oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
Fucking sense at last !!!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Guardiola fined £20,000 for wearing yellow ribbon (p140)
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
nmc
Well-Known Member
Of course. Women's Lib was happening BEFORE Pankhurst and in fact many historians feel that although she created publicity, she actually set the movement back because she created extremes on both sides who then dug their heels in.
You are entitled to you view but the timing of granting women the vote following a concerted campaign suggests that the votes for women campaign must have been a major factor. It’s naive in the extreme to think that those in authority grant changes and concessions out of the goodness of their heart - they have to be pressured and forced to conceed changes in most cases.
East Level 2
Well-Known Member
So that will be former rag fanzine editor and general tosser Andy Mitten who is criticising Pep's actions?You really couldn’t make this up. Andy Mitten has written an article for the South China Morning Post criticising Pep’s action and claiming the separatist view is a minority one, even in Catalonia.
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
My view on this is actually super simple.
The FA decide the rules.
That's it really, it's their competition and they get to decide what you can and can't do if you participate in it. If they say no yellow ribbon then no yellow ribbon. Pep can wear a yellow ribbon for 22 and a half hours a day if he really feels like he has to (and I admire and encourage him to do so). But during this time, he is paid and expected to be managing a Premier League team under the jurisdiction and rules of the FA.
People can argue that the rule is stupid, and I agree somewhat, but it IS a rule and he should respect that. Why stand in his technical area? Why not play 15 players in a match? Why not manage bollock naked? Why respect SOME rules but not other rules?
This isn't a freedom of speech issue to me because the FA is not the Government. They run an invitational league that is owned by the Premier League and can exclude people for any, many, or no reason. If they wanted to dock City 50 points then they could an nobody could really stop them if it was within the rules.
If you want to get rules changed then you work within the system to try and change things. That's how the whole of civilisation works, generally.
Difficult to argue with any of that.
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
Didn't even think to mention that. But if you insist, then yes, he's another rag hypcrite.So that will be former rag fanzine editor and general tosser Andy Mitten who is criticising Pep's actions?
My view on this is actually super simple.
The FA decide the rules.
That's it really, it's their competition and they get to decide what you can and can't do if you participate in it. If they say no yellow ribbon then no yellow ribbon. Pep can wear a yellow ribbon for 22 and a half hours a day if he really feels like he has to (and I admire and encourage him to do so). But during this time, he is paid and expected to be managing a Premier League team under the jurisdiction and rules of the FA.
People can argue that the rule is stupid, and I agree somewhat, but it IS a rule and he should respect that. Why stand in his technical area? Why not play 15 players in a match? Why not manage bollock naked? Why respect SOME rules but not other rules?
This isn't a freedom of speech issue to me because the FA is not the Government. They run an invitational league that is owned by the Premier League and can exclude people for any, many, or no reason. If they wanted to dock City 50 points then they could an nobody could really stop them if it was within the rules.
If you want to get rules changed then you work within the system to try and change things. That's how the whole of civilisation works, generally.
Sense. This isn't the hill Pep wants to die on. Accept the rules and move on. This is already causing too much unplanned backlash with the questions regarding human rights abuses in the UAE.
You are entitled to you view but the timing of granting women the vote following a concerted campaign suggests that the votes for women campaign must have been a major factor. It’s naive in the extreme to think that those in authority grant changes and concessions out of the goodness of their heart - they have to be pressured and forced to conceed changes in most cases.
And the pressuring was done in the corridors of Parliament. In fact Women's Lib mas moving at a steady pace until Pankhurst got involved and you could argue, as many historians do, that her militancy completely slowed it down. In 1894, the Act was passed that allowed Women landowners to vote having already won the right to vote in local elections. It was already coming.
Pankhurst founded a militant group that we'd now refer to as terrorists in 1904 and along with the War, pushed back Women's Lib all the way to 1918. Women were already getting the vote and there was widespread support BEFORE Pankhurst who then started burning down buildings and the like of which led to wavering public support.
oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
The FA are the Governing Body and rules etc are set for teams playing in England & Wales.Am I being dumb here, if its only an FA rule, then it only applies to FA Cup games so what's the bother now? Or do FA rules supersede EFL and Premier League rules for their respective competitions?
asahartford1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Nov 2016
- Messages
- 8,833
And the pressuring was done in the corridors of Parliament. In fact Women's Lib mas moving at a steady pace until Pankhurst got involved and you could argue, as many historians do, that her militancy completely slowed it down. In 1894, the Act was passed that allowed Women landowners to vote having already won the right to vote in local elections. It was already coming.
Pankhurst founded a militant group that we'd now refer to as terrorists in 1904 and along with the War, pushed back Women's Lib all the way to 1918. Women were already getting the vote and there was widespread support BEFORE Pankhurst who then started burning down buildings and the like of which led to wavering public support.
While I would not argue with what you say, I do seem to remember that the FA did ban women from playing football for around 50 years, when they argued that playing football would destroy a women's ability of performing their main duty, ie giving birth. As you say their rules.