Paintolerance
Well-known member
Trust me, if you are more actively involved in various social causes than I am, give yourself a pat on the back
de Kock refuses to take the knee
- Thread starter Paintolerance
- Start date
No it won’t. SA will lose another quality player and he’ll go on to make millions by playing franchise cricket all over world for many years.
jam69
Well-known member
Those Marxist polices you like?
Corco65
Well-known member
They added a new expectation and then he made his decision, that's his choice.
He's making a stand for some reason and for something he believes, that's his decision, however as much as I try, I struggle to understand why anyone would object to supporting a sentiment such as BLM and even more so some one from South Africa, but that's his decision and his actions alone say enough for me.
BLM
Last edited:
Borotommo
Well-known member
The beliefs i witnessed and never really got to grips with, during many years of frequent visits to SA and living within their communities, gave me clues as to this type of behaviour. De Kock may not have the deep-rooted hatred of the blacks, that I witnessed. I’m sure he’d have become a much more rounded and worldly wise individual, due to the global cricket community he lives within, but many of the Afrikaaners I spent time with were (and some I still know still are) gripped by a viscous fear/hatred of the black South Africans. It was utterly impossible to comprehend, although I did try to understand
MolteniArcore
Well-known member
Unravel_Morrison
Well-known member
Maybe; there is talk that he might lose his IPL contract.
Laughing
Well-known member
Oh wouldn't that be boring.If we all followed your rational this board would only have about 3 posts on it
There are other, less contentious issues to argue about though. Ones that don't destroy someone's integrity with absolutely nothing but conjecture. I realize you were responding tongue in cheek, and I did take it that way. However I think it is quite a serious subject how social media allows us to interject ourselves and baseless opinions into someone's life.
Shocking comparison.
It appears as though he does have a right not to take the knee?
Corcaigh_the_Cat
Well-known member
Absolutely, and he exercised that right.
Muttley
Well-known member
Yes, those are well known facts.
What do you think it has to do with dK not taking the knee? If you compare the way that SA has been governed since the end of Apartheid things could have got a lot worse for the white minority which a glance at their neighbours in Zimbabwe would show them. The transition to a fully representative government has no doubt had its bumps along the way but has not seen a repetition of the terrible scenes enacted in Zimbabwe.
Although they now have a representative government, wealth and privilege is still very much predominantly in the hands of the white minority. I have no idea why he has a problem with showing support for BLM, he must understand the situation in his country better than anyone here and the implications of an unexplained reluctance to show support is very likely to be interpreted negatively. This is not some Joe Schmo who would like to live his life privately he is a professional sportsman REPRESENTING his country. I think that is important, as he stands at the crease he is representing the people of his country, all of them and if he cannot show solidarity with the long down trodden majority he should at least explain why he feels unable to do so. He owes it, not to us, but to the people he represents. Or failing that he must be prepared for his career to be negatively affected.
Expat Smoggie
Well-known member
Schools (school kids) will be required to do it next…maybe it will be next requirement at work (all workers assembled and ready sir to take the knee.. we’ll done Smithers carry on)
jam69
Well-known member
No ones required to do it.
Corco65
Well-known member
Your reply reads like, undertaking the BLM gesture is in some way being subservient.
indeedido
Well-known member
You are so sanctimonious.
He has only ever known a black government and has absolutely no responsibility for what happened before his birth.
I find the point that he should be forced to take the knee or have his career negatively affected both perverse and outrageously unfair.
Whatever reason he gives for not taking the knee will be jumped on, especially by people like you.
He has the right not to do it and absolutely the right not to explain it without his career impacted.
The collapse of Zimbabwe is stunning, but read up a little more about what has happened in RSA to large chunks of the white minority.
Muttley
Well-known member
The fact that you term a representative government as "black" is rather unfortunate. The act of taking the knee is a simple one, showing solidarity for those born without privilege. A privilege still enjoyed by most white South Africans as they attend better schools hold most of the wealth, etc. Privilege that as a child he will have enjoyed. As a South African it ill behoves him not to explain his stance. He is not some boiler fitter who finds himself out of a job for not showing the due degree of deference, he is not a German office worker in the late in 1930s denied a job in favour of a party member. He is a cricketer REPRESENTING his nation. Now I agree that he shouldn't be forced to "take the knee" but as someone else showed earlier he did not do so when it was voluntary. So you have to acknowledge that this in itself may have caused questions to be asked in his home country.
Well he has the right not do it, a right that he has exercised. Ditto the right not to explain himself. Those employing also have the right not to employ him if they see fit.
There were attacks on white people in SA after the collapse of the Apartheid government took place but they were nothing like as bad as they might have been. The repression visited upon the native population of that country between 1948 and 1994 were so far in excess of anything meted out since as to make them almost inconsequential to everyone except those unfortunates who suffered them. The native population that now finds themselves properly represented have been remarkably forgiving, the "Truth and Reconciliation Commission" has done a good job of letting people hear the truth about what happened. Acts which included state sanctioned rape, torture, murder, assassination and every foul act you could countenance. As well as forcing people to live in townships with no adequate housing or infrastructure.
Now it could be that dK or his family was one of those who suffered as a consequence and if so it would be understandable that he was reluctant to take the knee. I would be interested to hear it.
indeedido
Well-known member
You just keep prattling on and on in self righteous self importance.The fact that you term a representative government as "black" is rather unfortunate. The act of taking the knee is a simple one, showing solidarity for those born without privilege. A privilege still enjoyed by most white South Africans as they attend better schools hold most of the wealth, etc. Privilege that as a child he will have enjoyed. As a South African it ill behoves him not to explain his stance. He is not some boiler fitter who finds himself out of a job for not showing the due degree of deference, he is not a German office worker in the late in 1930s denied a job in favour of a party member. He is a cricketer REPRESENTING his nation. Now I agree that he shouldn't be forced to "take the knee" but as someone else showed earlier he did not do so when it was voluntary. So you have to acknowledge that this in itself may have caused questions to be asked in his home country.
Well he has the right not do it, a right that he has exercised. Ditto the right not to explain himself. Those employing also have the right not to employ him if they see fit.
There were attacks on white people in SA after the collapse of the Apartheid government took place but they were nothing like as bad as they might have been. The repression visited upon the native population of that country between 1948 and 1994 were so far in excess of anything meted out since as to make them almost inconsequential to everyone except those unfortunates who suffered them. The native population that now finds themselves properly represented have been remarkably forgiving, the "Truth and Reconciliation Commission" has done a good job of letting people hear the truth about what happened. Acts which included state sanctioned rape, torture, murder, assassination and every foul act you could countenance. As well as forcing people to live in townships with no adequate housing or infrastructure.
Now it could be that dK or his family was one of those who suffered as a consequence and if so it would be understandable that he was reluctant to take the knee. I would be interested to hear it.
People who take the knee should be respected and have every right to do so.
People who choose not to, should not be pilloried, let alone have their careers impacted.
It is as simple as that.