Is it this?I’m not sure which virtue is being signalled with this idea
Can someone signpost it, or point me in the right direction?
Bisexual flag - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Is it this?I’m not sure which virtue is being signalled with this idea
Can someone signpost it, or point me in the right direction?
Found this so interesting that I ordered a shirt for my daughter as soon as I read your post.Or £10.82 + P&P on soccer03.
I’m not buying another shop shirt ever again after seeing how good the one I got come through was!
I think it's because the critical issues are too hard, or expensive to solve, so our focus gets shifted to the trivial ones.I take your point.
People are entitled to care about what they want.
I'm just tired of how much oxygen is taken up by relatively minor or trivial issues, at the expense of critical ones.
Particularly by the media and major political parties.
Blimey mate don’t cancel cards, I can honestly say I only ordered off the site because enough friends had recommended it otherwise I wouldn’t have!Found this so interesting that I ordered a shirt for my daughter as soon as I read your post.
I guess what I should have done first was to google soccer03 and look for reviews. Did so after ordering and horrified to see the plethora of negative reviews regarding scams, selling card details etc.
Now, I am easily scared so I rang my bank to cancel my card. The payment couldn’t be stopped but my card’s cancelled. I await the arrival of the shirt and hope nothing further goes wrong.
You’ve obviously had good experiences with this company so would be interested to hear more from you, and others. Cheers.
For the last 20-odd years, Brazil's team's been living on the achievements of its predecessors. I haven't seen anyone recently to mention in the same breath as Zico, Socrates and Ronaldo, let alone Pele or Garrincha (a name I only know by his great reputation).
The World Cup is only two years away… I imagine he’ll still be playing then.
Blimey, everyone has a flag these days.
Blimey, everyone has a flag these days.
I want a flag!
I mean, it's a bit shit but I'll take it!
Kaka was the one but he faded when he went to Madrid.For the last 20-odd years, Brazil's team's been living on the achievements of its predecessors. I haven't seen anyone recently to mention in the same breath as Zico, Socrates and Ronaldo, let alone Pele or Garrincha (a name I only know by his great reputation).
I was being perhaps over cautious but you should google “ is soccer03 legit”.Blimey mate don’t cancel cards, I can honestly say I only ordered off the site because enough friends had recommended it otherwise I wouldn’t have!
A couple of them have said their orders have been a bit delayed but none of them have any issues apart from that
It's just a catch-all term used to assume any form of "political correctness" is only done to appear noble rather than out of empathy or consideration of changing times.I’m not sure which virtue is being signalled with this idea
Can someone signpost it, or point me in the right direction?
One of the issues with the modern England team, or maybe even with football in general, is that almost anything can become a battleground in the culture war. In a world already dominated by symbols and gestures, it does not take much for people to turn things into a profound matter of identity, belonging; ‘us against them’.If someone who is more tech savvy can copy/paste, good article in the Athletic:
https://theathletic.com/5360479/2024/03/22/england-nike-collar-flag/?source=user_shared_articleNike, England, and a shirt-collar culture war that really shouldn’t have existed
TLDR: new design of the St George flag on an England shirt. Bunch of people have random, sometimes ludicrous opinions on it.One of the issues with the modern England team, or maybe even with football in general, is that almost anything can become a battleground in the culture war. In a world already dominated by symbols and gestures, it does not take much for people to turn things into a profound matter of identity, belonging; ‘us against them’.
But not many would have expected before this week that the launch of a new England home shirt would be weaponised in this way.
It all started on Monday morning when Nike revealed the new England home and away kits, which the men’s team will be wearing at Euro 2024 in Germany this summer. The home shirt is a more traditional design than the blue-shouldered jersey the men’s team wore at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. The most obvious difference was the red and blue trim on the cuffs of the shirt and the hem of the shorts, evoking memories of the England kits from World Cups gone by.
Under normal circumstances, it would have passed without excessive commentary, before people returned to the more pertinent matters of who would play in midfield alongside Declan Rice and Jude Bellingham, or whether Ollie Watkins or Ivan Toney was a better backup to Harry Kane. But we do not live in normal times.
What set off this week of noise and anger was a tweet issued by the @nikefootball account at 8:41 on Monday morning. It showed the back of the collar of the home shirt, where the St George’s cross had been altered: the vertical bars were three different shades of red, the horizontal ones red, blue and navy. The tweet read: “A playful update to the (England flag emoji) of St. George appears on the collar to unite and inspire.”
That was all it took. That tweet has — at the time of writing — been viewed 23 million times. It has thousands of replies and quote-tweets. The view, in broad terms, is that this was an attempt to re-draw the cross of St George in a political way, to make it look like the rainbow flag associated with LGBTQ+ people. (Never mind the fact that this new cross did not contain any orange, yellow or green. Some argued it must therefore be the pink, purple and dark blue of the bisexual pride flag instead.)
Some people simply do not like the design, as is always the case. Some people would rather the flag was kept in its traditional colours, quite understandably. But for another group, this was something else. It was an insult, a betrayal, an example of a woke agenda being forced upon England fans. A petition on Change.org entitled ‘SAVE ST GEORGE’S CROSS IN ENGLISH FOOTBALL’, started by one ‘Alfred Ramsey’, argues that the tiny motif on the back of the shirt’s collar is “political”, “divisive” and “damaging”. It calls on the similarly-minded to sign the petition to show the FA and Nike that “the English people and our ancient affinity for football refuse to be erased”. So far, almost 11,000 people have done so.
But what if those who view these colours as a statement are seeing something that simply isn’t there? What if the intention with these kit designs was not politics but history? Nike claim the introduction of purple was meant to be a nod to the training kit that England wore during their victorious 1966 World Cup campaign. Not everything has to be a political statement.
“The England 2024 Home kit disrupts history with a modern take on a classic,” said a Nike spokesperson. “The trim on the cuffs takes its cues from the training gear worn by England’s 1966 heroes, with a gradient of blues and reds topped with purple. The same colours also feature an interpretation of the flag of St. George on the back of the collar.”
Assuming we accept this, the next question is why so many people looked at this and saw an LGBTQ+ symbol that was never intended. Perhaps it was the wording of the initial tweet, “a playful update… to unite and inspire”, that gave people the wrong idea, words which in a certain light look gently political. (On the @nikefootball Instagram page it was merely described as a “modern interpretation of the St. George flag”, prompting far less reaction.)
Could it be that people associated the motif with the ‘OneLove’ armband that England (along with other countries) talked about wearing at the Qatar World Cup, before being blocked by FIFA? (That armband, you will remember, was also not a complete rainbow, but rather coloured bars across a heart.) Possibly, but not everyone has clear memories of an ultimately brief pre-tournament controversy from almost 18 months ago.
Or maybe this goes deeper than that. For some people, there is a suspicion that Southgate is trying to impose what are assumed to be left-liberal politics via the Trojan horse of his England team. Remember that when England took the knee in their friendlies before the last European Championship they were booed by some of their fans. Southgate lost a small implacable minority of the England support that day and has never been able to win them back. (On the other side of the fence, he retains the adoration of huge swathes of the English public, as the success of James Graham’s play about him, Dear England, proves.)
As much as Southgate might want to focus on his job, preparing his team to win the Euros, he must know that he has been politicised to the point of no return. He cannot escape his fate as the Rorschach test of the English culture war. What you see on the back of the collar determines which side you are on.
I don’t know where the athletic get their view on what the majority of England football fans think of Southgate. Unless they sit in the same media cess tank of writers who believe their own hype. The majority of England fans I’ve spoken to think he is a melt who has cost us two cups with his negative approach .One of the issues with the modern England team, or maybe even with football in general, is that almost anything can become a battleground in the culture war. In a world already dominated by symbols and gestures, it does not take much for people to turn things into a profound matter of identity, belonging; ‘us against them’.
But not many would have expected before this week that the launch of a new England home shirt would be weaponised in this way.
It all started on Monday morning when Nike revealed the new England home and away kits, which the men’s team will be wearing at Euro 2024 in Germany this summer. The home shirt is a more traditional design than the blue-shouldered jersey the men’s team wore at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. The most obvious difference was the red and blue trim on the cuffs of the shirt and the hem of the shorts, evoking memories of the England kits from World Cups gone by.
Under normal circumstances, it would have passed without excessive commentary, before people returned to the more pertinent matters of who would play in midfield alongside Declan Rice and Jude Bellingham, or whether Ollie Watkins or Ivan Toney was a better backup to Harry Kane. But we do not live in normal times.
What set off this week of noise and anger was a tweet issued by the @nikefootball account at 8:41 on Monday morning. It showed the back of the collar of the home shirt, where the St George’s cross had been altered: the vertical bars were three different shades of red, the horizontal ones red, blue and navy. The tweet read: “A playful update to the (England flag emoji) of St. George appears on the collar to unite and inspire.”
That was all it took. That tweet has — at the time of writing — been viewed 23 million times. It has thousands of replies and quote-tweets. The view, in broad terms, is that this was an attempt to re-draw the cross of St George in a political way, to make it look like the rainbow flag associated with LGBTQ+ people. (Never mind the fact that this new cross did not contain any orange, yellow or green. Some argued it must therefore be the pink, purple and dark blue of the bisexual pride flag instead.)
Some people simply do not like the design, as is always the case. Some people would rather the flag was kept in its traditional colours, quite understandably. But for another group, this was something else. It was an insult, a betrayal, an example of a woke agenda being forced upon England fans. A petition on Change.org entitled ‘SAVE ST GEORGE’S CROSS IN ENGLISH FOOTBALL’, started by one ‘Alfred Ramsey’, argues that the tiny motif on the back of the shirt’s collar is “political”, “divisive” and “damaging”. It calls on the similarly-minded to sign the petition to show the FA and Nike that “the English people and our ancient affinity for football refuse to be erased”. So far, almost 11,000 people have done so.
But what if those who view these colours as a statement are seeing something that simply isn’t there? What if the intention with these kit designs was not politics but history? Nike claim the introduction of purple was meant to be a nod to the training kit that England wore during their victorious 1966 World Cup campaign. Not everything has to be a political statement.
“The England 2024 Home kit disrupts history with a modern take on a classic,” said a Nike spokesperson. “The trim on the cuffs takes its cues from the training gear worn by England’s 1966 heroes, with a gradient of blues and reds topped with purple. The same colours also feature an interpretation of the flag of St. George on the back of the collar.”
Assuming we accept this, the next question is why so many people looked at this and saw an LGBTQ+ symbol that was never intended. Perhaps it was the wording of the initial tweet, “a playful update… to unite and inspire”, that gave people the wrong idea, words which in a certain light look gently political. (On the @nikefootball Instagram page it was merely described as a “modern interpretation of the St. George flag”, prompting far less reaction.)
Could it be that people associated the motif with the ‘OneLove’ armband that England (along with other countries) talked about wearing at the Qatar World Cup, before being blocked by FIFA? (That armband, you will remember, was also not a complete rainbow, but rather coloured bars across a heart.) Possibly, but not everyone has clear memories of an ultimately brief pre-tournament controversy from almost 18 months ago.
Or maybe this goes deeper than that. For some people, there is a suspicion that Southgate is trying to impose what are assumed to be left-liberal politics via the Trojan horse of his England team. Remember that when England took the knee in their friendlies before the last European Championship they were booed by some of their fans. Southgate lost a small implacable minority of the England support that day and has never been able to win them back. (On the other side of the fence, he retains the adoration of huge swathes of the English public, as the success of James Graham’s play about him, Dear England, proves.)
As much as Southgate might want to focus on his job, preparing his team to win the Euros, he must know that he has been politicised to the point of no return. He cannot escape his fate as the Rorschach test of the English culture war. What you see on the back of the collar determines which side you are on.
A lot of the media now just quote random views from Twitter/X. Then make a story out of it.I don’t know where the athletic get their view on what the majority of England football fans think of Southgate. Unless they sit in the same media cess tank of writers who believe their own hype. The majority of England fans I’ve spoken to think he is a melt who has cost us two cups with his negative approach .
Vox populi has always been a huge part of news gathering. It is just easier nowA lot of the media now just quote random views from Twitter/X. Then make a story out of it.
I actually think the vitriol that Southgate gets is over the top and unjustified and I struggle to understand it. So maybe they’re writing articles specifically for me nowI don’t know where the athletic get their view on what the majority of England football fans think of Southgate. Unless they sit in the same media cess tank of writers who believe their own hype. The majority of England fans I’ve spoken to think he is a melt who has cost us two cups with his negative approach .