Quinton de Kock opts out of match against the West Indies after refusing to take knee

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Racism movement in middle east... the capital of racism.. let that sink in

I'm enjoying the tournament thanks. It's sinking in fine.

 

[mastimasti]

Do you know what the term "step mother" means?

QDK is actually regarded as a "coloured" player under CSA regulations. It goes to show just ho privileged white people in the country are that they may even be part of the coloured quota.

But a lot of this is besides the point. Go back and read the multiple points I made and then answer those.

 

[mastimasti]

Poor Quinton. Forced into taking the knee.

Why cant he have his right to decide?

Regulations at work constantly force employees to do what they may not want to do. There was a team decision and a majority vote for the knee. In a democratic society, the minority must follow the majority decision, whether they like it or not.

As Temba stated , QDK is free to make his choice but also to deal with its consequences.

 

[Snowflake]

Sanity prevails

 

[Sir-fraz]

Regulations at work constantly force employees to do what they may not want to do. There was a team decision and a majority vote for the knee. In a democratic society, the minority must follow the majority decision, whether they like it or not.

As Temba stated , QDK is free to make his choice but also to deal with its consequences.

Thats why democratic societies are flawed.. majority doesnt mean they are right..

We could apply that to the Nazis.. im sure there are a lot of people who wouldve fallen in line because of "majority" and "fitting" in...

They had a choice and they made theirs... many of them said we were just following orders.. or they were following what everyone else was doing...

Corporate backed protests, its hilarious how people fall for ad propoganda so easily.

 

[LaLoco]

Thats why democratic societies are flawed.. majority doesnt mean they are right..

We could apply that to the Nazis.. im sure there are a lot of people who wouldve fallen in line because of "majority" and "fitting" in...

They had a choice and they made theirs... many of them said we were just following orders.. or they were following what everyone else was doing...

Corporate backed protests, its hilarious how people fall for ad propoganda so easily.

This is getting hilarious.

Using Nazi analogy to express a point while displaying a lack of understanding of systemic racism.

 

[Sycamore]

What a farce, quinton should've just done in the first place, and SA cricket should've just let the players choose like in the 1st game.

Now even if quinton takes a knee how ridiculous is it going to look.

 

[Colorblind Genius]

What a farce, quinton should've just done in the first place, and SA cricket should've just let the players choose like in the 1st game.

Now even if quinton takes a knee how ridiculous is it going to look.

IMO, this drama, however cool it may look to some, has minimal to no effect on anyone or anything.
It’s just turning into a ritual and folks are getting immune to it.

I’d be surprised if it truly changed anything.

 

[Ahmad-GERMANFC]

So why don't these people ever openly celebrate Pakistani defeats against India then? In India, these kind of celebrations have been happening since decades. You're kidding if you think Pakistani hindus can openly celebrate an Indian victory against Pakistan. Most Hindu women in Pakistan don't even wear the bindhi in public like most hindu women do, and you're saying nobody would care if Pakistani hindus celebrated Pakistani defeats against India lol.

almost all Pakistani Hindus who follow cricket support Pakistan

But most Pakistani Hindus are Sindhi which as a people whether Muslim or Hindu don’t follow cricket much at all.

Pakistani Hindus have no attachement to india no matter how much Indians would like to think that’s the case as a *** for tat.

 

[HitWicket]

Regulations at work constantly force employees to do what they may not want to do. There was a team decision and a majority vote for the knee. In a democratic society, the minority must follow the majority decision, whether they like it or not.

I get the impression that part of the issue is that this wasn't a team decision? It was discussed by the team before the tournament and they agreed that they would all be allowed to make their own gesture (with a majority of the team opting not to kneel in the first game). They were then instructed on the day of their 2nd match that the board had instructed them they had to kneel.

 

[street cricketer]

almost all Pakistani Hindus who follow cricket support Pakistan

But most Pakistani Hindus are Sindhi which as a people whether Muslim or Hindu don’t follow cricket much at all.

Pakistani Hindus have no attachement to india no matter how much Indians would like to think that’s the case as a *** for tat.

Nobody thinks all Pakistani hindus support or have a soft spot for India. It's the same case with Indian muslims too, the majority of them don't support Pakistan, regardless of what the BJP fans might have you believe.

But you're delusional if you think there won't be a small section in the minority who would have a soft spot for the neighbour due to cultural reasons. Good for you if you believe that.

 

[IcedCoffee]

I'd suggest you can be racist against anyone anywhere. There's no legal or dictionary definition (to the best of my knowledge) that factors in whether there's any kind of power/numbers imbalance for racism. I'm not exactly sure where that suggestion originated from?

https://www.vox.com/identities/2020/6/10/21286656/merriam-webster-racism-definition

 

[HitWicket]

https://www.vox.com/identities/2020/6/10/21286656/merriam-webster-racism-definition

Thanks for this. From the looks of it though all they've done is add in the fact that racism can be systemic oppression to the advantage of others. Their original definition that doesn't have any additional criteria is still there.

 

[Sir-fraz]

Thanks for this. From the looks of it though all they've done is add in the fact that racism can be systemic oppression to the advantage of others. Their original definition that doesn't have any additional criteria is still there.

And their motive is ro reverse thay on to the whites.. which would be racist... they are creating racial sergregration which will lead to more confict..

 

[IcedCoffee]

Thanks for this. From the looks of it though all they've done is add in the fact that racism can be systemic oppression to the advantage of others. Their original definition that doesn't have any additional criteria is still there.

And that that is a more realistic definition of the term. In the case of SA and any other country where there is systemic advantages for a race, the revised definition certainly applies.

 

[HitWicket]

And that that is a more realistic definition of the term. In the case of SA and any other country where there is systemic advantages for a race, the revised definition certainly applies.

Which I'd agree is systemic racism, that doesn't mean people still cannot be racist against the race that have that systemic advantage though. We can't just redefine the word to excuse people from being guilty of it.

 

[IcedCoffee]

Which I'd agree is systemic racism, that doesn't mean people still cannot be racist against the race that have that systemic advantage though. We can't just redefine the word to excuse people from being guilty of it.

Disagreed. The article itself talked about redefining the aging definition to what is relevant today. Additionally, it says "Racism and systemic oppression go hand in hand". So while the instance of prejudice against white people isn't right, it wouldn't be classified as racism. Rather, it would be racialized prejudice. But I guess we're arguing semantics at that point. I suppose you could use the definition in a colloquial sense of the word, but power structure is so intrinsic to the word that the implication of the term only really applies when it's experienced in that setting.

 

[HitWicket]

Disagreed. The article itself talked about redefining the aging definition to what is relevant today. Additionally, it says "Racism and systemic oppression go hand in hand". So while the instance of prejudice against white people isn't right, it wouldn't be classified as racism. Rather, it would be racialized prejudice. But I guess we're arguing semantics at that point. I suppose you could use the definition in a colloquial sense of the word, but power structure is so intrinsic to the word that the implication of the term only really applies when it's experienced in that setting.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. In my view the power structure is intrinsic to system racism but not racism itself. Like you say though, it's semantics.

 

[MenInG]

QdK is back in the SA XI today vs SL

 

[MenInG]

QdK is back in the SA XI today vs SL

Had to take the knee in the end - so much for his principles - why create the drama in the first place?

<div style="width: 100%; height: 0px; position: relative; padding-bottom: 56.250%;"><iframe src="https://streamable.com/e/a7587a" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="100%" allowfullscreen style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute;"></iframe></div>

 

[Rana]

What did I tell you, he will be retiring and not looking back very soon

If you couldn’t see the writing on the wall

 

[Rana]

You did not tell us that he will retire because of CSA politics. You told us that he will retire because he is not interested in cricket anymore.

That is not the case. His best years are still ahead of him, but if CSA is not going to give respect to one of their greatest players of the last decade, he has no reason to play for them.

So what is it? Politics or disinterest?