Idrissa Gueye refuses to wear a rainbow shirt

[I'm With Stupid]

Idrissa Gueye refuses to wear PSG shirt featuring rainbow symbol​

Paris St-Germain's Idrissa Gueye refused to play in a match to avoid wearing a rainbow symbol in support of LGBTQ+ rights, BBC Sport understands.

The 32-year-old former Aston Villa and Everton midfielder was absent from Saturday's 4-0 win over Montpellier.

PSG boss Mauricio Pochettino said only that Gueye missed the game for "personal reasons".

The French Football Federation (FFF) has reportedly written to Gueye to clarify why he was absent.

Story

Obviously a lot has already been said about how this supposedly devout muslim has only made a stand about a symbol of LGBT inclusion, when he's spent half of his career wearing the logo of a beer company or gambling company. But I guess the wider question is whether players should be compelled to wear things that promote things they disagree with (like the poppy), even if it is something like anti-homophobia or anti-racism (let's be honest, a player publicly refusing to wear an anti-racism message would get far more stick because there's no obvious religious dogma to hide their bigotry behind). But another argument would be that he's paid a shit ton of money to wear what his club tells him to wear, and if he doesn't wear it and misses a game, he's not doing his job. It'd be like working for Disney and objecting to wearing something with Mickey Mouse on it.

What do you reckon?

 

[Bozo]

I bet he'd love to kiss a man really.

 

[Barcon]

I reckon he’s gay and can’t deal with it

 

[WNRH]

Story

Obviously a lot has already been said about how this supposedly devout muslim has only made a stand about a symbol of LGBT inclusion, when he's spent half of his career wearing the logo of a beer company or gambling company. But I guess the wider question is whether players should be compelled to wear things that promote things they disagree with (like the poppy), even if it is something like anti-homophobia or anti-racism (let's be honest, a player publicly refusing to wear an anti-racism message would get far more stick because there's no obvious religious dogma to hide their bigotry behind). But another argument would be that he's paid a shit ton of money to wear what his club tells him to wear, and if he doesn't wear it and misses a game, he's not doing his job. It'd be like working for Disney and objecting to wearing something with Mickey Mouse on it.

What do you reckon?

Not really as he doesn't work for a LGBT company.

I think anyone should have a choice to support or not support anything they want including anti-racism actions/attire or Poppies etc. It's no different to Zaha not taking the knee. Just because they are paid a lot of money doesn't mean they should be forced to support things. Surely that goes against the core element of what these things are in being free to be yourself?

 

[WillT]

Not really as he doesn't work for a LGBT company.

I think anyone should have a choice to support or not support anything they want including anti-racism actions/attire or Poppies etc. It's no different to Zaha not taking the knee. Just because they are paid a lot of money doesn't mean they should be forced to support things. Surely that goes against the core element of what these things are in being free to be yourself?

But he didn't work for a beer company or a sports betting company either. Granted you can support what you want, but we also have the right to criticise his selective morals.

 

[WNRH]

But he didn't work for a beer company or a sports betting company either. Granted you can support what you want, but we also have the right to criticise his selective morals.

That comment was in reply to the Disney analogy.

I agree with your last point as i have no doubt it is a selective moral issue with him, however it is different IMO as well as one is a sponsorship and the other is a campaign. It would be interesting to see if this was different if Stonewall or whoever is the French equivalent became sponsors even know deep down i know the answer.

We get told by religious people that all faiths are welcoming to others and respect people's choices. We know that's a load of bollocks.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

Not really as he doesn't work for a LGBT company.

I think anyone should have a choice to support or not support anything they want including anti-racism actions/attire or Poppies etc. It's no different to Zaha not taking the knee. Just because they are paid a lot of money doesn't mean they should be forced to support things. Surely that goes against the core element of what these things are in being free to be yourself?

The Disney analogy was more that his refusal to wear the shirt allegedly made him unavailable for selection, and therefore not able to do the job he's paid a lot of money to do.

 

[domalino]

I'd still disagree with his views, but I would have a lot more respect for him if he was brave enough to play with the normal white numbers and explain to everyone that the campaign goes against his religious beliefs.

Instead he just pretended to have a stomach bug 2 years in a row which seems pretty cowardly.

Although of course then he'd have to explain all the other times he ignored Islam, like advertising gambling and alcohol sponsors on his kit.

If your religious views are important, stand by them.

 

[The Black Shed]

The irony of his surname is not lost on me!

 

[Tugay One Cup]

How long before rainbows are deemed controversial and evidence of needlessly divisive gesture politics or that Manchester Pride is symbolic of heterosexual oppression?