Explained: how sports fields become sites of protest and officials look the other way

In their respective midweek World Cup qualifiers, the Norwegian and German national soccer teams marched on the pitch. wear t-shirts with slogans highlighting a human rights issue.

For most of 2020, sports leagues around the world have allowed and encouraged clubs to ‘take the knee’ before a game to support the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. But when Norway visited Gibraltar on Wednesday and Germany hosted Iceland a day later, both teams drew attention to the alleged mistreatment of migrant workers by Qatar, host of the World Cup 2022.

Bulletin | Click for today’s Best Explanations to your inbox

The Norwegian team came out with identical tops with the message “Human rights – On and off the pitch”, while the German team had the words “Human rights” spelled out as each player wore a t-shirt with a single letter. Both teams won their respective matches 3-0.

Although such a demonstration is against FIFA standards, the sport’s governing body has claimed that no action will be taken against either team.

When did Norway and Germany make this statement?

There are reports that a discussion between top Norwegian clubs – led by Tromsø – has been going on for a few weeks over the possibility of the national team boycotting the World Cup next year.

National team players and coach Ståle Solbakken were all seen during the warm-up wearing t-shirts marked ‘Respect – On and off the pitch’, before exchanging it for the one with the words “Human Rights – On and off the pitch”. when they represented the national anthem.

“That’s kind of what we’re talking about, to emphasize part of what has been a discussion off the pitch,” Solbakken told Norwegian channel TV2. “The boys wanted to do it and I’m here as an example.”

Meanwhile, the German team lined up for the national anthem wearing t-shirts with a single letter that ultimately spelled out “Human Rights.”

“The players drew everything on their shirts,” German team coach Joachim Loew said by The Guardian. “It was supposed to be the first statement from us, the team. We stand up for human rights, wherever we are. These are our values. So it was a very good and important statement. “

Why were these statements made?

Since Qatar won the bid to host the 2022 World Cup in 2010, there have been reports of inhumane conditions for construction workers, most of whom are migrant workers, building the planned new and modernized stadiums.

A Guardian report last month found that more than 6,500 migrant workers from the Indian subcontinent had died since the oil-rich nation secured accommodation rights.

On Thursday, however, according to The Guardian, the spokesperson for Qatar’s World Cup organizer (Supreme Committee for Delivery and Legacy-SC) said the country had “always been transparent about health and safety. worker safety ”.

The spokesperson added: “Since construction began in 2014, there have been three work-related fatalities and 35 non-work-related fatalities. The SC investigated each case, learning lessons to avoid repetition in the future. The SC disclosed each incident through public statements and / or annual worker welfare progress reports.

What was FIFA’s response to the statement by Norway and Germany?

FIFA issued a statement after the protest in Norway on Thursday that “(no) disciplinary proceedings in connection with this case will be opened. FIFA believes in freedom of expression and in the power of football as a force for good. “

The position of the governing body contrasts with its disciplinary code according to which any case of “the use of a sporting event for a demonstration of a non-sporting nature” will result in sanctions.

Is this the first time that FIFA has not issued a sanction against such an act of protest?

No. When the German Bundesliga resumed after the break forced by the COVID-19 pandemic last year, Borussia Dortmund players Jadon Sancho and Achraf Hakimi displayed the message “Justice for George Floyd” under their shirts, the FIFA president , Gianni Infantino, congratulated the players and refused. sanction any punishment.

“For the avoidance of doubt, in a FIFA competition, recent player protests at Bundesliga matches deserve applause and not punishment,” he reportedly said. “We must all say no to racism and all forms of discrimination. We must all say no to violence. Any form of violence. “

According to the Evening Standard, FIFA Law 4 Section 5 states that “players are not expected to have slogans, statements or images on their equipment or any other equipment that could be considered political”.

Like FIFA, will the IOC also look elsewhere?

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has debated the implementation of its infamous Rule 50 – which prohibits any athlete from promoting any issue of any kind during the Olympic Games.

According to the IOC website: “The purpose of Rule 50 is to keep the playing field and the podium free from protest, to respect our fellow athletes and their special ‘moment’ and to allow them to focus on their performance. Examples of what would constitute a protest include the display of any political message, including signs or armbands; gestures of a political nature, such as a hand gesture or kneeling; and the refusal to follow the protocol of the ceremonies.

Since the death of George Floyd which sparked a renewed BLM movement, sporting events such as, but not limited to, football leagues across Europe, Formula 1, NBA, NFL, MLB and England tour of the West Indies last year all saw players take the knee before matches.

Many organizations, such as the United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee (USOPC) – made it clear in December that they would take no action against an athlete taking a stand at the upcoming Tokyo Olympics – and even World Athletics.

“I have been very clear that if an athlete chooses to step up to the knee on a podium, I support him”, said the president of the world of athletics, Sebastian Coe, as quoted by Eurosport.

“Athletes are part of the world and they want to reflect the world they live in. For me, this part is perfectly acceptable as long as it is done with respect – with the utmost respect – for other competitors, which I think most athletes understand. . “

Where is this discussion now?

The IOC Athletes’ Commission had conducted a survey to seek the views of Olympians and elite athletes on Rule 50. The deadline for the survey ended in January.

Other organizations have conducted their own investigations, as reported Inside the Games. The Australian Olympic Committee’s Athletes’ Commission said “the majority believed they should be able to speak out, but without affecting the performance of other athletes or the overall Olympic Games experience.”

The Panam Commission of Sports Athletes interviewed 218 athletes in 25 countries. She estimated that 189 believed that the IOC should fight discrimination and 191 said that the IOC should regularly update its rules. 153 claimed that rule 50 was totally or partially unfair and 39 called for its abolition. 98 presented amendments while 81 complied with Article 50 as it stood.