Jake Daniels, the UK's only openly gay active male professional footballer, speaks about his mental health, Jordan Henderson and the 18 months since coming out.
The comparison doesn’t hold. I’ve already explained why. “Worse” doesn’t come into it. It’s not relevant to why the comparison is awful.
“Person says A is a terrible thing and then does A.”
“Person says nothing public about B and then does B.”
I shouldn’t have to break it down that basic for you but apparently, you don’t get it unless I do.
“Are Liverpool fans not singing about Steven Gerrard any more?” was the qoute. The inference being that gerrard did bad things and is still a hero so why isn’t Henderson? For the reason I just explained.
But Henderson hasn’t done ‘A’. He’s just sold out to people who do ‘A’.
Whereas Gerrard has done ‘B’. Which is bad regardless of whether or not he’s publicly denounced it previously. Because organised crime and physically attacking people is bad by default.
That’s the comparison. Gerrard’s reputation is intact because barely anyone gives a shit about the moral dimension of his character. By this same measure, Henderson’s will be fine also.
Your logic is astoundingly moronic. It’s like saying Adam Johnson never spoke out against pumping kids so doesn’t belong in the same conversation as Henderson.
But Henderson hasn’t done ‘A’. He’s just sold out to people who do ‘A’.
Thats a semantic argument that I don’t think too many people will swallow. You might want to google what tacit agreement means. “I’m not a bigot! I simply espoused equality and then…went to work for bigots. I also spout their PR and say what they tell me to say…but its totally different!”
If you buy that, I might interest you in some magic beans.
Your logic is astoundingly moronic.
My logic is astoundingly logical. You, however, have skipped too many stops on the logic train.
Klopp would have been happy for him to stay, fans too - if he accepted the much reduced role. Last season made it clear he was done as a first team player for us.
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.
The only legacy he will now leave is one of hypocrisy.
Give it 5 years mate and he’s a Liverpool legend still and everyone has forgotten this,
I mean if you spoke to about 90% of Liverpool fans IRL I don’t think they give a shit either
but people on the internet told me what to think.
Reddit isn’t reflective of real life
He didn’t throw it all away.
He’s already a Liverpool legend regardless. He captained the team to the first league title in 30 years and a CL title as well.
He’s getting playing time and the bag in Saudi Arabia. Can’t blame him.
Are Liverpool fans not singing about Steven Gerrard any more?
Did Steven Gerrard make a big show of supporting LGBT and then fuck off to Saudia Arabia for money?
No?
Okay, then your comparison is pointless.
Gerrard only physically assaulted someone and sucks up to organised crime.
But did he come out against violence and organised crime BEFORE he did those things?
I never claimed he wasn’t a dick. I claimed comparisons to Henderson were erroneous.
The comparison holds, Gerrard’s reputation is fine despite his ties to organised crime and his own historic offence(s).
Henderson’s hypocrisy vis-a-vis Saudi Arabia does not outweigh that in most people’s estimation.
And if you think insincerely milking a bit of positive PR is worse than assaulting someone, then you need to get out more.
The comparison doesn’t hold. I’ve already explained why. “Worse” doesn’t come into it. It’s not relevant to why the comparison is awful.
“Person says A is a terrible thing and then does A.”
“Person says nothing public about B and then does B.”
I shouldn’t have to break it down that basic for you but apparently, you don’t get it unless I do.
“Are Liverpool fans not singing about Steven Gerrard any more?” was the qoute. The inference being that gerrard did bad things and is still a hero so why isn’t Henderson? For the reason I just explained.
It’s a terrible, terrible comparison.
But Henderson hasn’t done ‘A’. He’s just sold out to people who do ‘A’.
Whereas Gerrard has done ‘B’. Which is bad regardless of whether or not he’s publicly denounced it previously. Because organised crime and physically attacking people is bad by default.
That’s the comparison. Gerrard’s reputation is intact because barely anyone gives a shit about the moral dimension of his character. By this same measure, Henderson’s will be fine also.
Your logic is astoundingly moronic. It’s like saying Adam Johnson never spoke out against pumping kids so doesn’t belong in the same conversation as Henderson.
Thats a semantic argument that I don’t think too many people will swallow. You might want to google what tacit agreement means. “I’m not a bigot! I simply espoused equality and then…went to work for bigots. I also spout their PR and say what they tell me to say…but its totally different!”
If you buy that, I might interest you in some magic beans.
My logic is astoundingly logical. You, however, have skipped too many stops on the logic train.
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.
Club upper management, almost certainly
Klopp would have been happy for him to stay, fans too - if he accepted the much reduced role. Last season made it clear he was done as a first team player for us.
Unfortunately Southgate didn’t get the memo.