Ausie protest about World Cup

[basil6345789]

'th Ausies are protesting about Qatar - a bit late for that!

[Goobs]

Well behind the times. Scotland refused to go to Qatar ages ago.

[bobinho]

Staging the WC in a backwards country in the hope that they will change their intolerant ways?

Ranks right up there with some of the greatest ideas in the history of the world.

I imagine all the Qataris are thinking “if we really are that bad, they wouldn’t have given us the World Cup in the first place”.

There will be NO meaningful protests at the World Cup. None. They all missed their real chance to make the Qataris (and the rest of the Middle East) stand up and take notice, but no one had the swingers required. A qualifying nation should have pulled out. They all should have.

[Billy Balfour]

I very much doubt the awarding of the World Cup to Qatar had anything to do with trying to 'change their intolerant ways'.

[Billy Balfour]

I agree though. We should have told them to stuff it.

[Lowbankclaret]

My protest will be not to watch a single game, would be a massive statement if many did the same.

[bobinho]

I very much doubt the awarding of the World Cup to Qatar had anything to do with trying to 'change their intolerant ways'.

Yep, I reckon you are right…. I think we all know why they really got it.

Harry’s wearing an arm band tho, so that’ll learn ‘em.

I normally look forward to the festival of football that is the World Cup. Won’t be tuning in for this one….

[Billy Balfour]

I'm the same. I usually love the tournament, but not this time. The whole thing stinks.

[Top Claret]

Aussies are hypocrites, if they feel so strongly don't go

[Raconteur]

I will be honest. I will watch most of the games.

[Raconteur]

I will be honest. I will watch most of the games.

I am not going to play hypocrite. I didn't boycott the Newcastle games last season due to their links with S. A

Also, even though it is highly unlikely. Say we somehow miraculously ended up in European competition and drew PSG. Would everyone boycott due to their links to Qatar

[Devils_Advocate]

A fair few on here couldn't even manage stand by their principles enough to boycott MK Dons after the franchise episode when it came to Burnley. To be fair though some have never stepped foot inside an Asda since

[Middle-agedClaret]

I’m sure the Australian players are sincere in their message.
However - I think their fine words will have zero effect on either the conditions for migrant workers, or the way in which LBGTQ+ people are treated in Qatar.
As a poster earlier in the thread said, it would take a qualifying nation to withdraw from the competition for anyone to even take notice.
I’ve just seen an excellent interview with an official from Stonewall FC on Channel 4 News. He said that the only “rights” mentioned in the bidding process for the World Cup awarded to Qatar were media rights. His suggestion that FIFA might give some thought to human rights seems perfect.
Still - I’m sure Harry will look lovely in his little armband.

[Spiral]

I am not going to play hypocrite. I didn't boycott the Newcastle games last season due to their links with S. A

Also, even though it is highly unlikely. Say we somehow miraculously ended up in European competition and drew PSG. Would everyone boycott due to their links to Qatar

Nation states shouldn't be allowed to buy footy clubs, I'm sure everyone will agree, but there is a difference between those gulf states (and also oligarchs) exploiting the principles of the free market to buy up clubs/sports brands, and the awarding of an international tournament by a governing body. The awarding of a tournament is the end of a what is effectively a political process, not (ostensibly) a transactional process. Purchasing a club is a bare-faced transaction. To be awarded the right to host a tournament is something different altogether. Though, quite obviously there were actual transactions involved. But the point is that for a club to be bought, all that is required is money. To be tournament hosts, there are considerations far beyond this, which is why, considering Qatar's appalling human rights record (to say nothing of the bribery) their hosting of the WC is way more egregious than, say, their state investment fund buying PSG, or in the case of Saudi Arabia, Newcastle. Though to reiterate, that shouldn't be allowed to happen, either. So, with that in mind there is a gradation of scumminess, and the one is darker than the other, and for this reason the charge of hypocrisy is muddle-headed because they represent different shades of wrongness, much like how some crimes are more egregious than others, despite all of them falling under the banner, 'crime'.

[Spiral]

To use a really simply analogy, it's like the difference between a bad person buying something, and a bad person being honoured in spite of their transgressions. Can we stop the bad person buying the thing they want to buy? Perhaps, perhaps not...and if it is, say, a very large piece of land, and we are required to pass through that land for whatever reason, are we morally bound to their transgressions by using the path that cuts though their land — land which, because of factors beyond any individual person's control, we were incapable of stopping them from buying, and which existed either communally, or privately with communal purpose, for a very, very long time before their purchase? Is walking the path that cuts through a bad person's newly acquired land the same thing as, say, giving that person a knighthood, or any other honour from which they can socially profit? Of course not. Are we hypocrites for grudgingly using said footpath while objecting to them being awarded a knighthood? Of course not. Trying to apply Vulcan standards of logic and moral and ethical purity to complex real-world problems is unproductive. That's a rigorous exercise in moral purity either for the sake of moral purity (which is not an end in itself to a normal person), or for the sake of making the conversation end, at which point you begin to wonder who benefits from the conversation ending.

[Middle-agedClaret]

To use a really simply analogy, it's like the difference between a bad person buying something, and a bad person being honoured in spite of their transgressions. Can we stop the bad person buying the thing they want to buy? Perhaps, perhaps not...and if it is, say, a very large piece of land, and we are required to pass through that land for whatever reason, are we morally bound to their transgressions by using the path that cuts though their land — land which, because of factors beyond any individual person's control, we were incapable of stopping them from buying, and which existed either communally, or privately with communal purpose, for a very, very long time before their purchase? Is walking the path that cuts through a bad person's newly acquired land the same thing as, say, giving that person a knighthood, or any other honour from which they can socially profit? Of course not. Are we hypocrites for grudgingly using said footpath while objecting to them being awarded a knighthood? Of course not. Trying to apply Vulcan standards of logic and moral and ethical purity to complex real-world problems is unproductive. That's a rigorous exercise in moral purity either for the sake of moral purity (which is not an end in itself to a normal person), or for the sake of making the conversation end, at which point you begin to wonder who benefits from the conversation ending.

Well - that’s all clear then.

[Spiral]

It's clear. Shouldn't have to spell it out, but the 'path' or 'land' is a club like ours playing against PSG or Newcastle, the 'honour' is Qatar being given the WC.

[Quicknick]

I won't be watching any of it.

[tiger76]

The last 3 World Cups have been awarded to Brazil, Russia and Qatar make of that what you will, but none of those nations could exactly be described as progressive in their outlooks can they.

Sadly unless the bigger nations pull out en masse, which being realistic is not going to happen due to cash and prestige involved, then their protests although no doubt well meaning will have little bearing on Qatar modernising it's working practices in the short term I'm afraid.

If anything good has come out of this fiasco it has at least shone a spotlight on such practices so that might in time change social attitudes.

Will I watch the WC don't know yet TBH, I guess I'll tune in for the evening KO'S given there's no other footy on for about a month or so.

[NoFixedAbode_Claret]

Protests. Noble but futile

The needle returns to the start of the song. And we all sing along like before

Sh'*t isn't it?

[SingaporeClarets]

I'm not sure singling out LGBT rights as an issue in a country which is not secular and therefore is guided on these views beyond the government is really about human rights.

Opening up a can of worms here on the whole religious beliefs v personal freedom topic, it can and will be seen as an indirect affront on religious beliefs.

[Duffer_]

I'm not sure singling out LGBT rights as an issue in a country which is not secular and therefore is guided on these views beyond the government is really about human rights.

Opening up a can of worms here on the whole religious beliefs v personal freedom topic, it can and will be seen as an indirect affront on religious beliefs.

I think freedom of sexuality is fundamentally about human rights. If people choose to justify their opposition to that on the grounds of religious belief then they should be prepared to be affronted. Bull$hit is bull$hit whatever god it worships.

[Lancasterclaret]

I don't have an issue with the World Cup being played in different continents and regions on a four yearly basis

Its the way Russia and Qatar got the World Cups by the blatant bribery of FIFA that annoys

If you said Europe-Asia-America-Africa-Middle East and kept to that, then it would cut a lot of that out

I'll still be watching though, but even if I could, I wouldn't be going

[claretonthecoast1882]

See no point at all in any person going to this World Cup and then protesting it is being held there.

Same as these clowns who are proudly telling anyone who will listen how happy they are to be going there to cover it for TV then throw in a token line that they will be highlighting things while being there. If you really feel so strong about it don't go.

There is a clamour these days for powerful messages, how powerful would it have been had countries refused to go there in the first place.

[fatboy47]

Stinks.

[CaptJohn]

I'll certainly be watching it but I'm not in any way blaming the Qataris for this. In their eyes they did nothing wrong. They used their considerable wealth to get centre stage, in the eyes of the world, for a massive event. Well done to them. Great marketing coup.
As to the human rights issues I think that one or two people should get the full picture before having a rant. Yes the working conditions are poor by our standards but the workers involved are happy to be there and sending money back home to support their families. Nothing wrong in that.

[claretonthecoast1882]

I'll certainly be watching it but I'm not in any way blaming the Qataris for this. In their eyes they did nothing wrong. They used their considerable wealth to get centre stage, in the eyes of the world, for a massive event. Well done to them. Great marketing coup.
As to the human rights issues I think that one or two people should get the full picture before having a rant. Yes the working conditions are poor by our standards but the workers involved are happy to be there and sending money back home to support their families. Nothing wrong in that.

Does the happy workers group include the ones killed ?

[what_no_pies]

I'll certainly be watching it but I'm not in any way blaming the Qataris for this. In their eyes they did nothing wrong. They used their considerable wealth to get centre stage, in the eyes of the world, for a massive event. Well done to them. Great marketing coup.
As to the human rights issues I think that one or two people should get the full picture before having a rant. Yes the working conditions are poor by our standards but the workers involved are happy to be there and sending money back home to support their families. Nothing wrong in that.

You might want the full picture before describing these workers as happy.

"DOHA (Reuters) - Workers in Qatar renovating a 2022 World Cup stadium have suffered human rights abuses two years after the tournament’s organizers drafted worker welfare standards in the wake of criticism, Amnesty International said.

Dozens of construction workers from Nepal and India were charged recruitment fees by agents in their home countries, housed in squalid accommodation and barred from leaving the country by employers in Qatar who confiscated their passports, Amnesty said in a report released on Thursday."

[daveisaclaret]

I'll certainly be watching it but I'm not in any way blaming the Qataris for this. In their eyes they did nothing wrong. They used their considerable wealth to get centre stage, in the eyes of the world, for a massive event. Well done to them. Great marketing coup.
As to the human rights issues I think that one or two people should get the full picture before having a rant. Yes the working conditions are poor by our standards but the workers involved are happy to be there and sending money back home to support their families. Nothing wrong in that.

I would like to bet one million pounds that this guy has lived and worked in Qatar and been treated nothing like the workers who have built everything for this World Cup.

[NewClaret]

I won't be watching any of it.

I’ll probably find it hard as imagine my boys will want to watch it but we’re it not for that, I’d definitely not be tuning in.

[Lancasterclaret]

I'll certainly be watching it but I'm not in any way blaming the Qataris for this. In their eyes they did nothing wrong. They used their considerable wealth to get centre stage, in the eyes of the world, for a massive event. Well done to them. Great marketing coup.
As to the human rights issues I think that one or two people should get the full picture before having a rant. Yes the working conditions are poor by our standards but the workers involved are happy to be there and sending money back home to support their families. Nothing wrong in that.

There is so much wrong with this that I really don't know where to start

[NottsClaret]

If it's not in Europe or South America, then it's a bit rubbish. I normally look forward to these, but this feels more like a World Club cup inconvenience, or an Emirates pre-season trophy. Sooner it's over and we're back to proper football, the better.

[CaptJohn]

I would like to bet one million pounds that this guy has lived and worked in Qatar and been treated nothing like the workers who have built everything for this World Cup.

Correct Mr Dave, however..................................... I had my passport confiscated and was not allowed to leave at one stage, so have every right to be a tad annoyed at the Qataris but I'm not in anyway upset by them getting the World Cup. Now FIFA on the other hand??

[CaptJohn]

There is so much wrong with this that I really don't know where to start

Care to make a start on planet earth and not up there in the Galactic winds?

[daveisaclaret]

Correct Mr Dave, however..................................... I had my passport confiscated and was not allowed to leave at one stage, so have every right to be a tad annoyed at the Qataris but I'm not in anyway upset by them getting the World Cup. Now FIFA on the other hand??

Where do I collect my million pounds?

How much of a **** do you have to be to not care that thousands of people have died just because you quite liked being there?

[CaptJohn]

Where do I collect my million pounds?

How much of a **** do you have to be to not care that thousands of people have died just because you quite liked being there?

Just contact one of the Al Thani clan. They probably have a million quid down the back of one of their many sofas
If you really want to make a protest turn off the gas supply to your house. Don't buy their LNG. They'll really be upset.

[daveisaclaret]

Just contact one of the Al Thani clan. They probably have a million quid down the back of one of their many sofas
If you really want to make a protest turn off the gas supply to your house. Don't buy their LNG. They'll really be upset.

"I'm totally amoral - isn't that a lark!"

[Lancasterclaret]

Care to make a start on planet earth and not up there in the Galactic winds?

Nah, there isn't any point

You've done an vast amount of ignoring very widespread news reports on Qatar, how they treat the workers and how they got the world cup

I'm fairly sure that with that in mind, anything I say will make zero difference

[Duffer_]

Just seen that Prince William is boycotting the Qatar WC. Thought it might have been mentioned on here but maybe it will make the "Prince Harry" thread...

'Yeah, love the Royals me. Well, not the nonce, the one married to the milfy beard, or the traitor who married an actress. Oh, and the big eared one needs to wind his neck in with all that meddling in this pollution rubbish. He thinks we've forgotten what he did to our People's Princess so he could marry a moose. Oh, and the one married to the lass whose sister has a lovely bum needs to wind his neck in too. Keep banging on about Adam and Steve and we might not get those BAE orders from Qatar.'

Some royalists seem to dislike the royal family, Andew apart - we can all agree on that surely, more than us republicans.

[GordonvaleClaret]

I'm ashamed of my adopted country men and their sporting body. It takes a lot to shame me.
They are going to a country as privileged guests, yet they feel the need to criticise their hosts. They make public statements about situations which are offensive to not only their hosts, but also to the majority of Muslims and Christians the world over. There are many issues in their own country which need to be addressed, but they remain silent. Sponsorship money rules!

[Duffer_]

I'm ashamed of my adopted country men and their sporting body. It takes a lot to shame me.
They are going to a country as privileged guests, yet they feel the need to criticise their hosts. They make public statements about situations which are offensive to not only their hosts, but also to the majority of Muslims and Christians the world over. There are many issues in their own country which need to be addressed, but they remain silent. Sponsorship money rules!

That's a bit cryptic for my tastes, so please help me out:

1) What is your "adopted" country, and which sporting body are you referring to?

2) Are you ashamed that footballers are supporting LGBT rights? Or, does your shame come from them challenging the views of the Qatari state, it's population, or religions that are intolerant of LGBT rights? Are there any circumstances in which you would challenge a majority view, or believe it to be acceptable to do so?

3) Are you suggesting it is OK for players to express support of the LGBT community in their own country but not in Qatar?

4) What, if any, issues would you like footballers to be talking about in their own country?

[Lancasterclaret]

I'm ashamed of my adopted country men and their sporting body. It takes a lot to shame me.
They are going to a country as privileged guests, yet they feel the need to criticise their hosts. They make public statements about situations which are offensive to not only their hosts, but also to the majority of Muslims and Christians the world over. There are many issues in their own country which need to be addressed, but they remain silent. Sponsorship money rules!

I don't think it takes a lot to shame you mate

You are clearly bothered about people who are different to you and you decide that a public messageboard is the place to come out to share your prejudices

I wonder what it is about this board that makes you feel that would be acceptable?

[houseboy]

The last 3 World Cups have been awarded to Brazil, Russia and Qatar make of that what you will, but none of those nations could exactly be described as progressive in their outlooks can they.

Sadly unless the bigger nations pull out en masse, which being realistic is not going to happen due to cash and prestige involved, then their protests although no doubt well meaning will have little bearing on Qatar modernising it's working practices in the short term I'm afraid.

If anything good has come out of this fiasco it has at least shone a spotlight on such practices so that might in time change social attitudes.

Will I watch the WC don't know yet TBH, I guess I'll tune in for the evening KO'S given there's no other footy on for about a month or so.

It's true as you say that the last three WCs were awarded to less than perfect countries but I think that's where the analogy ends. Brazil and Russia (Brazil especially) have long standing traditions in football whereas Qatar has virtually none, to the point where they have had to build stadia. The point I am making is that few nations have entirely clean hands when it comes to 'doing the right thing' so even the gross human rights problems in Qatar is possibly not an argument (even if it should be) for not awarding them the WC. The problem lies in the awarding of football's premier tournament to a nation with absolutely no history in the game and the fact that it appears to have been awarded in a somewhat fraudulent way.
I think the human rights argument has been used to strengthen the argument against awarding it in the first place because people believe, as I do, that it was awarded simply because FIFA sold it to the highest bidder. I won't be watching it (easy for me because my wife hates football and I have to have an argument every time I watch it, so I just won't bother with the agro) and it would be great if no-one else did, but that of course is down to personal choice. Eric Cantona had it right, as an ex French international hero, when he said he won't watch it and couldn't care less if France win it or not.

[houseboy]

I'm sorry but I also forgot to add the glaringly obvious problem of the disruption caused to leagues all over the world due to having to play it in winter.

[tiger76]

It's true as you say that the last three WCs were awarded to less than perfect countries but I think that's where the analogy ends. Brazil and Russia (Brazil especially) have long standing traditions in football whereas Qatar has virtually none, to the point where they have had to build stadia. The point I am making is that few nations have entirely clean hands when it comes to 'doing the right thing' so even the gross human rights problems in Qatar is possibly not an argument (even if it should be) for not awarding them the WC. The problem lies in the awarding of football's premier tournament to a nation with absolutely no history in the game and the fact that it appears to have been awarded in a somewhat fraudulent way.
I think the human rights argument has been used to strengthen the argument against awarding it in the first place because people believe, as I do, that it was awarded simply because FIFA sold it to the highest bidder. I won't be watching it (easy for me because my wife hates football and I have to have an argument every time I watch it, so I just won't bother with the agro) and it would be great if no-one else did, but that of course is down to personal choice. Eric Cantona had it right, as an ex French international hero, when he said he won't watch it and couldn't care less if France win it or not.

Valid points regarding Qatar's complete lack of footballing pedigree and the lack of existing infrastructure, and for those reasons alone it was a bizarre choice before we even get onto the other issues.

I've no problem if FIFA want to extend the game to emerging countries but Qatar have no football heritage whatsoever.

For me if they really want to grow the game globally they should have awarded it to a more deserving member and that certainly isn't Qatar.

Finally regarding alleged corruption the English FA are hardly squeaky clean if the various allegations are to believed.

[tiger76]

I'm sorry but I also forgot to add the glaringly obvious problem of the disruption caused to leagues all over the world due to having to play it in winter.

Yes the timing is hardly ideal for most of the major leagues I just hope it doesn't derail our promotion bid as effectively it will be a season of 2 halves pre and post WC.

For those who are seeking a footy fix during the domestic lay-off the non league and lower leagues should be continuing as normal I'd imagine, and one advantage for those at the lower end of the pyramid is they might well attract bigger crowds during the WC weeks.

[NRC]

You might want the full picture before describing these workers as happy.

"DOHA (Reuters) - Workers in Qatar renovating a 2022 World Cup stadium have suffered human rights abuses two years after the tournament’s organizers drafted worker welfare standards in the wake of criticism, Amnesty International said.

Dozens of construction workers from Nepal and India were charged recruitment fees by agents in their home countries, housed in squalid accommodation and barred from leaving the country by employers in Qatar who confiscated their passports, Amnesty said in a report released on Thursday."

To CaptJohn's point, he didn't want to give up his passport, but chose to. I did the same thing in Dubai 25 years ago. Nobody has forced these workers to leave their countries and go and work in Qatar. They will have been aware of the conditions and still opted to go on the basis of a risk/reward choice. It doesn't excuse Qatar's record in the slightest, but free-world choices saw it awarded to them, and that risk/reward conundrum to be available to individuals. The two things can co-exist.

As for the poster that suggested he wouldn't watch, but on the basis his boys would want to, "I guess I'm being forced......" give me a break. you either have a principle or you don't. Let them watch, meanwhile you skulk in your bedroom or something, but to hide behind your boys..?

[Stanbill05]

The migrant workforce has been exploited, but they still come in their millions. Why? Because it is still better for them than home. Much much better in the majority of cases. Lives are transformed and families saved from poverty. Wages are not an issue.

There have been 6500 deaths in 10 years out of 20,000,000 migrants. Why? Because a lot of the work is hot and hard and critically, pre-employment medicals are none existent. The work shouldn't kill healthy people. Have strict medicals and deaths would plummet, but the unintended consequence would be to consign people to poverty.

However, there are dodgy agents in home countries that mean a minority of workers are effectively slaves. That is the scandal that needs sorting and Qatar could help fix that overnight.

Not my words, I've spent a lot of time in Qatar too and have chatted with lots of low pay migrants.

[Devils_Advocate]

To CaptJohn's point, he didn't want to give up his passport, but chose to. I did the same thing in Dubai 25 years ago. Nobody has forced these workers to leave their countries and go and work in Qatar. They will have been aware of the conditions and still opted to go on the basis of a risk/reward choice. It doesn't excuse Qatar's record in the slightest, but free-world choices saw it awarded to them, and that risk/reward conundrum to be available to individuals. The two things can co-exist.

Absolute desperation has led to these workers giving up their passport and if you think exploiting their desperation to the point they are willing to sacrifice their basic human right is somehow acceptable then I feel very sorry for you.

The conditions and control at which Capt John gave up his passport is not in anyway comparable to the situation faced by the migrants workers and to compare the two is pathetic.

Would you be comfortable with residents of the UK to agreeing to slave labour conditions because they are that desperate or would you expect practices like that to be outlawed and for workers to have basic rights protected regardless of how desperate they are?

[Bullabill]

Stanbill05 ................
There have been 6500 deaths in 10 years out of 20,000,000 migrants.

Twenty million? Really?