It pisses me off that because one person's actions upset him, Lynch denied the players and coaches who may have wanted to stand on the field and honor the anthem the opportunity to do so. And that statement, combined with his unavailability to the media afterwards, is a prime example of how NOT to do PR. He took something that was not about him, and made it all about him.
NFL media isn't event comparable. ESPN is pretty much a 24/7 NFL PR channel who will talk about anything to fill their airtime. These are the people who talked nonstop about Tebow, a garbage NFL QB, for 3 years. Pinoe kneeling the first time is a footnote in that weekend. Media that doesn't pay any attention unless it's the NT picked it up a little but all the NWSL discussion was about the playoff picture. Lynch's antics made this the only talking point out of Wednesday. Not only with the moving of the anthem but one of the worst statements put out right as the game is starting so people immediately are talking about that and little else. Move the anthem and then release a statement after the game if you think it's a distraction from the actual game. The statement and actions are completely contradictory. He has claimed the anthem as his own and no one else's
Isn't that also what Rapinoe is doing though? Two wrongs don't make a right but we aren't here if Rapinoe doesn't take a knee. She's taking a moment about something completely different and making it about her and she's said she'll do it while representing her country too. I get the desire to make a statement and I have no doubt that her initial motive was pure, but its not like Lynch made his move autonomously. It happened for a reason. My right to protest something isn't any stronger than your regardless of point of view, so if you're going to take a stand you have to be prepared to have people counter it.
Statement from the Spirit players: http://washingtonspirit.com/pro/statement-from-washington-spirit-players/
I think Lynch made a very poor tactical decision here, but this is not a right/wrong issue for me. There really is value in both perspectives. Demonizing Lynch or Rapinoe is pointless. Let's also be clear, the NFL gets the coverage it gets because that's what people want to see. Absent this controversy no one knows there were NWSL games and you're not getting much playoff picture analysis anyway. Its a story that resonates and its controversial so it gets media time.
I disagree. Those are old, tired talking points, IMO. We are not a military dictatorship, meaning our military fights for our right, as Americans, to protest our government and laws (and change if/as needed), burn the flag, etc. To some, any deviation from "white heterosexual male" norms is considered disrespectful. As I say, unless you are a woman (gender, pay, reproduction) or gay or a minority (all have faced some sort of "second class citizen" treatment), how do you know where they are coming from? Just my two cents.
Which is great, but is Rapinoe's freedom of expression more important or valuable than Lynch's and vice versa? Let's say instead of moving the anthem, Lynch said, her choice and I'll have to accept that, but I'm offended think she's being selfish and I think its inappropriate in this venue?
L Why not announce she was going to do it right before or after the anthem for each game. It would have still drawn attention without creating so much controversy unless that was her intent all along.
Also be careful that these gestures by Ms. Rapinoe will not alienate fans who may be totally against what she is doing to the detriment of this still fledgling young league. The majority of fans coming to NWSL games as well as USWNT games will still be IMO, conservative suburbanite soccer moms and dads and their kids who may not like what she is doing. I want to see her do this at USWNT games while in the uniform of the employer who actually pays her and see what the repercussions will be. There may not be any. But if she doesn't do this at USWNT games and only does it at NWSL games then IMO, it would be hypocritical.
I don't think there's a big worry about that... Anyone who's already a fan of the league or of the USWNT probably isn't as conservative as you're thinking - soccer fans in general are already more liberal than the country on average, with WoSo fans likely even more so with feminism and gay rights and what not always hovering around the edges. Even those suburbanites who are conservative generally have a different brand of conservatism than, say, big business conservatism or rural conservatism or Bible Belt conservatism. I mean, I've never known the suburbs to a vocal bastion of patriotism. Commercial patriotism, sure, but nothing incredibly entrenched.
From the USSF web site Hosting of International Matches and Tournaments http://www.ussoccer.com/about/federation-services/international-games/operating-procedures IV. National Anthems. The national anthems of the competing National Teams shall be played prior to the commencement of any match. In all cases, the national anthem of the designated “home” team shall be played last. All players and members of the delegations are expected to show the proper respect for all national anthems. There is no obligation to play National Anthems for club matches. (bode added)
Hmm. I'm looking at 538.com and their red state blue state map for the upcoming election. Looks like eight nwsl teams are in blue states, including Maryland. KC and Texas Are the red states. As to the suburbanite thing, I'm not buying it. The future of the league is urban and adult. Kids don't buy season tickets.
Sorry, but I'm very conservative. Clearly some conservatives support NWSL. =D What Rapinoe is doing doesn't scare me from supporting the league, but I do see how it could detract from some. Is that something you want to take a chance on? I don't know. What Rapinoe does shouldn't stop someone from enjoying the game. I will admit, I'm tired of how often they tie gay pride items together with women's soccer. There's certainly a lot of overlap, but it seems to be tied at the hip....
Beware positive confirmation bias. I really don't think the personal politics of soccer fans, on the men's or women's side, will match up as neatly as anyone thinks. Even if you look red state/blue state margins can be thin and vary by region. This is why situations like this have to be tread very carefully. This has been an issue that divides people pretty evenly and not necessarily down party or ideological lines either. If you assume you have a demographic and cater to it, you risk shutting yourself off to half the potential market.
The types of reactions we're getting now are just the same as when the gloved fists were raised at the Olympics. I was young then and supported the runners 100%. Now, I can't protest what the athletes are doing. And, there most certainly is racial and sexual orientation discrimination in this country. The reaction that, somehow, Rapinoe showed disrespect to the military is baseless. She's protesting discrimination in this country. She's not the first and won't be the last. To equate that with a lack of patriotism, or to consider it as some kind of insult to the military, is the very kind of attitude that has gotten this country in really deep trouble in the past. Whatever one may think of the athletes' protests, the Spirit's interpretation of it was immature and ignorant. It's the very kind of interpretation that keeps people from facing the issues of discrimination.
In a country where peoples' rights to freedom of speech is enshrined in its constitution, I wouldn't say that kneeling during the national anthem is not proper respect. I know there are others who would disagree.
Maybe in Portland. Midwest, IMO is different. Red Stars fans are still mostly kids and soccer moms and soccer dads. Haven't asked many where they are from, but reading the names on kid's uniforms I am thinking suburbs. Chicago and St.Louis areas across the river may be the only blue areas of Illinois, everything else is red and conservative.
I am a former serviceman/veteran and I along with a couple other veterans who sit near me stand at attention and salute the flag as the anthem is played.
That's why I made sure to include generous use of "general" and "average" and tried to avoid speaking in absolutes! I know there's variability; my point was that I'm not sure how big of an issue it is. As I had referenced in the PBP thread, it seemed like Rapinoe had strong, wide support in the crowd on Wednesday; if there are people turned off by Rapinoe's actions, it seems like a small enough contingent to not worry about.
Response from Lynch in Washington Post article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...em-move/?postshare=6071473451628840&tid=ss_tw
Actually, she was a top 10 story for a day on Google News. I wasn't being figurative. Now, the way Google sorts their sports news may have had an impact, but for a day (or some portion of a day) it came up on their front page (before the issue with Lynch began).
News from Google is filtered based on what they know from you. Because Google. Normal news sites - and even sports news sites - didn't have it front page until Wednesday. At least none I had seen.
This is not a racist statement? There are plenty of women and minorities serving in the armed forces. Ask them how they feel when someone disrespects the flag or the anthem. I know that as a citizen of the USA you have the right to do what you want in these regards, but other people have the right to disagree. Rapinoe and Kaepernick took an action which others disagreed with. There was bound to be a reaction. The funny thing, in Rapinoe's case (and all national team players), is that she has stood at attention for the playing of the national anthems of other countries before, which have far less human rights than our own country.