Standing for the Anthem

[rowan]

Should players be required to stand for the anthem? What if they're in the national team? Makes for an interesting question. I suppose there's a big difference between refusing to stand for the anthem when you're only playing for your club, and refusing to stand for it when you're representing the country itself. Are anthems actually played at domestic competition finals or any other games? I'm not sure. I've certainly never heard of a case like this in rugby anyway.

& What would happen, for instance, if a player decided he didn't want to participate in the haka? Personally I certainly don't think opposing players should be obliged to face the haka, if they don't want to, especially as the haka used today is a made-for-TV version and barely resembles the traditional All Blacks haka of the amateur era at all. That one was just a little tapping of the knees and elbows and only performed on tour prior to the inaugural World Cup. Moreover, it was composed in celebration by the legendary chief Te Rauparaha after he had escaped his enemies. It was not a war dance, and not designed to intimidate. The All Blacks have since had their own haka composed for copyright reasons, and this initially included a throat-slitting gesture. I don't see why other teams should have to face that, personally.

SANTA CLARA, Calif. -- San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick has willingly immersed himself into controversy by refusing to stand for the playing of the national anthem in protest of what he deems are wrongdoings against African Americans and minorities in the United States.

His latest refusal to stand for the anthem -- he has done this in at least one other preseason game -- came before the 49ers' preseason loss to Green Bay at Levi's Stadium on Friday night.

"I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color," Kaepernick told NFL Media in an exclusive interview after the game. "To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder."

The 49ers issued a statement about Kaepernick's decision: "The national anthem is and always will be a special part of the pre-game ceremony. It is an opportunity to honor our country and reflect on the great liberties we are afforded as its citizens. In respecting such American principles as freedom of religion and freedom of expression, we recognize the right of an individual to choose and participate, or not, in our celebration of the national anthem."

Niners coach Chip Kelly told reporters Saturday that Kaepernick's decision not to stand during the national anthem is "his right as a citizen" and said "it's not my right to tell him not to do something."

The NFL also released a statement, obtained by NFL Media Insider Ian Rapoport: "Players are encouraged but not required to stand during the playing of the national anthem."

By taking a stand for civil rights, Kaepernick, 28, joins other athletes, like the NBA's Dwyane Wade, Chris Paul, LeBron James and Carmelo Anthony and several WNBA players in using their platform and status to raise awareness to issues affecting minorities in the U.S.

However, refusal to support the American flag as a means to take a stand has brought incredible backlash before and likely will in this instance. The NBA's Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf of the Denver Nuggets, formerly Chris Jackson before converting to Islam, refused to acknowledge the flag in protest, citing similar reasons as Kaepernick and saying that it conflicted with some of his Islamic beliefs.

Abdul-Rauf drew the ire of fans and was briefly suspended by the NBA before a compromise was worked out between the league and player, who eventually stood with his teammates and coaches at the playing of the national anthem.

Kaepernick said that he is aware of what he is doing and that he knows it will not sit well with a lot of people, including the 49ers. He said that he did not inform the club or anyone affiliated with the team of his intentions to protest the national anthem.

"This is not something that I am going to run by anybody," he said. "I am not looking for approval. I have to stand up for people that are oppressed. ... If they take football away, my endorsements from me, I know that I stood up for what is right."

Kaepernick said that he has thought about going public with his feelings for a while but that "I felt that I needed to understand the situation better."

He said that he has discussed his feelings with his family and, after months of witnessing some of the civil unrest in the U.S., decided to be more active and involved in rights for black people. Kaepernick, who is biracial, was adopted and raised by white parents and siblings.

Kaepernick's Twitter feed is filled with civil rights messages.

The former Super Bowl starting quarterback's decision to go public comes while he is fighting for his football life with the 49ers, who drafted him in the second round in 2011. He lost his starting job last season after being one of the most promising players in the NFL during his run under former coach Jim Harbaugh.

Over the past few months, his relationship with management has turned sour. He requested a trade last spring, which never came. He also has spent most of the offseason rehabilitating from operations to his left (non-throwing) shoulder, his hand and knee. His recovery left him unable to fully compete with Blaine Gabbert for months and has him seemingly in a bind to regain his starting job.

He made his preseason debut against the Packers and played in the second quarter, completing two of six passes for 14 yards. He looked as rusty as you'd expect from someone who has not played since last November.

Following the game, and without any knowledge of Kaepernick's non-football behavior, coach Chip Kelly said that there has never been any discussion about cutting Kaepernick. Rapoport added Saturday that Kelly will make "football decisions" on Kaepernick, despite the quarterback's comments.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... nal-anthem

[Eugene Wrayburn]

It is an interesting issue. There are obviously protocols for where people are supposed to be and what they are supposed to do. I think the rules in domestic and international representative sport can and should be different. In international representative sport you have to assume that people are content to represent the team and all that entails. However you used to get NI protestants standing at the end of the line, stony faced, all together refusing to sing the irish national anthem. Now they probably still don't sing it - most wouldn't know it and i certainly don't - but you wouldn't get them separating themselves like that.

[Stones of granite]

The question itself itself is interesting. Rowan is basically asking for comment on what is a local cultural issue. I'm not playing the game, not would I appreciate comments from an American (or a Hong Konk/kiwi/Turk) on local cultural issues in Scotland.

[rowan]

We all have a right to comment on these matters, and that's why they're in the media. What's in the news is considered of importance to its target audience, obviously. Anyone who understands journalism knows this.

Returning to the topic of national anthems, New Zealand's has been criticised in the past for its references to 'God,' and in recent decades the Maori language version 'Aotearoa' has been gaining currency - notably at major rugby fixtures. Personally I'd support the Maori version replacing the English version entirely. While I don't believe opposiing players ought to be obliged to face the All Blacks haka if they don't want to, I'm all for the elevation of Maori culture, which during my childhood in that country was entirely ignored both within the education system and on national television.

Meanwhile, here's a few lines from the American anthem:

No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave,
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

This was written for the 'freemen' - ie whites - during an early 19th century battle during which the United States attempted to take over Canada. Time to change a few of the verses, me thinks

[Lizard]

I'm not thrilled about standing up for a song about a god, especially if I'm not even singing it. Nothing against NZ as a nation, just we've apparently got shit taste in music, flags and heads of state.

[OptimisticJock]

I'm not going to get worked up if someone doesn't.

[Stones of granite]

We all have a right to comment on these matters, and that's why they're in the media. What's in the news is considered of importance to its target audience, obviously. Anyone who understands journalism knows this.

Returning to the topic of national anthems, New Zealand's has been criticised in the past for its references to 'God,' and in recent decades the Maori language version 'Aotearoa' has been gaining currency - notably at major rugby fixtures. Personally I'd support the Maori version replacing the English version entirely. While I don't believe opposiing players ought to be obliged to face the All Blacks haka if they don't want to, I'm all for the elevation of Maori culture, which during my childhood in that country was entirely ignored both within the education system and on national television.

Meanwhile, here's a few lines from the American anthem:

No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave,
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

This was written for the 'freemen' - ie whites - during an early 19th century battle during which the United States attempted to take over Canada. Time to change a few of the verses, me thinks

You quoted from the US media, and yes, I would expect Americans to have a view on it.
Another point that I take issue with is the implication that the point of the media reporting a story is to elicit opinion. It isn't. It's to make money, that's why the Daily Mail exists.

I have no opinion either on what song or in what language New Zealanders should have as an anthem, or on what little dances they do. The only time I feel I have any right to comment on this is when it enters the field of International sport.

[rowan]

Any publication intentionally disseminated among the international commmunity is part of the international press. & where the US is concerned it is only natural that there is widespread interest due to America's overwhelming influence on our own daily lives. Aside from which, I happen to have a personal interest in the country, having spent a couple of years there studying at university. Besides, the idea of putting nationalist restrictions on the right to comment is absurd. What are borders anyway? There are humanitarian issues involved here.

So my suggestion is, if you don't like the topic, stay off the thread.

[rowan]

I'm not thrilled about standing up for a song about a god, especially if I'm not even singing it. Nothing against NZ as a nation, just we've apparently got shit taste in music, flags and heads of state.

Agreed. The native culture needs to be represented in all of the above, otherwise it appears to me that New Zealand has just never grown up as a nation. Time to cut the apron strings and fully embrace the pre-European heritage.

As for the US, they clearly need to re-write an anthem that was composed for white colonizers at a time they were involved in a war during which they attempted to grab Canada. Somehow that doesn't seem entirely appropriate for the 21st century

[Stones of granite]

Any publication intentionally disseminated among the international commmunity is part of the international press. & where the US is concerned it is only natural that there is widespread interest due to America's overwhelming influence on our own daily lives. Aside from which, I happen to have a personal interest in the country, having spent a couple of years there studying at university. Besides, the idea of putting nationalist restrictions on the right to comment is absurd. What are borders anyway? There are humanitarian issues involved here.

So my suggestion is, if you don't like the topic, stay off the thread.

Well, it seems to me that you are imposing your cultural attitudes on those of Americans, and I would expect you to be among the first to cry foul if the roles were reversed.

I believe I have the right to comment on whichever thread I please.

[rowan]

You have the right to comment on whatever thread you please, but I do not have the right to comment on whatever article in the international press I please? Is that what you're saying? & you cite nationalist reasons for the restrictions you wish to impose on freedom of expression? Wow

This would be a very strange forum indeed if we were all restricted to commenting on our own nations. & the problem for me as that I no longer regard any particular nation as being my own. I could probably claim three or four, and there will always be a little of the American in me as well given I received two years of university education there.

Anyway, my suggestion was simply that if this discussion bothers you for any reason, you might be better off not opening the thread, especially as you haven't actually contributed anything to it.

[Discreet Hooker]

Not anthem related , but there's an Irish WBA player who refused to wear a ' poppy ' club football shirt on a match day . Name escapes me but a keen fan I know says he an arse all year round.

[rowan]

Ah, yes, the James McLean saga. Brave man and full credit to him!

[morepork]

I'm all for the elevation of Maori culture, which during my childhood in that country was entirely ignored both within the education system and on national television.

Depends where you went to school chief. I was around early education right before the Kohanga Reo thing took off and was lucky enough to have active and motivated family members of various school mates come in and educate us.

[Stones of granite]

You have the right to comment on whatever thread you please, but I do not have the right to comment on whatever article in the international press I please? Is that what you're saying?

hold on, you're the one who's trying to restrict comment, not me. All I'm saying is that imposing your cultural values on other cultures is both hypocritical and wrong.

& you cite nationalist reasons for the restrictions you wish to impose on freedom of expression? Wow

No I didn't. It's nothing to do with nationalism.

This would be a very strange forum indeed if we were all restricted to commenting on our own nations. & the problem for me as that I no longer regard any particular nation as being my own. I could probably claim three or four, and there will always be a little of the American in me as well given I received two years of university education there.

Nobody suggested that we should restrict comment to our own nations. Throwing this straw man into the discussion appears to be a sign of desperation.

Anyway, my suggestion was simply that if this discussion bothers you for any reason, you might be better off not opening the thread, especially as you haven't actually contributed anything to it.

And there you go again.

[rowan]

You've come onto a thread to complain about people commenting on cultural issues in other nations, and then have the affrontery to object when someone tells you if you don't like the topic butt out. I'm starting to find the absurdity of your posts quite humorous, in a twisted sort of way, of course.

[rowan]

I'm all for the elevation of Maori culture, which during my childhood in that country was entirely ignored both within the education system and on national television.

Depends where you went to school chief. I was around early education right before the Kohanga Reo thing took off and was lucky enough to have active and motivated family members of various school mates come in and educate us.

Well, I was at primary school in the 70s and high school in the 80s, basically, so that's a long way back. You are aware that Maori was actually banned in schools until the late 60s, I take it. On TV there was nothing about Maori language and culture until the late 80s, I think, when they introduced a whopping 5-minute-long Maori news bulletin. This combined with the effects of the general population to the urban centres from the 1960s onward basically resulted in a cultural genocide. A lot has been done to rectify that in the past few decades, I understand, but it may be a case of too little, too late. Only time will tell on that count.

[morepork]

I'm all for the elevation of Maori culture, which during my childhood in that country was entirely ignored both within the education system and on national television.

Depends where you went to school chief. I was around early education right before the Kohanga Reo thing took off and was lucky enough to have active and motivated family members of various school mates come in and educate us.

Well, I was at primary school in the 70s and high school in the 80s, basically, so that's a long way back. You are aware that Maori was actually banned in schools until the late 60s, I take it. On TV there was nothing about Maori language and culture until the late 80s, I think, when they introduced a whopping 5-minute-long Maori news bulletin. This combined with the effects of the general population to the urban centres from the 1960s onward basically resulted in a cultural genocide. A lot has been done to rectify that in the past few decades, I understand, but it may be a case of too little, too late. Only time will tell on that count.

Same time frame for me. I am aware of the repression of Maori, I'm from NZ captain. I was down there the week Ranganui Walker died and RNZ played some of his speeches and presentations from the past. One particular one I heard sitting next to a fire in the Grebe valley in Fiordland gave an account of the shutting down Te Reo when he was growing up. Strong stuff made all the more poignant by the setting.

[OptimisticJock]

Ah, yes, the James McLean saga. Brave man and full credit to him!

Brave? Nah.

[canta_brian]

You have the right to comment on whatever thread you please, but I do not have the right to comment on whatever article in the international press I please? Is that what you're saying? & you cite nationalist reasons for the restrictions you wish to impose on freedom of expression? Wow

This would be a very strange forum indeed if we were all restricted to commenting on our own nations. & the problem for me as that I no longer regard any particular nation as being my own. I could probably claim three or four, and there will always be a little of the American in me as well given I received two years of university education there.

Anyway, my suggestion was simply that if this discussion bothers you for any reason, you might be better off not opening the thread, especially as you haven't actually contributed anything to it.

Creative writing?

[rowan]

You have the right to comment on whatever thread you please, but I do not have the right to comment on whatever article in the international press I please? Is that what you're saying? & you cite nationalist reasons for the restrictions you wish to impose on freedom of expression? Wow

This would be a very strange forum indeed if we were all restricted to commenting on our own nations. & the problem for me as that I no longer regard any particular nation as being my own. I could probably claim three or four, and there will always be a little of the American in me as well given I received two years of university education there.

Anyway, my suggestion was simply that if this discussion bothers you for any reason, you might be better off not opening the thread, especially as you haven't actually contributed anything to it.

Creative writing?

Good guess. Mostly literature but a little journalism and social-psychology thrown into the mix.

[rowan]

& just for comedy value:

Donald Trump suggests Colin Kaepernick should find a new country


Count Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump as being among those upset by 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick's decision to sit on the bench during the national anthem.

During an appearance on the Dori Monson show on KIRO radio in Seattle, Trump was asked his thoughts on Kaepernick, who sat on the bench before each of his team's three preseason games during the playing of the anthem to protest the treatment of minorities in the United States. His response was to suggest that Kaepernick find a new place to live.

“Well I have followed it, and I think it’s personally not a good thing," Trump said. "I think it’s a terrible thing. And you know, maybe he should find a country that works better for him. Let him try. It won’t happen."

Kaepernick, for his part, made it clear while speaking to reporters on Sunday that he was neither a fan of Trump nor Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

"You have Hillary who has called black teens or black kids super predators, you have Donald Trump who’s openly racist," Kaepernick said. "We have a presidential candidate who has deleted emails and done things illegally and is a presidential candidate. That doesn’t make sense to me because if that was any other person you’d be in prison. So, what is this country really standing for?"

Kaepernick also said Sunday he plans on carrying his protest into future games.

"I'll continue to sit," Kaepernick said. "I'm going to continue to stand with the people that are being oppressed. To me this is something that has to change. When there's significant change and I feel like that flag represents what it's supposed to represent, this country is representing people the way that it's supposed to, I'll stand."

http://sfo.247sports.com/Bolt/Donald-Tr ... y-47041906

[kk67]

Good Lad. Proper, big bollies.

Someone think they know someone with bigger bollies....?.......living..?.

[morepork]

You have the right to comment on whatever thread you please, but I do not have the right to comment on whatever article in the international press I please? Is that what you're saying? & you cite nationalist reasons for the restrictions you wish to impose on freedom of expression? Wow

This would be a very strange forum indeed if we were all restricted to commenting on our own nations. & the problem for me as that I no longer regard any particular nation as being my own. I could probably claim three or four, and there will always be a little of the American in me as well given I received two years of university education there.

Anyway, my suggestion was simply that if this discussion bothers you for any reason, you might be better off not opening the thread, especially as you haven't actually contributed anything to it.

Creative writing?

Good guess. Mostly literature but a little journalism and social-psychology thrown into the mix.

University of Phoenix?

[rowan]

No, Nebraska. Right in the middle of the country. Snow on the ground for three months of the year and got as low as minus 26, which was great for focusing on your studies, but in summer it would get up into the 90s with a surprising degree of humidity since there weren't any major bodies of water nearby. It was also very flat. No respite from the elements in the spring or fall either, with horrific thunder storms during the former and tornadoes coming up from the Caribbean in the latter (though usually fizzling out in Kansas somewhere). From the Rockies to the Great Lakes was an inland sea so many millions of years ago and the state of Nebraska is still mostly sand-based. Somehow it's good for growing corn, however.