Booing the Ramadan drinks break

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sexpom said:
It’s a 30 second water break ffs.
Click to expand...
Thin end of the wedge. As already stated what’s next, no Easter games, what about other religions that fast?

People are free to make their choices about their beliefs and to live their lives as such. But there are consequences and responsibilities for each of us to accept for that.

To you it’s just 30seconds..well two mins all in…to me it signifies an acceptance that religious belief overrides everything else. Can we have a pastafarian stripper-heaven break next home game?
 
Sexpom said:
I feel sad that you think this way.
Click to expand...

Just playing devils advocate here - if the same players who needed their break (again, I will reiterate my stance that I care neither way - didn't bother me one little bit) were to use their religion to justify intolerance of homosexuals or some other divisive in intolerant belief (many religions have these views), how much would you want religion in football then?
 
Zain said:
There aren't many religions largely followed by footballers, other than Christianity and Islam. If there's any exceptions that can be made to make life easier for footballers then teams, managers will always do so. Ultimately, football is just a sport and personal commitments will always come first, regardless of how much spectators do or don't like it.

It's quite well documented how tolerant some of the greatest managers the game has ever seen are, eg Wenger, klopp, pep, and that is what makes them great.
Click to expand...
I completely agree with the tolerance that the great managers have shown, but it sets a precedent when matches are interrupted for religious observances that will be hard for the authorities to decline when requested by other beliefs. How important does your faith have to be to justify the interruption of an important football game?
 
Support Your Local Team said:
Just playing devils advocate here - if the same players who needed their break (again, I will reiterate my stance that I care neither way - didn't bother me one little bit) were to use their religion to justify intolerance of homosexuals or some other divisive in intolerant belief (many religions have these views), how much would you want religion in football then?
Click to expand...
We are talking about a small water break, why the whattaboutery and deflection for someone that doesn’t care either way?
 
BoroMart said:
Thin end of the wedge. As already stated what’s next, no Easter games, what about other religions that fast?

People are free to make their choices about their beliefs and to live their lives as such. But there are consequences and responsibilities for each of us to accept for that.

To you it’s just 30seconds..well two mins all in…to me it signifies an acceptance that religious belief overrides everything else. Can we have a pastafarian stripper-heaven break next home game?
Click to expand...
So what is the solution, do we not allow fasting players an opportunity to break their fast, or we do just not select them in the starting xi?


I think you're missing the point. I don't think the drinks break is about virtue signalling or an acceptance that religious belief overrides everything else. It literally just is a break that allows athletes to refuel. No manager worth his salt will prevent his players fulfilling their personal obligations hence fasting, but equally he will not want his team to give up any edge on the field. And hence a logical solution is to allow a few mins drinks break.
 
Sexpom said:
We are talking about a small water break, why the whattaboutery and deflection for someone that doesn’t care either way?
Click to expand...

Because I really dislike people who label people "racist" and become extremely judgemental of people who have different beliefs to their own. They often shout loudest about other people who they see as intolerant etc yet are equally intolerant themselves of any alternative views. Essentially, they scream about people not respecting their beliefs when really they hate that people just won't agree with them.

They accuse and label people of things in the hope they just stop arguing and see what they shout as "victory" but then avoid answering questions that may break the chain of their perceived "logic".

I'm afraid (as several have pointed out in this thread) that you are one of the least tolerant in here although you seem to see yourself as more virtuous so will it will likely be pointless anyway. The fact that your last post avoided answering a worthwhile question in favour of questioning why you be questioned at all suggests a lot about your mentality.

I will leave it here, anyway. I just hope you are able to see that people won't have the same beliefs as you and aren't "racist" as you love to label people when you are struggling with reasoned debate.
 
xboro said:
I completely agree with the tolerance that the great managers have shown, but it sets a precedent when matches are interrupted for religious observances that will be hard for the authorities to decline when requested by other beliefs. How important does your faith have to be to justify the interruption of an important football game?
Click to expand...
To religious individuals, personal commitments will always take precedence over a game of football.

If there's sensible solutions to allow individuals to adhere to any religious observances without causing severe interruption to a game of football, exceptions will always be made.
 
Zain said:
So what is the solution, do we not allow fasting players an opportunity to break their fast, or we do just not select them in the starting xi?


I think you're missing the point. I don't think the drinks break is about virtue signalling or an acceptance that religious belief overrides everything else. It literally just is a break that allows athletes to refuel. No manager worth his salt will prevent his players fulfilling their personal obligations hence fasting, but equally he will not want his team to give up any edge on the field. And hence a logical solution is to allow a few mins drinks break.
Click to expand...
You are missing the point, anyone with strict religious beliefs makes a choice as to how that will impact their life. We should not have to be impacted by that choice.
 
Zain said:
So what is the solution, do we not allow fasting players an opportunity to break their fast, or we do just not select them in the starting xi?


I think you're missing the point. I don't think the drinks break is about virtue signalling or an acceptance that religious belief overrides everything else. It literally just is a break that allows athletes to refuel. No manager worth his salt will prevent his players fulfilling their personal obligations hence fasting, but equally he will not want his team to give up any edge on the field. And hence a logical solution is to allow a few mins drinks break.
Click to expand...

Games won't have the same breaks built in in 4 weeks time just like they didn't 4 weeks ago. So it is there for religion.

And people will be concerned about what other introductions to games will be introduced in the future for religious reasons to a sport where many fans don't believe in religion at all.

Whether people agree or don't it's not hard to understand that once you introduce things into games for any religion then other things may well be introduced too.
 
Zain said:
So what is the solution, do we not allow fasting players an opportunity to break their fast, or we do just not select them in the starting xi?
Click to expand...
Muslim players have played on while fasting for 100 years without any problem. This drinks break is a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.

According to Google, sunset is at 19:56 in Middlesbrough, give or take a few mins it will have been the same Friday.

Allowing Muslim players a water break for a match that started at 17:30 and finished approx 19:15 is helping Muslims to break their fast as they shouldn’t consume anything for another 40 mins when the sun sets. In which case have the water prior to kick off
 
xboro said:
You are missing the point, anyone with strict religious beliefs makes a choice as to how that will impact their life. We should not have to be impacted by that choice.
Click to expand...
Okay, in that case, there should be no religious individuals (Muslims in this case) on the playing field during Ramadan ( or any other religiously significant period) as any break in play will cause individuals like yourself to be severely impacted. Or should they be on the field, and they choose to fast, they should not be afforded an opportunity to break their fast. Got it.
 
BoroMart said:
Muslim players have played on while fasting for 100 years without any problem. This drinks break is a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.

According to Google, sunset is at 19:56 in Middlesbrough, give or take a few mins it will have been the same Friday.

Allowing Muslim players a water break for a match that started at 17:30 and finished approx 19:15 is helping Muslims to break their fast as they shouldn’t consume anything for another 40 mins when the sun sets. In which case have the water prior to kick off
Click to expand...
I don't think there has been anywhere near as many Muslim footballers as there is now. If you add that to the increased physicality and intensity of the sport it's no wonder the PL and EFL have decided to act.

As in my previous post, sunset was before kickoff yesterday so I'm still not sure how we've come to any conclusion that the drinks break was to allow Muslims to break their fast. But as we move closer to summer certainly there will be fasts broken after an 8pm kick off.
 
Support Your Local Team said:
Because I really dislike people who label people "racist" and become extremely judgemental of people who have different beliefs to their own. They often shout loudest about other people who they see as intolerant etc yet are equally intolerant themselves of any alternative views. Essentially, they scream about people not respecting their beliefs when really they hate that people just won't agree with them.

They accuse and label people of things in the hope they just stop arguing and see what they shout as "victory" but then avoid answering questions that may break the chain of their perceived "logic".

I'm afraid (as several have pointed out in this thread) that you are one of the least tolerant in here although you seem to see yourself as more virtuous so will it will likely be pointless anyway. The fact that your last post avoided answering a worthwhile question in favour of questioning why you be questioned at all suggests a lot about your mentality.

I will leave it here, anyway. I just hope you are able to see that people won't have the same beliefs as you and aren't "racist" as you love to label people when you are struggling with reasoned debate.
Click to expand...

Zain said:
Okay, in that case, there should be no religious individuals (Muslims in this case) on the playing field during Ramadan ( or any other religiously significant period) as any break in play will cause individuals like yourself to be severely impacted. Or should they be on the field, and they choose to fast, they should not be afforded an opportunity to break their fast. Got it.
Click to expand...
Correct, sport not be influenced by religious beliefs. Of course religious and cultural beliefs should be respected but not interrupt competitive games.
 
Support Your Local Team said:
Games won't have the same breaks built in in 4 weeks time just like they didn't 4 weeks ago. So it is there for religion.

And people will be concerned about what other introductions to games will be introduced in the future for religious reasons to a sport where many fans don't believe in religion at all.

Whether people agree or don't it's not hard to understand that once you introduce things into games for any religion then other things may well be introduced too.
Click to expand...
So again, what is the solution, do managers drop fasting individuals from the starting xi? Do we stop individuals from fulfilling religious obligations and hence fasting altogether? None of that is going to happen and that's something we'll have to learn to deal with.


Any exceptions catered towards individuals and their religious beliefs will and should be made so long as they don't impact the sport severely, which is what we've seen here.
 
Sexpom said:
I feel sad that you think this way.
Click to expand...
You have said that you feel sad several times in this thread, perhaps if you were a little bit more accepting and tolerant to other poster's opinions you would be happier. Please stop branding people that you don't know racist for opinions that differ to yours, it is deeply offensive and divisive.
 
xboro said:
Correct, sport not be influenced by religious beliefs. Of course religious and cultural beliefs should be respected but not interrupt competitive games.
Click to expand...
But the needs of any individual on the pitch will always take precedence, as would the best interests of a team. Its likely in their eyes that a two minute drinks break causes little to no disruption.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top