Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12468
    12 Oct '17 00:49
    http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/20989433/gerald-mccoy-tampa-bay-buccaneers-uproar-players-forced-stand


    I am not sure how anyone is forced to stand. The players can quit the NFL.

    How would players be forced to stand when they can just quit and get a different job?
  2. Subscriberlemondrop
    pawn grabber
    Joined
    19 Jul '13
    Moves
    205327
    19 Oct '17 03:24
    Originally posted by @eladar
    http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/20989433/gerald-mccoy-tampa-bay-buccaneers-uproar-players-forced-stand


    I am not sure how anyone is forced to stand. The players can quit the NFL.

    How would players be forced to stand when they can just quit and get a different job?
    the minimum salary in the NFL, or all professional sports for that matter, is much more than they could hope for in another profession or job

    if forced to stand
    they'll stand
  3. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12468
    19 Oct '17 16:52
    Originally posted by @lemondrop
    the minimum salary in the NFL, or all professional sports for that matter, is much more than they could hope for in another profession or job

    if forced to stand
    they'll stand
    They could always walk, there is no forcing to stand.

    If the players do no stand, some of the NFL's financial support will walk.
  4. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    19 Oct '17 19:091 edit
    Originally posted by @eladar
    http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/20989433/gerald-mccoy-tampa-bay-buccaneers-uproar-players-forced-stand

    I am not sure how anyone is forced to stand. The players can quit the NFL.
    How would players be forced to stand when they can just quit and get a different job?
    Can Eladar explain why standing for the US national anthem's supposedly an essential part of an NFL player's job?

    I note that not all NFL players are US citizens. Would Eladar be as upset if some NFL players
    who are not UK citizens refused to stand for the UK national anthem at games in London?
  5. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    55704
    19 Oct '17 19:22
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    Can Eladar explain why standing for the US national anthem's supposedly an essential part of an NFL player's job?

    I note that not all NFL players are US citizens. Would Eladar be as upset if some NFL players
    who are not UK citizens refused to stand for the UK national anthem at games in London?
    It would be a marketing problem for the NFL if
    (1) players did not stand for the UK national anthem and
    (2) UK citizens (who the NFL is trying to market their game to) were offended and were turned off by the incident.
    I personally could not care whether someone stands for a piece of cloth. But that's not the issue. The issue is whether an employee can engage in conduct which offends the customer base and I think the answer is a definite no.
  6. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    19 Oct '17 19:38
    Originally posted by @quackquack
    It would be a marketing problem for the NFL if
    (1) players did not stand for the UK national anthem and
    (2) UK citizens (who the NFL is trying to market their game to) were offended and were turned off by the incident.
    I personally could not care whether someone stands for a piece of cloth. But that's not the issue. The issue is whether an employee can engage in conduct which offends the customer base and I think the answer is a definite no.
    My question was addressed to Eladar, not the NFL commissioner.
    Roger Goodell already has stated that NFL players will not be 'forced to stand'.

    From what I have observed, people in the UK tend to be less obsessed than Americans
    with nationalistic symbols, so I expect that there would be less adverse reaction in the UK
    toward anyone (particularly a non-UK citizen) who refuses to stand for the UK national anthem.

    Let's suppose that an Irish American NFL player who (like No1Marauder) fiercely objects
    to Northern Ireland ('ACLE' in No1Marauder's peculiar parlance) being a part of the UK.
    That player decides to protest by refusing to stand for the UK national anthem.
    He claims to be exercising his right to freedom of expression, even outside the USA.
    Should the NFL proceed to discipline him for allegedly 'disrespecting' the UK anthem or flag?
  7. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    19 Oct '17 19:462 edits
    Originally posted by @quackquack
    It would be a marketing problem for the NFL if
    (1) players did not stand for the UK national anthem and
    (2) UK citizens (who the NFL is trying to market their game to) were offended and were turned off by the incident.
    I personally could not care whether someone stands for a piece of cloth. But that's not the issue.
    The issue is whether an emplo ...[text shortened]... e can engage in conduct which offends the customer base and I think the answer is a definite no.
    "The issue is whether an employee can engage in conduct which offends the
    customer base and I think the answer is a definite no."
    --Quackquack

    Back in the Golden Age of air travel (imagine stewardesses being advertised for their sex appeal),
    some male passengers felt entitled to 'take liberties' toward female flight attendants that
    today would be regarded as sexual harassment or even sexual assault.
    In some cases, if a stewardess dared to complain about being groped, for instance, by a
    passenger, her employer reprimanded only her for allegedly 'offending the customer base'.
    Would Quackquack approve of the airline doing this to its employee?
  8. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    55704
    19 Oct '17 19:47
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    My question was addressed to Eladar, not the NFL commissioner.
    Roger Goodell already has stated that NFL players will not be 'forced to stand'.

    From what I have observed, people in the UK tend to be less obsessed than Americans
    with nationalistic symbols, so I expect that there would be less adverse reaction in the UK
    toward anyone (particularly a n ...[text shortened]... .
    Should the NFL proceed to discipline him for allegedly 'disrespecting' the UK anthem or flag?
    Freedom of expression allows a player to do whatever they want on their own time. Here however, the player is in uniform, on the stage provided by the employer. And if the players behavior actually hurts the bottom line for his employer, then of course they would be subject to discipline.
  9. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    19 Oct '17 19:48
    Originally posted by @quackquack
    Freedom of expression allows a player to do whatever they want on their own time. Here however, the player is in uniform, on the stage provided by the employer. And if the players behavior actually hurts the bottom line for his employer, then of course they would be subject to discipline.
    So if No1Marauder were an NFL player and refused to stand for the UK national anthem
    at a game in London, then Quackquack believes that NFL should punish him for doing so?
  10. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    55704
    19 Oct '17 20:11
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    So if No1Marauder were an NFL player and refused to stand for the UK national anthem
    at a game in London, then Quackquack believes that NFL should punish him for doing so?
    I believe that if
    (1) No1 was an NFL player and
    (2) there was a rule requiring him to stand at games and
    (3) the NFL had a reasonable belief that his failure to stand for the flag offended their customer base and thereby hurt their bottom line
    then they certainly could implement their collectively bargained for punishment.
  11. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    19 Oct '17 20:28
    Originally posted by @quackquack
    I believe that if
    (1) No1 was an NFL player and
    (2) there was a rule requiring him to stand at games and
    (3) the NFL had a reasonable belief that his failure to stand for the flag offended their customer base and thereby hurt their bottom line
    then they certainly could implement their collectively bargained for punishment.
    "if ... there was a rule requiring him to stand at games."
    --Quackquack

    Can Quackquack cite anything in the NFL collective bargaining agreement that
    requires NFL players to stand at attention during the playing of national anthems?
  12. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12468
    19 Oct '17 20:341 edit
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    "if ... there was a rule requiring him to stand at games."
    --Quackquack

    Can Quackquack cite anything in the NFL collective bargaining agreement that
    requires NFL players to stand at attention during the playing of national anthems?
    Owners can fire players at any time for any reason.

    As for why players would be required to stand, so that the NFL stops losing money.

    Players are a product. If what they do causes loss of money, then they should be replaced if they could make more money in doing so.

    It would be no different than having a career ending injury.
  13. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    19 Oct '17 20:411 edit
    Originally posted by @eladar
    Owners can fire players at any time for any reason.

    As for why players would be required to stand, so that the NFL stops losing money.
    Players are a product. If what they do causes loss of money, then they should be replaced if they could make more money in doing so.

    It would be no different than having a career ending injury.
    "Owners can fire players at any time for any reason."
    --Eladar

    Really? If an owner (some NFL owners have been women) demanded sexual favors from
    a player, who refused, then would that owner have the right to terminate that player?

    "Players are a product."
    --Eladar

    Harvey Weinstein may have said, "Actresses are a product."
  14. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    55704
    19 Oct '17 20:44
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    "if ... there was a rule requiring him to stand at games."
    --Quackquack

    Can Quackquack cite anything in the NFL collective bargaining agreement that
    requires NFL players to stand at attention during the playing of national anthems?
    According to Time magazine “The league’s Game Operations Department uses the manual to govern the conduct of home clubs, to ensure they protect players and provide the conditions for a fair and fan-friendly contest,” reads the NFL’s website. “Clubs face warnings and other penalties for noncompliance.”

    The NFL rulebook makes no mention of the national anthem. But the game operations manual does.

    Here’s what the game operations manual says regarding the national anthem, according to an NFL spokesperson:


    The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem.

    During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses."

    Thus, it seems that there may or may not be a basis for punishment. Personally, both sides botched the incident. The NFL has not helped by flaming the issue. The protesters have not helped their cause by offending those who are overly attached to the flag. Since the players and the owners share profits, offending the general public hurts their bottom line. A different form of protest or specific actions to help the problems the protesters were trying to highlight would have been far more effective.
  15. Standard memberfinnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    To the Left
    Joined
    25 Jun '06
    Moves
    64930
    19 Oct '17 21:09
    Originally posted by @eladar
    Owners can fire players at any time for any reason.

    As for why players would be required to stand, so that the NFL stops losing money.

    Players are a product. If what they do causes loss of money, then they should be replaced if they could make more money in doing so.

    It would be no different than having a career ending injury.
    Players are a product.
    Remember that phrase and the profoundly cynical sentiments it reflects next time you want to lecture us about how important the individual is in capitalism. In capitalism - as you acknowledge here - the individual is of no importance whatsoever, except as a unit of production, and this is demonstrated by the phrase
    they should be replaced if they could make more money in doing so.

    No less brutally cold is your simply astonishing remark
    It would be no different than having a career ending injury.
    Of course, for the individual player, a career ending injury would be devastating - the end of hopes and dreams and the end of economic prospects. But to the capitalist, those considerations are of no interest, not remotely relevant to the [sacred] business decision - is this player worth more money to me on the team or would I make more money by sacking him and finding a replacement [ one more willing to comply with my demands, however unreasonable]? This is because the 'individual' is not a person but a commodity, a unit, an impersonal quantity; it would seem bizarre to even think in terms of that individual's personality.

    But this is freedom to you - the freedom to be a commodity, the freedom to starve, the freedom to accept or to abandon employment on terms that are not always consistent with your own values and concerns. Capitalism values the freedom of the worker because it needs people who are available to be picked up on demand and to be put aside again when they are not required. Capitalism does not want to be restricted by inconvenient rights or obligations when labour is not "free" in this economic sense, as when a serf is not available to work because tied to the land, or when a slave requires feeding and housing when no longer productive. Yes, the freedom of the worker is most important to capitalism but this is not the sense of "freedom" that most reasonable people hope for in life.

    Individual freedom. The words are mere gaslighting phrases and mean the opposite of what simple souls expect them to mean.
Back to Top