E.G.Red Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 (edited) and now the French aren't happy with Nike over the size of their cockerel Edited March 27 by E.G.Red Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
42nite Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 23 hours ago, SecretSam said: Seriously? England loo roll? I mean, you're literally wiping your...self with the flag... Probably marketed towards the many countries that don't like us very much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcusX Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 1 hour ago, Cowshed said: I posted that defacing a flag can be a hate crime. I also posted this? You ignored the this?. Could this, an American sportswear brand rebranding of our the St George be perceived as insensitive? The action has been unpopular. A reaction that should have been predicted. Yes I posted pictures of England and Bristol City fans St George flags because they are significant. The St George is clearly a significant part of fan culture and traditions. They are part of BCFC fan culture. You then posted a laughing emoji regarding the St George that required a lot of effort from City fans to purchase. I with my family and a friends took a small part in that fundraising. Here's that picture again of that flag/surfer twenty years on at recent game. I do think its cool. Of course it is you stupid bugger. You were metres away from me in the ground. Sorry, this is probably boring to everyone else but I wont have you or three lions re-write history and twist this into something it isn't. At no point have I laughed at the specific flag or it's background or efforts towards it. It's totally dishonest of both of you to suggest I have, as others have also supported. I'm laughing at the irony of you posting that "defacing a flag is a hate crime" - then 3 posts later posting a photo of, by definition, a defaced flag. The evidence is clear in your history below. No further replies before I responded laughing at the irony of your two posts. I don't know what your ramble at the start of today's post is, but no I cannot see anywhere that you've said those things in this thread. So once again, no disrespect intended to anyone involved in producing that flag, clearly being deceitful to suggest otherwise. Thankfully several people had already seen through it and replied before I could. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southside Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 (edited) Edited March 27 by southside 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54-46 Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 2 hours ago, E.G.Red said: and now the French aren't happy with Nike over the size of their cockerel Join the queue 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 3 hours ago, Cowshed said: I posted that defacing a flag can be a hate crime. There is no case law where defacing a flag is a hate crime in the UK. However, under certain circumstances, say burning a union flag on the Cenotaph, such actions could be considered incitement to a breach of the peace and therefore be illegal. Putting different colours on a football shirt would not fall under this definition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP Hampton Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 (edited) On 22/03/2024 at 09:32, ChippenhamRed said: Nothing to do with “inclusion”. Just an artistic version to align with the design and colour palette on the shirt. Linking it to “inclusion” is just your own projection. Tbf “inclusive “ was Nike’s word not RobboRed’s so clearly not RR’s own projection. Edited March 27 by JP Hampton 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP Hampton Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 On 22/03/2024 at 09:37, SecretSam said: Don't you think those people you think are being "included" (who are they, BTW?) might also be proud to be English? On that premise then every flag of every nation, should be changing to include all those who consider themselves of that Country, but aren’t in fact a native or are a different colour. I don’t understand why a flag is “exclusive” as opposed to “inclusive”? Otherwise you have to apply that at all nations’ flags don’t you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP Hampton Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 FWIW my take on it is this, I probably wouldn’t have batted an eyelid about this, just wouldn’t seem to be worth caring about, but I think I understand why people do care. Ten or more years ago people wouldn’t really have been that bothered with a few exceptions. I think the problem now is that people are seeing changes happen in this Country, which genuinely makes them feel they have little control over things, things which used to be just plain common sense are now being challenged and changed. There’s been incredible changes to institutions in this country, a Police Force who are supposed to be Policing by Consent and who are not supposed to show any affiliation to any particular side, can now be seen doing just that. I could go on. It’s telling that it’sNike that people are getting up in arms about, because to many they represent unwanted change, many Companies have become political and I believe that’s what people oppose. If you like it’s another straw on the camels back of unwanted change. For want of a better word they’re actually getting “triggered” by what to others may be a seemingly small thing, but it’s really, just another straw. It’s strange that in a climate where identity politics is the rallying call of companies like Nike, that they’d see no problem in taking what some people consider part of their identity, (which is common the world over, a flag) and change it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP Hampton Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 On 22/03/2024 at 12:49, Tim Monaghan said: St George wasn't even English And Andrew wasn’t Scottish and Patrick wasn’t born in Ireland and it’s the same for many other Countries too, what’s your point? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Monaghan Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 37 minutes ago, JP Hampton said: And Andrew wasn’t Scottish and Patrick wasn’t born in Ireland and it’s the same for many other Countries too, what’s your point? No point, Brother. Sick of having arguments with keyboard warriors on here, so take or leave the comment buddy, and make of it what you like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP Hampton Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 22 minutes ago, Tim Monaghan said: No point, Brother. Sick of having arguments with keyboard warriors on here, so take or leave the comment buddy, and make of it what you like. Wow, simply a genuine question. Sounds like if you’re sick of it, it might be good to take your own advice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 4 hours ago, Red-Robbo said: There is no case law where defacing a flag is a hate crime in the UK. However, under certain circumstances, say burning a union flag on the Cenotaph, such actions could be considered incitement to a breach of the peace and therefore be illegal. Putting different colours on a football shirt would not fall under this definition. You have just agreed with me. I didn't state defacing a flag is a hate crime, I stated it can be because while we do not have not law that make desecrating a flag a crime, we have law that prohibit hostility aimed towards groups. Hence in my post I added this ? No this does not fall under the above. Was it insulting? Yes. This act caused insult. A response that was predictable. What was the point of Nike and the FA knowingly doing something that they must have known would have not been wildly welcomed? I don't see the point. 6 hours ago, MarcusX said: Sorry, this is probably boring to everyone else but I wont have you or three lions re-write history and twist this into something it isn't. At no point have I laughed at the specific flag or it's background or efforts towards it. It's totally dishonest of both of you to suggest I have, as others have also supported. On 23/03/2024 at 10:43, MarcusX said: Even @Cowshedwading in talking about defacing flags, then shared a defaced flag celebrating it Your post featuring a laughing emoji about this flag. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reigate Red Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 7 hours ago, Ian M said: Maybe we're embarrassed it's only 1? Probably but we shouldn't be - at least we have won it. Albeit increasingly some time ago. Uruguay last won it in 1950 but are not shy about stars. They even include four stars on their shirts despite only having won the world cup twice! Maybe we should follow their example and just add a few Footnote: The other two Uruguayan stars are supposed to be for winning the Olympics before the world cup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 Just now, Cowshed said: You have just agreed with me. I didn't state defacing a flag is a hate crime, I stated it can be because while we do not have not law that make desecrating a flag a crime, we have law that prohibit hostility aimed towards groups. Hence in my post I added this ? No this does not fall under the above. Was it insulting? Yes. This act caused insult. A response that was predictable. Well spotted. I did agree with you, once you changed your posts from saying "flag defacement is a hate crime" to "flag defacement can be a hate crime". But as for the second bit of your response, the law isn't there to protect the delicate sensibilities of snowflakes hurt because a near invisible and non-traditional feature of one particular football kit has changed colour. It not only is not near the threshold of behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace, it isn't in the same county, the same country or even the same frigging continent as that threshold. Not sure how a tribute to the training colours of the England 1966 kit can be insulting, but then I'm not a led-by-the-nose to be offended by whatever culture war bullshit is being peddled by right-wing media sort of guy. I don't give a shit if Nike keep it, change it back, or drop the flag altogether in a tribute to all England kits pre-2002. I'm more offended by the shirt's price and I don't generally like Nike sportswear anyway. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StGeorge Posted March 27 Report Share Posted March 27 1 hour ago, Reigate Red said: Footnote: The other two Uruguayan stars are supposed to be for winning the Olympics before the world cup. I did wonder, thanks. useful post. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SecretSam Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 18 hours ago, 42nite said: Probably marketed towards the many countries that don't like us very much. That's a big, big market... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcusX Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 12 hours ago, Cowshed said: You have just agreed with me. I didn't state defacing a flag is a hate crime, I stated it can be because while we do not have not law that make desecrating a flag a crime, we have law that prohibit hostility aimed towards groups. Hence in my post I added this ? No this does not fall under the above. Was it insulting? Yes. This act caused insult. A response that was predictable. What was the point of Nike and the FA knowingly doing something that they must have known would have not been wildly welcomed? I don't see the point. Your post featuring a laughing emoji about this flag. Your either being thick or deliberately misleading. I can't decide which but I'm sure most reasonable people see straight through it and I won't be entertaining you further on this. Very obvious to most I was laughing at you and your posts on this subject - not the flag itself (or background to it that wasn't even posted). 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP Hampton Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 6 hours ago, SecretSam said: That's a big, big market... I think you’ve just got the nail on the head, as to why some people are taking offence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SecretSam Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 On 27/03/2024 at 11:55, Cowshed said: I posted that defacing a flag can be a hate crime. 'Defacing' would mean that the original would be still there, but then written on/marked, etc. What Nike did was recolour the same flag shape. A shape of flag that is used by a number of countries. That's not defacing it, it's recolouring it. Defacing it would have been to write "England were poor against Brazil" across the flag. #PedanticRantOver 12 minutes ago, JP Hampton said: I think you’ve just got the nail on the head, as to why some people are taking offence. I was saying that the number of people who hate England (across the world) is pretty big. I mean, our history is a little...checkered... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LilRascal Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 Is this still a thing? Patriotic football fans the length and breadth of England would never alter flag colours, would they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP Hampton Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 15 minutes ago, SecretSam said: 'Defacing' would mean that the original would be still there, but then written on/marked, etc. What Nike did was recolour the same flag shape. A shape of flag that is used by a number of countries. That's not defacing it, it's recolouring it. Defacing it would have been to write "England were poor against Brazil" across the flag. #PedanticRantOver I was saying that the number of people who hate England (across the world) is pretty big. I mean, our history is a little...checkered... Whose isn’t? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.