hypochondriac

Taking the knee is inextricably linked to the black lives matter movement for many. The damage is already done and is continuing to be done the longer it goes on.

At what point over the past decade has there not been vilification and sanctions for racial abuse? It already exists.

It's certainly more of a nuanced position than thinking that all Millwall supporters who boo are thick racists which is what your position appears to be.

Doesn't seem very smart of the premier league to taint their brand by having any of this confusion around black lives matter and the organisation. Particularly when they have a perfectly good anti racism initiative that didn't suffer from a PR problem and is much less likely to get people's backs up.

That is exactly what they are doing. My brother in law is an ex footballer and has a lot of current footballer mates and the majority view in the changing rooms are that this is all a load of bollocks but they keep their head down and do it because they don't want to get crucified in the press.

Question: have the blm organisation used the same gesture of taking the knee as a sign of support for their organisation? When the taking the knee was at its height, did many social media users express their support for football players taking the knee and then link to a blm fundraiser that was for the organisation and supposedly nothing to do with the gesture the footballers were doing?

Yep and people are allowed to take the knee if that's what they want to do as long as supporters are allowed to show their displeasure at the gesture.

Agreed.

When stadiums are full you can guarantee there will be more of it and it will be more widespread. Sadly those with an agenda will just dismiss that as evidence of racism without wondering if there is any more to it than that.

Where is the evidence that they were verbally attacking the black movement?

I don't think it's helpful for the media in general to just dismiss the Millwall fans as awful rather than attempting to listen to them. Would be much much better to start a dialogue to try to understand why they would be booing this gesture but instead there's just blanket condemnation. Seems counter productive.

You're really weird.

Depends though doesn't it. Supposedly even if it is 60% there's no evidence it doesn't prevent serious illness. I would probably take either but also given the choice I'd take the traditional vaccine.

Is there a proven link between heading a modern football and dementia?

These things happen sometimes as gutting as it is. Luckily we have had such a good start to the season that it's just a minor blip hopefully. If we had lost this 1-0 then there would have been a collective shrug of the shoulders, its just the manner of the defeat that's makes you sad.

If its just fish that remains then its jot going to lead to a no deal. Much more likely as someone else mentioned that fish is being used as a smokescreen for disagreements in other areas. If a deal fails to be reached then imo its to do with the level playing field and the EU being very keen not to allow the UK to have a competitive advantage.

Oh dear. This racist does not speak for me and I hope he doesn't represent other saints fans. RIP Maradona.

Having said that, the French really are a bunch of smug arseholes so maybe just ban them

Whilst I do believe there should be a transition period for fisheries and a quota system, it would be ridiculous to financially ruin some of the European fishing industry overnight. Its not their fault that this imbalance has existed. I'm in favour of a transition period for fishing.

Exactly. If the government kept the lockdown in place over Christmas then loads of people will ignore it anyway.

I get that but I was talking specifically about Christmas. It's obvious that if they just carried on like now that no one would listen and do what they wanted and once everyone decides to break the rules they are more likely to do it in the future. One thing I don't understand is with sports. If its safe to have 4000 spectators now then why not four months ago? The chopping and changing does give the impression that it's arbitrary I agree but I absolutely see why they view Christmas as a special case.

What's your point? I'm not denying that there won't likely be a spoke in deaths as a consequence of loosening restrictions. The majority of the country wouldn't have listened anyway so clearly the best thing to do is to acknowledge the reality and give some rules with the hope that more people will actually follow them and reduce the impact of Christmas.

I expect they've done behaviour modelling and the least worst option in the face of mass disobedience was to allow a loosening of the rules and hope that the majority follow them. If they did nothing and everyone broke the rules anyway then it becomes easier to break in the future.

Let's not forget that no children will be receiving the vaccine as far as I know so that's a big chunk of the population.

It's pathetic making up some conspiracy theory or demanding that companies allow people not to be vaccinated and then walk around doing whatever they want. The more rights the anti vaxxers lose the better as far as I'm concerned. Quick jab in my arm for me and then I can get on with my life as normal.