Quenelle
- Thread starter haywain
- Start date
DanCohen17
Simply The Best
Everyone is different (in terms of PTT button). Majority put on there although a number of guys do as Deano has done which is on the pack itself. He most certainly isn't doing the quenelle!
Last edited:
Back on topic gents, having never even heard of it until recently, I would have not punished it, but now knowing what it is, red all day long if I were to see it in a game, although I highly doubt id see it
Oh and please stay on topic, we don't really need to be grammar police, ive cleaned the thread up
Oh and please stay on topic, we don't really need to be grammar police, ive cleaned the thread up
MattyontheWhistle
RefChat Addict
I hadn't heard of it until it appeared on here!
Have googled it a little, and here's my take on it:
A French comedian used the gesture in what has deemed to be an anti-semitic comedy routine. Under French Law, this comedian has been arrested, and charged for that offence.
Nik Anelka is a friend of the comedian, and apparently used this gesture as a symbol of support for his friend back in France.
It appears that the gesture was pretty much unknown until this comedian used it, some claim he invented it, and it has kind of become a trademark for him.
So, in judging whether Anelka's gesture was offensive or not, I do think we need to take into account the society and racial situation of the country from whence it came. The law in France, indeed the attitude toward racism, sexism, religous bigotry et al is very different to the UK.
The head of one of the biggest Jewish organisations in France has said that it wasn't offensive I think the FA should take note, because it is a FRENCH organisation, and not the opinion of an English 'advisor'.
I don't know if there is more history to the gesture than I have found, but I think we need to be careful of not going too far with what is deemed 'offensive'.
So, when refereeing I will stick to the old work-place adage that if the person it is aimed at finds it offensive, then it must be.
Question from me then - who was Anelka aiming the gesture at?
As a PS:
We have a youth referee here, and a couple of older ones, who, when using 'straight-arm' signals use a flat hand, palm down. So indicating a GK, direction of free kick etc. I have pointed out to them that every time they give a corner, they are doing a Nazi salute, but here, that isn't a problem. In the UK, I am sure there would be some comment from some smart-arse that would/could undermine the ref, or even claim to be offended by it.
Different societies, different histories, different standards and cross-judgement can get very tricky.
Have googled it a little, and here's my take on it:
A French comedian used the gesture in what has deemed to be an anti-semitic comedy routine. Under French Law, this comedian has been arrested, and charged for that offence.
Nik Anelka is a friend of the comedian, and apparently used this gesture as a symbol of support for his friend back in France.
It appears that the gesture was pretty much unknown until this comedian used it, some claim he invented it, and it has kind of become a trademark for him.
So, in judging whether Anelka's gesture was offensive or not, I do think we need to take into account the society and racial situation of the country from whence it came. The law in France, indeed the attitude toward racism, sexism, religous bigotry et al is very different to the UK.
The head of one of the biggest Jewish organisations in France has said that it wasn't offensive I think the FA should take note, because it is a FRENCH organisation, and not the opinion of an English 'advisor'.
I don't know if there is more history to the gesture than I have found, but I think we need to be careful of not going too far with what is deemed 'offensive'.
So, when refereeing I will stick to the old work-place adage that if the person it is aimed at finds it offensive, then it must be.
Question from me then - who was Anelka aiming the gesture at?
As a PS:
We have a youth referee here, and a couple of older ones, who, when using 'straight-arm' signals use a flat hand, palm down. So indicating a GK, direction of free kick etc. I have pointed out to them that every time they give a corner, they are doing a Nazi salute, but here, that isn't a problem. In the UK, I am sure there would be some comment from some smart-arse that would/could undermine the ref, or even claim to be offended by it.
Different societies, different histories, different standards and cross-judgement can get very tricky.
Last edited:
DanCohen17
Simply The Best
MOTW, Anelka wasn't 'aiming' it at anyone. He was, as you say, doing in support of his friend.
The reason for the outrage, certainly amongst the Jewish community, is because the person he was supporting did it in a manner in which was deemed, correctly in my opinion, to be of an anti-Semitic nature. He was, as you again rightly say, subsequently arrested & charged.
THIS is why Anelka caused such a reaction as it's clearly an anti-Semitic thought process.
The comedian most definitely didn't invent it, however he is the most well-known person to have used it in the past 50 years (possibly the only one, which is why it is thought he may have created/invented it)
The law certainly is different in France, the country from which Anelka hails. So, should he be investigated in this country, the one in which he did the act, or France, the country he originates from and lives in?
Either way, I think The FA HAVE done the right thing in charging him (my opinion only!)
The reason for the outrage, certainly amongst the Jewish community, is because the person he was supporting did it in a manner in which was deemed, correctly in my opinion, to be of an anti-Semitic nature. He was, as you again rightly say, subsequently arrested & charged.
THIS is why Anelka caused such a reaction as it's clearly an anti-Semitic thought process.
The comedian most definitely didn't invent it, however he is the most well-known person to have used it in the past 50 years (possibly the only one, which is why it is thought he may have created/invented it)
The law certainly is different in France, the country from which Anelka hails. So, should he be investigated in this country, the one in which he did the act, or France, the country he originates from and lives in?
Either way, I think The FA HAVE done the right thing in charging him (my opinion only!)
MattyontheWhistle
RefChat Addict
Can't disagree with you Dan, without these cases boundaries don't get set and things get much worse. I'm not disagreeing with the charge, or the process.
My concern is that a French player, acting in support of a French friend, who is in trouble under French Law, in France, is going to be judged entirely on British sensibilities, which, speaking as a Brit abroad looking back in, can be extremely fragile at times. My point is simply that a French person finds things acceptible, or offensive that an English person wouldn't, and in cases like this, context is very important.
Being a Brit abroad has given me a slightly different view on cases like this, as I am now living in a society that is far more divided than anything I had experienced before. However, friends here from other European countries comment on how un-divided it is in comparison to their homeland.
One thing I have learned is that something said or done in one way can be offensive, but the same thing in a different context isn't. Being referred to as 'Pakeha' can be offensive, or not - depending on how it is used. Being called a 'Pom' can be offensive, but sometimes isn't. I have heard the national TV news here refer to 'the brown-skinned people of New Zealand' as a catch-all for Maori and Pacific Islanders which I found quite offensive, but apparently, it isn't, although I wouldn't use the phrase myself.
Understanding the context, and the intent of the Anelka gesture is vital to the enquiry if justice is to be served, and I don't think that can be fully understood by a British panel of suits, taking advice from a British advisor, given that the case is so 'French' in nature. (We Brits have NEVER understood the French have we?)
As many have found the gesture offensive, then it must be an offensive gesture - I can accept that point and agree with it - I'm just not convinced that that was the way it was intended, and am uncomfortable with throwing the book at Anelka for an idiotic and misguided show of support for a friend.
On a slightly different point though, isn't there a regulation preventing the showing of religious or political beliefs by the players during a game? This would fall under that as well wouldn't it?
My concern is that a French player, acting in support of a French friend, who is in trouble under French Law, in France, is going to be judged entirely on British sensibilities, which, speaking as a Brit abroad looking back in, can be extremely fragile at times. My point is simply that a French person finds things acceptible, or offensive that an English person wouldn't, and in cases like this, context is very important.
Being a Brit abroad has given me a slightly different view on cases like this, as I am now living in a society that is far more divided than anything I had experienced before. However, friends here from other European countries comment on how un-divided it is in comparison to their homeland.
One thing I have learned is that something said or done in one way can be offensive, but the same thing in a different context isn't. Being referred to as 'Pakeha' can be offensive, or not - depending on how it is used. Being called a 'Pom' can be offensive, but sometimes isn't. I have heard the national TV news here refer to 'the brown-skinned people of New Zealand' as a catch-all for Maori and Pacific Islanders which I found quite offensive, but apparently, it isn't, although I wouldn't use the phrase myself.
Understanding the context, and the intent of the Anelka gesture is vital to the enquiry if justice is to be served, and I don't think that can be fully understood by a British panel of suits, taking advice from a British advisor, given that the case is so 'French' in nature. (We Brits have NEVER understood the French have we?)
As many have found the gesture offensive, then it must be an offensive gesture - I can accept that point and agree with it - I'm just not convinced that that was the way it was intended, and am uncomfortable with throwing the book at Anelka for an idiotic and misguided show of support for a friend.
On a slightly different point though, isn't there a regulation preventing the showing of religious or political beliefs by the players during a game? This would fall under that as well wouldn't it?
DanCohen17
Simply The Best
But it's surely a misguided gesture in support of a convicted anti-Semite? Regardless of intention or thought-process (or lack of), that's the facts among the case. How anyone chooses to interpret that and use it is entirely at their own discretion. Anelka said that's why he did it (support his friend), so he's supporting a charged anti-Semite?
On your side-note, not sure if that is a regulation actually, no idea. However, possibly, but would this come under that? He's not done the quenelle because he's a Muslim (his religion) or due to his political beliefs, he's done in an act of support for a friend?
On your side-note, not sure if that is a regulation actually, no idea. However, possibly, but would this come under that? He's not done the quenelle because he's a Muslim (his religion) or due to his political beliefs, he's done in an act of support for a friend?
MattyontheWhistle
RefChat Addict
Again, being Devil;s advocate here, and i wasn't certain that the comedian had been convicted yet, but, yes, if so the comedian has been convicted for airing his political and religious views - so it is a very political situation, albeit that Anelka was simply trying to send a message of support to a friend. Misguided and ill-thought though it was.
(I thought there is something in the Equipment Law about displaying logos/messages etc. Maybe just for specific competitions, as I remember a FIFA youth player getting into trouble for wearing a sponsor's logo on sweatbands that wasn't a tournament sponsor. Also, messages on undershirts when a player raises the shirt after scoring can't be political or religious, or commercial I believe, although again could be specific competition regs)
What will be, will be I guess, I am just hoping that there isn't an over-the-top reaction and that sense will prevail. What did Suarez get for the racist comment to Evra? Would that be a similar/reasonable benchmark for this case?
DanCohen17
Simply The Best
Suarez got 8 games I think, although I may be wrong and happy to be corrected!
Would assume that the benchmark has been set and won't be too dissimilar!
'The head of one of the biggest Jewish organisations in France has said that it wasn't offensive'
That was, apparently, going to be the basis for Anelka's defence, tho it was reported on the news today that the guy in question,
Roger Cukierman, head of Jewish organisation CRIF (Representative Council of French Jewish Institutions) and vice-president of the World Jewish Congress.
has since said that Anelka's gesture was 'suspect'
'A French comedian used the gesture in what has deemed to be an anti-semitic comedy routine'
I think he's done a little bit more than that
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/104436/antisemite-banned-at-cannes
'So, when refereeing I will stick to the old work-place adage that if the person it is aimed at finds it offensive, then it must be'
so how about any person within hearing or viewing distance, other than the person that it is aimed at, who finds it offensive? - potentially 4.7 billion in Anelka's case
That was, apparently, going to be the basis for Anelka's defence, tho it was reported on the news today that the guy in question,
Roger Cukierman, head of Jewish organisation CRIF (Representative Council of French Jewish Institutions) and vice-president of the World Jewish Congress.
has since said that Anelka's gesture was 'suspect'
'A French comedian used the gesture in what has deemed to be an anti-semitic comedy routine'
I think he's done a little bit more than that
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/104436/antisemite-banned-at-cannes
'So, when refereeing I will stick to the old work-place adage that if the person it is aimed at finds it offensive, then it must be'
so how about any person within hearing or viewing distance, other than the person that it is aimed at, who finds it offensive? - potentially 4.7 billion in Anelka's case
MattyontheWhistle
RefChat Addict
Time for me to leave this discussion I think.
On that subject, you cannot wear clothing or equipment which is promoting a commercial brand (apart from boots obviously). I remember Bendtner being involved in an international match, he lifted his shirt and revealed some 'Paddy Power' boxers, which earned a £80,000 fine and a one match ban
Attachments
Law 4
Players must not reveal undergarments showing slogans or advertising. The basic compulsory equipment must not have any political, religious or personal statements.
A player removing his jersey or shirt to reveal slogans or advertising will be sanctioned by the competition organiser. the team of a player whose basic compulsory equipment has political, religious or personal slogans or statements will be sanctioned by the competition organiser or by FIFA.
Players must not reveal undergarments showing slogans or advertising. The basic compulsory equipment must not have any political, religious or personal statements.
A player removing his jersey or shirt to reveal slogans or advertising will be sanctioned by the competition organiser. the team of a player whose basic compulsory equipment has political, religious or personal slogans or statements will be sanctioned by the competition organiser or by FIFA.
Richthekeeper
Active Member
i can't agree with the point about Anelka's case being uniquely French. unfortunately the fact is that he plies his trade in England and must be judged by English sensibilities. if i made an offensive gesture in the Middle East for example, i couldn't base my defense on the fact that i am from a different culture.
we must also remind ourselves that every minute of every premier league game is broadcast around the world to a potential global audience of about 2 billion people. some of those will undoubtedly be Jewish and may have been offended. If the Premier League isn't seen to be taking a stance against this behaviour then it will be seen to approve of it by proxy, and that could be extremely commercially insensitive.
we must also remind ourselves that every minute of every premier league game is broadcast around the world to a potential global audience of about 2 billion people. some of those will undoubtedly be Jewish and may have been offended. If the Premier League isn't seen to be taking a stance against this behaviour then it will be seen to approve of it by proxy, and that could be extremely commercially insensitive.
Reffariiii
RefChat Addict
With a drop ball?
After 4 weeks I doubt I'll remember. Whoever shouts the loudest etc.
'some of those will undoubtedly be Jewish and may have been offended. If the Premier League isn't seen to be taking a stance against this behaviour then it will be seen to approve of it by proxy, and that could be extremely commercially insensitive'
As West Brom have already discovered with Zoopla's decision to end their sponsorship arrangement with the club. Zoopla co-owned by a Jewish businessman.
of course, there are plenty of numpties around who just see it all as a big joke
As West Brom have already discovered with Zoopla's decision to end their sponsorship arrangement with the club. Zoopla co-owned by a Jewish businessman.
of course, there are plenty of numpties around who just see it all as a big joke
His last name is Cohen and you didn't know he was Jewish?
