the time was a threat to them or members of the general public but did feel it okay to take his life. In some ways it has to be him because it is someone with a bad past because even though he had one he still didn't deserve to die.

I guess us saffas, who have seen worse acts of brutality, not just by police, doesn't see the level of brutality is the same way you do. We are receiving weekly articles with graphic content as to how innocent, elderly people who cannot defend themselves are brutally raped and murdered on the farms in SA. It's horrific.

The general opinion of violent criminals in SA is that they should not be wrapped in cotton wool. and be given any leniency on sentencing. Our prison's are overcrowded, We don't have the death penalty, our police are inadequate and the poor and vulnerable keep on suffering.

There is no justice here. Yes, George Floyd should perhaps not have been handled or treated how he was. But we have seen plenty of instances over here, where the police try to subdue or arrest a violent criminal only for the criminal to launch an attack and/or have some of his own friends surprize the police and open fire. Plenty of police die that way.

The other thing is that sometimes these criminals are under the influence of some sort of drug and they are not that easy to subdue or arrest. I've seen with my own eyes how a guy, wanted for rape, had to be held down by 5 officers while they tried to handcuff him. He was superhumanly strong, for such a timid figure, and the police just could keep him down. even when they put him the holding cells at the police station, he was still as high as a kite and tough to get to the cells.

Again, personal point of views...

This is not a new movement either, Kapernieck was kneeling long before this ever happened and was sparked by the extra-judicial of Mike Brown and Eric Garner back in 2014.
You should retract the remarks because you haven't proivded any evidence to us just that you "read it". You complain about wikipedia which requires citations from good sources for the postulated facts within its information but can't be bothered with the same burden of proof yourself..
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]

I remember the whole NFL taking a knee thing. But then again, taking a knee on the footbal field, means you are taking a down, if I'm correct and letting time go by??

If BLM was just about police brutality on black americans, I would happily support the movement, without taking a knee.

But BLM has evolved, and I've said this in previous posts too. And I just can't support this movement for what it has become.
 
I'd have to read Kapernick's reasoning behind taking a knee and why he chose that gesture. I suspect it was because hes a QB and it's deliberate play with a QB.

But yes in NFL it's about running down the clock. In NFL the clock is only stopped in certain circumstances if a player holding the ball is bought down (I think this technically the knee or above hits the ground) the play ends but the clock continues. From there you have a certain amount of time (I think 30 seconds possibly more it's been a long time since I was well versed in American Football rules) before the next play must be started. If there's an incomplete pass, a penalty or the play isn't started the game clock is paused.

So a team in the lead will run down the clock right at the end (especially in a tight game) by snapping the ball and the QB taking a knee. Thereby allowing the clock to carry on but the opposition can't do anything. You can essentially waste the last two minutes of a game by doing this.
 
The kneeling has nothing to do with American Football rules, it's because everyone else stands for the anthem:


Maybe it's just me, but that to me is also a sign of disrespect.

I love my country, but I hate our government. I would never do anything else other than to stand and to sign my national anthem loud and proud!

We will live and strive for freedom, in South Africa our land!!
 
Maybe it's just me, but that to me is also a sign of disrespect.

I love my country, but I hate our government. I would never do anything else other than to stand and to sign my national anthem loud and proud!

We will live and strive for freedom, in South Africa our land!!
Its about impact more than anything else the American's make most other countries outside of a completely authoritarian state look like a bunch of unpatriotic dickweeds.

Protest is a weird thing if you don't do something to shock nobody listens. Kapernick has achieved his entire goal he was a borderline QB (there is genuine debate about whether he was dropped for not being good enough among NFL fans I know who support his actions) who made his voice become an international name. He's achived his goals but he wasn't sticking a middle finger up or turning his back.

We talked a lot about gestures here, isn't being forced to stand, put your hand on your heart and listen to the national anthem exactly what people railing against being forced to take a knee are arguing against?

It comes down to what are you saying by your actions Kaperneck is clear he was doing it to highlight a problem so it could be talked about, people not taking a knee are muddled at best. Even the few saying it for religion decided to do so like days after the incident which is why there is questioning about it and true motives. Take Heineiken hes willing to say he doesn't support BLM (we might disagree on what BLM is and thats the point of difference but there willingness when challenged to articulate that) these playes though they are just hiding behind religion and not really addressing the issue.


I'm moving off here the key thing is, is it direspectful? Kindof it was a tame thing but then it was the point.
 
Should note for the English we live in a country where our flag has been so co-opted by far right nationalist and hooliganism that any meaning of the flag itself as a point of pride has been more or less removed from a lot of the national psyche.

It has gotten to the point where anyone displaying the flag outside a sporting tournament is probably a far-right goon and sadly its also probably correct.
 
Disrespect to what? A rectangle of material?

Flag worship is so alien to me

Not the flag. The national anthem. You sing your national anthem out of pride, patriotism and loyalty to your country. When the national anthems are sung at sporting events, everyone in attendance stand out of respect for the nations competing, or out of pride for your own team when singing.

I've never seen people remain seated during the National Anthems, except for people in wheelchairs.
 
Yeah, that doesn't really register with me either.
A song about arbitrary lines drawn in the sand ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Don't get me wrong - pre-game anthems are great at big sporting events, but if someone takes a knee to draw attention to their cause I'm not going to call them a terrorist who wants to destroy democracy.

They came out and specifically explained their actions, said it was no disrespect towards the armed forces etc., that should be enough.


Should note for the English we live in a country where our flag has been so co-opted by far right nationalist and hooliganism that any meaning of the flag itself as a point of pride has been more or less removed from a lot of the national psyche.

It has gotten to the point where anyone displaying the flag outside a sporting tournament is probably a far-right goon and sadly its also probably correct.

Aye, patriotism isn't really drilled into us in the way that is in places like America and North Korea
 
Its about impact more than anything else the American's make most other countries outside of a completely authoritarian state look like a bunch of unpatriotic dickweeds.

Protest is a weird thing if you don't do something to shock nobody listens. Kapernick has achieved his entire goal he was a borderline QB (there is genuine debate about whether he was dropped for not being good enough among NFL fans I know who support his actions) who made his voice become an international name. He's achived his goals but he wasn't sticking a middle finger up or turning his back.

We talked a lot about gestures here, isn't being forced to stand, put your hand on your heart and listen to the national anthem exactly what people railing against being forced to take a knee are arguing against?

It comes down to what are you saying by your actions Kaperneck is clear he was doing it to highlight a problem so it could be talked about, people not taking a knee are muddled at best. Even the few saying it for religion decided to do so like days after the incident which is why there is questioning about it and true motives. Take Heineiken hes willing to say he doesn't support BLM (we might disagree on what BLM is and thats the point of difference but there willingness when challenged to articulate that) these playes though they are just hiding behind religion and not really addressing the issue.


I'm moving off here the key thing is, is it direspectful? Kindof it was a tame thing but then it was the point.

South African fans don't clutch the flag when they sing during a rugby game, they clutch the Springbok.

But yeah, I guess it's all about shock and awe.

And with the USA singing their national anthem at every sporting event, no matter how minute, I guess it's a lot different than an international rugby test.

But to be honest, I wouldn't have known about half of these things, if I didn't watch comedy central that has shows like the Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon, or the Daily Show with Trevor Noah, or my personal favourite, Last Week tonight with John Oliver. Had it not been for them, I wouldn't even have known about the BLM movement before it became an issue at our recent local cricket match...
 
Should note people do pick and chose their moments Lewis Hamilton who's a very high profile person of colour in a sport absolutely dominated with white people throughout. He's been very vocal on this matter yet in every one of those wins decided not to take a knee during the national anthem but has done so at the start of races whilst also wearing a black lives matter T shitrt (all other driver wear End Racism, some don't kneel its been a mess but they already screwed it and can't really backtrack fixing it no matter how hard they try, on the second race which was at the same place as the first the broadcaster cut away from drivers 'solidarity' moment to cut to sky diver with the Austrian flag). Key point he is very media savvy and clearly think kneeling during the anthem will cause the wrong kind of press to the message he is trying to send.
 
There is something almost authoritarian/fascist about BLM.

The implication that you cannot possibly disagree with anything they say and if you do not do exactly that they demand then you are a racist,.

Nobody should feel obliged to kneel, nobody should have to explain why they haven;t kneeled.
 
There is something almost authoritarian/fascist about BLM.

The implication that you cannot possibly disagree with anything they say and if you do not do exactly that they demand then you are a racist,.

Nobody should feel obliged to kneel, nobody should have to explain why they haven;t kneeled.

And that is why I think it's so unfair on sports stars. They were basically between a rock and a hard place by having certain players voluntarily showing support, while others doesn't necessarily support/are against/undecided of the movement now basically has to show where they stand because they are on tv. If the matches weren't televised, none of this would have mattered and none of the South African players would have to explain their freedom of expression.

Nearly all major sporting tournaments have an anti-racism movement and we regularly see banners, signs and bandages/wrapping with "Say no to racism" and similar wordings on them.

if the kneeling was just a symbol like the 3 fingers in the air in hunger games, or live long and prosper like in Star Trek, then so be it, but through the centuries, kneeling was been used by religions/faiths, and swearing fealty to someone or something.

We still use it when people get married in South Africa where the husband and wife kneels in front of the Minister/priest/reverend in signifying the trinity bond between husband, wife and God.
 

Latest posts

Top