3 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

If you had some actors that took a knee during a performance on stage, would you not replace them?

 

You really should stop digging.

 

 

1 hour ago, Boon Mee said:

That's right. Politics has no business in Sports and besides, what's wrong with respecting the flag? 

What’s wrong with respecting the First Amendment?!

13 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Not the atheletes

Yet the USA govt established the precedent. 

 

The players are just following in their steps. 

 

Nothing wrong with peacefull protest. 

1 hour ago, mtls2005 said:

 

Well, some twist themselves into knots trying to justify free speech for white people, but denying it to others. Most Americans seem to inherently recognize the importance of the First Amendment, and a small segment remains ignorant. What can you do? 

If the American people cant do anything about it then it doesn't show much resolve by them. From what you say and I understand it as all countries are like that now, the government rules the country to suit themselves, the people in reality have no say in the matter

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

What’s wrong with respecting the First Amendment?!

Come on, don't make it so complicated for Boon Mee! Don't burst his bubble. 

1 minute ago, upu2 said:

If the American people cant do anything about it then it doesn't show much resolve by them. From what you say and I understand it as all countries are like that now, the government rules the country to suit themselves, the people in reality have no say in the matter

The rightwing press are keen for you to accept that as true.

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The rightwing press are keen for you to accept that as true.

The press belong to the politicians, not that I would classify Trump as a politician.

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

What’s wrong with respecting the First Amendment?!

The First Amendment is being respecting .

The protestors are still free to continue their protests 

2 minutes ago, sanemax said:

The First Amendment is being respecting .

The protestors are still free to continue their protests 

And so they should maintain their right to protest. Trump needs to keep his nose out of trying to play with the constitution

2 minutes ago, upu2 said:

And so they should maintain their right to protest. Trump needs to keep his nose out of trying to play with the constitution

Trump also has the right to say what he thinks .

Trump is protected by the First Amendment, just as much as the players are

3 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Trump also has the right to say what he thinks .

Trump is protected by the First Amendment, just as much as the players are

Agreed, but he shouldnt be calling for legal action against the players.

3 minutes ago, upu2 said:

Agreed, but he shouldnt be calling for legal action against the players.

I have just re-read the article and it doesnt state that Trump is calling for "legal action" against the players

27 minutes ago, sanemax said:

The protestors are still free to continue their protests 

 

Yes, this is correct. The NFL had unilaterally dictated "rules" for this season (stand, or remain in the locker room during the playing of the national anthem). However, both the NFL and the NFLPA agreed to a pause in the implementation of this "rule" given that it was vague, each team invoked different and unique "rules" and punishments were vague. Jerry Jones probably wants to be able to whip any of his " 'boys " who step out of line?

 

Note that until we slid into unending wars post 9/11, NFL teams remained in the locker room during the playing of the national anthem, which only became "official" in 1931. Then, once the DoD started paying the NFL for forced patriotism, teams were on the field for the anthem.

 

 

Edited August 11, 20187 yr by mtls2005

4 minutes ago, sanemax said:

I have just re-read the article and it doesnt state that Trump is calling for "legal action" against the players

 

Of course the President has the same First Amendment rights as NFL players.

 

That said, please review ALL of his NFL tweets, in at least one of his dozen or so tweets, he has called for players to "stand, or be fired". Arguably, firing someone without cause would be considered a "legal action".

 

 

14 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

Yes, this is correct. The NFL had unilaterally dictated "rules" for this season (stand, or remain in the locker room during the playing of the national anthem). However, both the NFL and the NFLPA agreed to a pause in the implementation of this "rule" given that it was vague, each team invoked different and unique "rules" and punishments were vague. Jerry Jones probably wants to be able to whip any of his " 'boys " who step out of line?

 

Note that until we slid into unending wars post 9/11, NFL teams remained in the locker room during the playing of the national anthem, which only became "official" in 1931. Then, once the DoD started paying the NFL for forced patriotism, teams were on the field for the anthem.

 

 

Speaking of Jerry Jones,

 

 

10 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

Of course the President has the same First Amendment rights as NFL players.

That said, please review ALL of his NFL tweets, in at least one of his dozen or so tweets, he has called for players to "stand, or be fired". Arguably, firing someone without cause would be considered a "legal action".

The Players are employed by their Clubs , they are representing their Clubs and thus have to act in a way that will not bring their Clubs into disrepute .

   If their Clubs feel that the players are bringing their Clubs into disrepute , they have every right to fire them . 

   Trump has suggested that the players be fired , nothing wrong with that .

Its up to the clubs whether they fire them or not

8 minutes ago, alanrchase said:

Speaking of Jerry Jones,

 

He's of the "plantation owner" mentality.

 

I'm a HUGE NFL fan, but it doesn't take a genius to see the similarities between an NFL franchise and a slave-owning plantation circa Mississippi early 1800s. No regional competition, cheap repaceable labor, talent evaluated and sold at auction (draft), no guaranteed contract, help treated as disposable (except for white QBs).

 

The investment in Papa John's, and the 'Boys sticking with them, speaks volumes.

 

 

Edited August 11, 20187 yr by mtls2005

20 minutes ago, sanemax said:

The Players are employed by their Clubs , they are representing their Clubs and thus have to act in a way that will not bring their Clubs into disrepute .

   If their Clubs feel that the players are bringing their Clubs into disrepute , they have every right to fire them . 

   Trump has suggested that the players be fired , nothing wrong with that .

Its up to the clubs whether they fire them or not

7

 

 

You've presented a lot to unpack, much of which is vague, simplistic or downright inaccurate.

 

NFL players are employed by individual teams but are part of a union. Contracts are standard. Players cannot be "fired" unless the contract stipulates that as punishment. They can be legally waived and illegally blackballed.

 

have to act in a way that will not bring their Clubs into disrepute .

 

I'm not sure this is covered in the standard player contract, and if it is, the behavior is certainly clearly defined. Protesting is not covered, AFAIK. Nor is wife-beating, rape, drug use or murder, assuming the player is good - these would be covered by league rules.

 

 

Trump has suggested that the players be fired , nothing wrong with that .

 

Again, the President can have an opinion but suggesting that teams illegally terminate employees without cause would cross the line for most reasonable human beings, and appear to be conspiratorial, and thus illegal. SO yes, there is something wrong with that.

 

Its up to the clubs whether they fire them or not

 

Again, no. You are misinformed.

 

 

 

Edited August 11, 20187 yr by mtls2005

2 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

They are employees at work, if they want to protest they should do it on their own time.

Employers can make various regulations, and with the NFL involves a Collective Bargaining Agreement, getting into complex area of labour law involving 1st Amendment of the COTUS. Prohibiting silent protest something having nothing to do with Football, would NOT stand scrutiny before the the Supreme Court and the owners are treading lightly in this area. Trump should ignore them, oh well.

Edited August 11, 20187 yr by ChiangMaiLightning2143

1 hour ago, canuckamuck said:

Presidents make political statements at work. That's their job.

EXACTLY! And as members of society you/I/we /they are all allowed to make statements about the conditon of our society. That is our collective job.

 

The amount of money you get paid in society does not preclude that right.

 

They are doing their jobs (playing football) and exercising their rights as members of society to highlighed percieved injustices. 

 

COVFEFE

 

 

1 hour ago, jonclark said:

So it is fine for a president to broadcasts his personal opinion to the world while he is on the job. Even though he is paid by the taxpayer... to work ..you must see the contradiction.

 

Tweeting isnt work.

Some court determined Trumps' Tweets constitute official government pronouncements or info and his Twitter is not  "private". He is not allowed to block people and some he blocked were reinstated.

Edited August 11, 20187 yr by ChiangMaiLightning2143

1 hour ago, canuckamuck said:

They are performers, they get paid a lot. If you had some actors that took a knee during a performance on stage, would you not replace them?

Ask the owners... why do YOU care so much how a private business decides to deal with their employees?

 

33 minutes ago, sanemax said:

 Trump has suggested that the players be fired , nothing wrong with that .

Its up to the clubs whether they fire them or not.

There is something wrong with the govt (45) threatening NFL owners over a free speech issue. It is a violation of the 1st Amendment.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/10/us/politics/trump-nfl-jemele-hill.html

The NFL has special rights granted by Congress so that the NFL doesn't have to follow rules/laws of a regular business. This should end now.

 

8 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

 

You've presented a lot to break down, much of which is both vague, simplistic or downright inaccurate.

 

NFL players are employed by individual teams but are part of a union. Contracts are standard. Players cannot be "fired" unless the contract stipulates that as punishment. They can be legally waived and illegally blackballed.

I am just going by general employment rules and the players contracts .

Which I sure that NFL players have to adhere too .

   I dont know about U.S. players contracts , but UK players have many clauses put in them about not bringing the Club into disrepute or giving them bad publicity, and they are very restricted in what they can and cannot do .

21 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

I'm not sure this is covered in the standard player contract, and if it is, the behavior is certainly clearly defined. Protesting is not covered, AFAIK.

Once again , I dont know about the USA , but in the UK is usually contractually forbidden to show any Political alliance  or participate and any  protests , agendas or causes, especially whilst on the pitch of play

7 minutes ago, IAMHERE said:

The NFL has special rights granted by Congress so that the NFL doesn't have to follow rules/laws of a regular business. This should end now.

 

 

What should end now? The Anti-Trust/Collusion/Monopoly Exemptions granted by Congress?

 

Probably.

 

Not sure how that impacts the player's behavior on the field during the playing of the anthem?

 

 

26 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

Again, the President can have an opinion but suggesting that teams illegally terminate employees without cause would cross the line for most reasonable human beings, and appear to be conspiratorial, and thus illegal. SO yes, there is something wrong with that.

 

Trump didnt suggest that Clubs "illegally" fire players , he did say that they should be fired , but he didnt say they should be fired "illegally" .

   Whether firing them would be legal or not is a different matter and that can be decided by the Lawyers , but Trump didnt say that they should be fired illegally

4 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Once again , I dont know about the USA

 

 

Thanks for being honest.

 

Maybe best to resist commenting on matters with which you are unfamiliar.