spectator.co.uk

The problem with the FA’s rainbow laces furore

Marc Guehi wearing the altered armband (Credit: Getty images)

The suits who run football in this country can always be relied upon to make a pig’s ear of things. The latest example of their capacity to cock up matters is the farce over this week’s return of the rainbow laces campaign in the Premier League. This campaign, now in its eleventh year, is an initiative backed by the charity Stonewall, in which team captains wear rainbow armbands and laces to signal support for LGBT+ inclusion and the fight against homophobia.

It would be fair to say that things have not exactly gone to plan. The England and Crystal Palace defender, Marc Guehi, chose not to play ball at the weekend, writing ‘I love Jesus’ – with a love heart drawn instead of the word ‘love’ – on his rainbow-coloured captain’s armband during his team’s match against Newcastle.

The game’s governing bodies have only themselves to blame for this mess

Cue horror and panic from those in charge of the game. Why? This is, technically speaking, a breach of Football Association rules which state: ‘For any offence the player and/or the team will be sanctioned by the competition organiser, national football association or by Fifa.’ The laws were clarified last year to state that ‘captains must wear an armband which is simple and conforms to the requirements of Law 4 relating to slogans, statements, images and advertising’.

That Guehi chose to write the religious slogan on an armband supporting LGBT+ issues could have been seen as an aggravating factor in the eyes of the FA. In the event, the governing body decided not to formally charge the Crystal Palace captain but said it would write to him and his club to remind them that religious messages are prohibited.

Guehi is a devout Christian, and his father is a church minister in south-east London. So what exactly is wrong with his declaration of his love for Jesus? Why is this message of universal love and compassion worse than a Stonewall-sanctioned message?

Things get even murkier when it comes to the actions of another player this weekend. The Ipswich Town captain Sam Morsy refused to wear a rainbow armband at due to his religious beliefs. In his case, the FA has deemed that this was not a breach of their regulations.

Morsy was the only one of the 20 club captains in the Premier League at the weekend not to wear the rainbow armband. The British-born midfielder, who plays for Egypt, is a practising Muslim. The FA is understood to deem Morsy’s decision solely a matter for the player and his club. Ipswich said in a statement they are ‘committed to being a fully inclusive club that welcomes everyone’ and supports the rainbow laces, but that they also supported Morsy’s decision.

Make of that word salad what you will. The more pertinent absurdity here is that a footballer who wears the rainbow armband but also says he loves Jesus is ticked off yet the player who refuses to wear the armband is, well, left to his own devices.

The confusion doesn’t end there. Fifa and FA rules ban ‘any political, religious or personal slogans, statements or images’ on players’ equipment, including armbands. Surely any statement on an armband, even one in favour of inclusivity, amounts to a political statement of some kind?

Bear in mind too that these are the same footballing authorities who had no problem ordering players to comply with an order not to wear similar armbands during the 2022 Qatar World Cup. So much for their principled stand on gay rights. The Qataris are, of course, not known for their support for LGBT+ causes or inclusivity. The football chiefs are also due to award the 2034 World Cup to Saudi Arabia next month – another Middle East nation that outlaws homosexuality.

The game’s governing bodies have only themselves to blame for this mess. The lack of real clarity, let alone any real principled stand, is creating ever more problems on the field of play. In 2023, several players in France refused to play in matches that formed part of a campaign against homophobia. The French players’ union backed their protest, saying it was not up to the players to convey ‘collective messages’. There have been similar protests elsewhere, with players citing religious grounds for their objections.

In truth, fans don’t give a flying football what players, clubs and governing bodies think about wider social and political issues. It’s a crying shame that those who run the game just don’t get it.

Unlock unlimited access

Subscribe to unlock 10 weeks of unlimited access for just $1

SUBSCRIBE Just $1 for 10 weeks REGISTER 2 articles a week

Already a subscriber? Log in

Read full news in source page