this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2023
2 points (100.0% liked)

Football / Soccer / Calcio / Futebol / Fußball

144 readers
1 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (35 children)

Henderson could have stayed at Liverpool, less game time but become a mentor, done more charity work etc and cement himself as a Liverpool legend.

Instead he threw it all away to play in front of 800 people, lose all good will, and I guess make bank. Hope that’s worth your legacy being tarnished.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Every ideology has its price

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (13 children)

The only legacy he will now leave is one of hypocrisy.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I actually think Liverpool wanted him gone and encouraged it. FFP means that £12m is pure profit and it got his large wages off the books.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As Liverpool fan.. We absolutely did, it came probably a year sooner than we anticipated, as we wouldn’t have expected to let Henderson, Milner and Fabinho go all in one summer but the midfield was looking tired and the wages were high, a revamp was needed, and getting rid of him helped that. If you want to be successful you can’t be too sentimental and our ownership knows this.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (32 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Hendersons whole legacy was tarnished by this, that’s crazy

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Only thing he supports is money.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

He started his international career by being booed by the fans and he will finish it the same way

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Tbf I can't really hate Henderson because at the end. The way the world is going, money has become more important than values for many. But I don't really get people who defend him as well. It's okay that he chose money but it doesn't remove the fact that he indeed failed the vulnerable community who believed in him. Two things can be right.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Just goes to show pro athletes should not get involved with causes like this.

Loads of players have gone to Saudi and Henderson takes as much flack as the rest of them put together.

If he keeps his mouth shut and doesn’t get involved with LBGT causes he would have been just another player getting a massive end of career payday.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Horrible take. Surely the conclusion should be that when athletes get involved in social causes, they shouldn't completely betray them. It's not that hard an ask.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

FR. It's good that they want to stand for things and use their platform for good if that feels right for them.

Obviously then people want you to stick to it if not it looks like all they were doing is virtue signalling / PR image curation.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

His interview just made matters worse. He’s a dumb, deluded egocentric.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Not only is Jake Daniels gay but he's also poor. Offer 350k net per week and you would have more allies Jake, duh.

/s, obviously

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

How can Jake not understand that Jordan has obviously done this in order to promote LGBT rights. What a hero!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (8 children)

It just goes to show that most ‘holier than thou’ people are just virtue signalling twats.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think it is a good thing to show solidarity, be passionate about a cause or causes and speak up about it.

I don't think the language you're using is helpful here, seems like a very cynical worldview. Just because Jordan Henderson sold out his beliefs for a bit of cash doesn't mean that everyone who cares about social causes is a "virtue signalling twt" and it's unhelpful to tarnish people with that brush.

Just my two cents on the matter seeing as you gave yours

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The thing thats not right is the value of his wage comes from being in that country and not playing football. He could still earn more than enough money and not have to move to a religious sandy shithole.

The only thing i question is his basic decision making skills.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This.

It's extremely easy to defend someone or something when you've got nothing to lose. Henderson had a lot to gain actually.

He basically went from being rich to being slightly more rich. I don't think he increases his quality of life much.

The best part is how he tries to justify it, like him being in Saudi will make any sort of difference. Not only is he a man who's word have no value whatsoever... He's probably also has an exaggerated sense of self worth( I think a lot of celebrities would have ).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I think it will make small, negative difference. Saudi opinion is we are a bunch hypocritical whores who will abandon any principle if they throw enough money at us. Henderson is now prime example.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

It's extremely easy to defend someone or something when you've got nothing to lose.

When making a ham and eggs breakfast, the chicken is involved but the pig is fully commited

regarding LGBT, henderson was involved

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Why most? This is just one guy, no need to judge everyone for it. I’m sure there are players who turned down more money because they were morally against Sauid, but we’ll never hear about those people

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (41 children)

celebs should never ever be taken seriously when it comes to any other matter than the one they actually excel at, be it football or acting etc.

No I dont want a fucking actor, raised by actors, isolated from society telling me how to vote or what to think about economics. Same goes for footballers. These people are not normal in any sense of the word nor do they have any understanding of the world they live in so sheltered.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

But yet they have immense influence and use it to try and take serious stances, sometimes with success. I agree with you they're terrible role models but the problem is they don't know how to shut up about things they're clueless about

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Agree. Fans (peasants) wants celebrities to stand up for them, no matter what the political view is, and when they mess up they get all mad. No shit, theyre celebrities. Not politicians or activists.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (39 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is the problem with pushing sportspeople into being "societal" role models. He's made a decision for his personal gain, it's not really anyone's business regardless of what people think. I think Hendo is a complete hypocrite for going, but whatever. It's his choice. Why should he be held to a higher standard than anyone else going to work in Saudi or other gulf states?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Rich guy insincerely takes up moral/political stance which is PR friendly, commercially safe, and unradical.

Tale as old as time.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

It seems like he's not going to jeopardise generational wealth over virtue signalling

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

he's not going to jeopardise generational wealth over virtue signalling

he could have just had some actual virtue

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Never had if he chose the bag over what he believes in.... Question we should ask is if Jake Daniels would go earn the bag at Saudi rather than rotting at a league one bench

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Question we should ask is if Jake Daniels would go earn the bag at Saudi rather than rotting at a league one bench

I think Jake, an openly gay man, might have a couple issues going to the Saudi league to be honest

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Foreigners/expats have different rules in saudi...everyone knows this, he'll be alright if he doesn't make a big fuss about being gay

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

he’ll be alright if he’s just not himself.

Cool cool fr

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

"He'll be alright if he suppresses an entire part of his identity to appease bigots"

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

he'll be alright if he doesn't make a big fuss about being gay

And you see the problem with what you said, right?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

He was a Liverpool footballer for 10-12 years, he's already got generational wealth, the money he's on now just guarantees his grandkids are gonna be assholes

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

He's been a PL footballer for over a decade, he has generational wealth

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

There was no jeopardy involved, he already had generational wealth and still would have earned millions in England.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (13 children)

No matter what people on Reddit say, this guy’s views are important. He is a gay footballer, he isn’t just a gay fan who can justify it away because they support Liverpool or England. He has experiences on the pitch, he’s heard the vitriol that fans come out with and there stood Henderson. A man who decided to become a face of LGBTQ inclusion in football, who subsequently abandoned it all for a big ol’ bag of cash.

If he’s saying it was disappointing it must be disappointing for so many players who aren’t out yet. I’m a member of the community and it does really fucking suck to see good representation disappear like it never mattered.

Good on Jake for having the guts to talk about it, even when he’s going to get some horrible comments about his identity in return. Henderson has done damage to the progression of inclusion in football full stop, fuck, I’d argue EA managed to do more to raise awareness with including women’s players in FUT who are often queer too and they’re solely motivated by money.

Man could have had both, now nobody will touch him with a bargepole post retirement.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Right now the harmless choice to simply love someone in Saudi leads to torture and complete loss of human rights.

The UK treated homosexual people the same in the past, but the MASSIVE difference is that people forced their voice to be heard and society changed for the better. Try that in Saudi u get executed.

Fuckers who try to defend Saudi are hypocrites who will without question do a complete 180 and play victim if freedoms or security they believe in are even touched, let alone mutilated by Saudi law. They simply don't care because it doesn't effect them. Heartless bastards.

Henderson's choice is indefensible. The fact he did it for money reveals even more of his character.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

This is very problematic, isn't it? -

  1. It implies that once someone advocates for a political cause or community, they are now obligated to make substantial personal and financial sacrifices related to that cause going forward. Their past advocacy locks them into standards they may not have fully considered initially.
  2. This means public advocacy for controversial issues becomes very risky - it's hard to know where it may impose serious burdens down the line as social views change. This could have a "chilling effect", discouraging that advocacy.
  3. It sets up an expectation that other people (in this case Daniels) get to police your life choices based on their interpretation of your past advocacy and whether your actions now align. This imposes an invasive moral judgment.
  4. This approach provides little room for context, nuance, or thoughtful disagreement when an activist claims someone has contradicted past support. It becomes close to a black-and-white moral litmus test enforced through public shaming.
load more comments
view more: next ›