hypochondriac

I'm sorry I don't really understand what point you're making now. You've accepted that there's political baggage associated with the gesture whether you personally choose to ignore that association or not. Bit silly to pretend that the black lives matter has had no impact in the UK even if the most negative impact has been in America. There's been loads of actions by the political movement in this country that would be worthy of disapproval and hostility. Something negative happening in my country doesn't have to affect me immediately and directly for me to have either a positive or negative opinion about it.

I think the majority of players either go along with it because they don't want to rock the boat or they believe it's solely an anti-racist gesture. That doesn't mean that the political baggage already mentioned doesn't exist. You've admitted yourself that it existed and then tried to deny it (and are now ignoring that bit.) The gesture and its associations is the issue not what the players or Southgate state is the intention. Its obviously not tenuous or they wouldn't have felt the need to remove the BLM branding.

I don't believe that you believe that the link to the England players kneeling and the BLM political stuff is very very tenuous. Be serious.

So you agree then that the primary achievement of the kneeling before games is to cause a row between people about the divisive nature of the gesture?

I was talking about the reaction on here and on social media. Some commentators have also called the supporters booing racist which is disingenuous at best.

People are talking about the divisive or benign nature of the gesture, not how to best tackle racism or discrimination which I thought was the purpose of the protest. Ruling people up with gestures that some find inflammatory isn't getting people talking about issues in any meaningful way.

And the other thing is that the suggestion from some now is that the payers are continuing the gesture in defiance at the booing. If that's true then its lost its original intention anyway.

How has it got people talking about the issue? It's achieved nothing positive at all. All its done is got a few people to boo at it and the hysterical reaction and majority of abuse seems to be coming from the reaction to that booing.

I didn't say that. I've always maintained that there will be a small group of people who attend football who are racist in the same way that racists exist in the wider population and its possible that some of them were booing. Why did you earlier suggest that I had the option to ignore the political baggage if you don't accept that it exists? You're now saying that I can choose not to associate the baggage. If there is no baggage to the kneeling gesture then there wouldn't be anything for me to choose not to associate it with.

So you accept that the reasons I outlined are all possible reasons from both sides? Then why does the narrative persist then that its all just a bunch of racists even if fans booing have come out and said otherwise? You've accepted yourself that there is political baggage associated with the gesture and that that could be a reason for the booing. If that is the case then do you accept that reason? Even if you don't think the association matters?

Yes I was going to say that's clearly nonsense. The BLM UK twitter controversy from last year that caused the Premier league to panic was from black lives matter.

It's OK I found it amusing. I'd never been called a "gammon" before so that's the first time.

They can use the current terms for their protest if they like but don't start whining and calling everyone racist when people boo them.

Hold on I explained it above and I didn't mention anything about Marxism. The idea that there's some Marxist conspiracy with the England players is quite obviously complete rubbish but no one was arguing that. They're booing because there's political baggage associated with the taking of the knee and they are booing the gesture and what its associations. Quite clear and obvious what they are and you yourself admitted they existed even if you just said they could be ignored.

I'm sorry but I think you're being wilfully blind by suggesting that there's no link between the two and that those making the link are being obtuse in some way. They used the same branding, they called themselves the same thing, mings attended a BLM rally, they used the same gestures as the political organisation including raising of the fist, some people donated millions to the UK branch of black lives matter UK and then the Premier league shat themselves and backed away from them after a bunch of terrible tweets from their official account. No one was "trying" to connect the two, the connection was clear at the start and they only changed things slightly when things got a bit too hot for the brand. I think if you're honest with yourself you can see why the two are inextricably linked and to suggest that they are and have always been completely separate entities in spite of the above is quite frankly nonsense.

Yes I could ignore it but it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Your reply is contradictory. If theres political baggage attached to the gesture that I can ignore if I choose then that means it exists. You may consider it unimportant but many do not and that explains perfectly why some supporters are booing and its not because they're all closet racists.

Is there political baggage associated with the taking the knee gesture yes or no? The Marxist bit is an irrelevance.

No it didn't "get perverted." it was being used by the political black lives matter organisation in America prior to its adoption by the Premier league. At the time it was pointed out that it was a bad idea to use it but it was ignore. Now football authorities claim its mad that the two could ever be conflated when it's clear why the two issues are because like it or not they are inextricably linked and that's largely the fault of the football authorities themselves. Rightly or wrongly taking the knee has significant political baggage attached to it and it is that baggage that people object to and what is booing booed when the gesture is made. Remove the gesture and pick something else that doesn't have the same associations and there won't be any booing. It's as simple as that.

Some footballers will be doing it because they have been told to do it, some think it's an anti-racism gesture. Others will be sympathetic towards the black lives matter demonstrations and that will certainly be in their minds (like mings for example.) Like everything there will be a range of reasons, many of them totally innocent. Clearly the supporters are booing because they don't want to see divisive gestures that have negative associations to violence and political movements both here and abroad at the football. Change the gesture and bring it under the kick it out umbrella and I'm almost certain there would be almost unanimous support. If everyone was as racist as some claim then surely the booing would continue regardless?

Well in that case the types of people who scream racist at someone over things like this are likely to be the same people all over twitter doing it at every opportunity. Their cries of racism aren't exactly impactful and they shouldn't really be taken seriously. Why did they have it in the first place? Why did the UK branch of the black lives matter anarchist group receive loads of donations from people who said they were supporting the anti-racism message that the footballers claim to be supporting? Everyone knows the gesture itself and the initial branding is divisive because of its past associations and that if the gesture was changed there would be widespread support, how does that square with the football being full of a bunch of racists?

Footballers kneeling say its not about supporting black lives matter and that should be believed without question but supporters booing say they aren't booing because they are racist and we have to disbelieve them?

That's interesting because by the same logic, if you call yourself black lives matter and copy the branding and actions of a group rioting in America and disrespecting the flag of the UK and the cenotaph then people are going to associate you with that group.

Genuinely I apologise. I was scrolling on my phone and I mistakenly thought you were replying to me. Sorry about that.

100% which is why the claims of racism and all the opposing arguments are idiotic.

I genuinely have no idea what you're talking about. You said: "since when has BLM been about white privilege?" I don't know where that came from. You're the only one who has mentioned it.