de Kock refuses to take the knee

indeedido said:
But the choice to acknowledge publicly or not should be personal not mandated.
Click to expand...
Agreed. And people shouldn’t be judgemental about it as they have no idea on another’s choice unless that person states their reason publicly. Then you can make your mind up as to their personal choice when you know why they’ve made that choice.

still, where there’s a witch hunt to be had…..
 
indeedido said:
But the choice to acknowledge publicly or not should be personal not mandated.
Click to expand...
Agreed but in McLeans case his objection is on historical grounds and he has expalined that, so far de Kock hasn't come up with any explanation.
Although I also concede that giving people a choice doesn't mean they have to explain the reasons behind their decision.
His problem is that people will draw obvious conclusions from it.
 
zzzzz said:
Agreed but in McLeans case his objection is on historical grounds and he has expalined that, so far de Kock hasn't come up with any explanation.
Although I also concede that giving people a choice doesn't mean they have to explain the reasons behind their decision.
His problem is that people will draw obvious conclusions from it.
Click to expand...
No, his problems are:
1. He is not being allowed to play for his country without doing something he doesn't want to do.
2. He will be pressurised into giving an explanation of his personal choice.
 
indeedido said:
No, his problems are:
1. He is not being allowed to play for his country without doing something he doesn't want to do.
2. He will be pressurised into giving an explanation of his personal choice.
Click to expand...
He is a role model and as such has a personal responsibility to expalin his choice.
So he'll be rightly pressurised into giving an explanation otherwise people will draw conclusions from his refusal to support an anti-racism gesture.
 
De Kock, who has previously declined to take a knee, said in June: "My reason? I'll keep it to myself. It's my own, personal opinion.
 
You can be sure whatever reason he did give wouldn't be accepted as valid. It would undoubtedly open up another can of worms.
 
There is a very clear historical difference between an Irishman not wishing to wear the poppy and a white South African not wishing to take the knee. You have be a bit desperate to score internet points not to acknowledge the difference. Put simply, one is the symbol of the oppressor the other shows solidarity with the oppressed. If he has a good reason not to take the knee, given his country of birth and their brutal history of oppressing the native population he should be stating it. If he cannot, his silence will condemn him.
 
Maybe the rest of the team didn't want him playing if he couldn't join them in showing solidarity with those who suffer prejudice because of their skin colour ?
And therefore chose not to play?
 
Muttley said:
There is a very clear historical difference between an Irishman not wishing to wear the poppy and a white South African not wishing to take the knee. You have be a bit desperate to score internet points not to acknowledge the difference. Put simply, one is the symbol of the oppressor the other shows solidarity with the oppressed. If he has a good reason not to take the knee, given his country of birth and their brutal history of oppressing the native population he should be stating it. If he cannot, his silence will condemn him.
Click to expand...
What if the reason is VERY personal to him and his family. Many horrific crimes happen in that country, Maybe he does not want to state or divulge what happened to protect someone very close to him
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top