UK footballer continues controversial stance of refusing to acknowledge Remembrance Day

by Mick the Ram

Republic of Ireland winger James McClean, who now plays his club football for Wrexham, has again courted controversy by refusing once more to observe the now accepted traditions adopted by clubs around Remembrance weekend.

Teams across the Premier League and EFL wear black armbands and poppies, as well as standing together in the centre-circle for a minute’s silence before kick-offs, to acknowledge the fallen armed forces of wars and conflicts.

McClean however, has constantly ignored doing both since first moving to England in 2011 and the game against Mansfield Town on 9 November was no exception.  

Whilst his teammates linked arms as they stood silent along with the opposition, McClean chose to stand deliberately separate in his own personal protest.

The Derry-born player insists he will never conform due to what he refers to as the “British Army’s role in The Troubles” that included the estate where he grew up and the location of where six people were killed on what became known as “Bloody Sunday” back in 1972.

The 35-year-old has consistently received both condemnation and praise for his stance over the years.

Defining decision

Life as a professional footballer for James McClean plying his trade in England, changed forever on 10 November, 2012 when in a  fixture against Everton playing for Sunderland, he declined to wear a shirt with a red poppy embroidered on its chest.

Immediately after the game his club released a statement saying that they as a club wholeheartedly supported the Remembrance Commemorations and highlighted that it was McClean’s own personal choice not to wear a the shirt provided for him, basically distancing themselves from his actions.

Set up for abuse

The Irishman would received death threats and from that time on, he has faced relentless abuse from opposition supporters at the majority of matches.

After joining Wigan Athletic two years later, the then 25-year-old felt compelled to write an open letter to his chairman at the club, Dave Whelan to explain exactly why he would not be wearing a poppy in a forthcoming game.

Disrespecting “his own”

He stated that were the poppy used just as a symbol for “lost souls” of the two World Wars he would be prepared to wear one.

However, because it extends to other conflicts including the troubles in Northern Ireland, his personal connection to the killings in Creggan (a housing estate in Derry, Northern Ireland that hugs the border to County Donegal in the Republic of Ireland) it prevented him from having any inclination to do so.

He said he would see it as being disrespectful to “his people” but failed to see it in any way as disrespectful to the people of the town in which he was happily earning a very good living.

Contradicting values?

That is a crucial consideration which is a source of irritation to many, as there seems to be a striking contradiction in play.

For someone with such strong single-minded values, it does appear a little conflicting that he chooses to make his stance, whilst receiving a wage “his people” could only dream about.

“History lesson” in bad taste

He says he is thick-skinned and a product of his own environment which is filled with resilient, proud people and believes he is standing up for himself, but not, he feels, going out and igniting any fires by his attitude and behaviour.

When reminded of a picture he posted on social media during lockdown that showed him in a balaclava alongside two children, to whom he claimed he was giving a “history lesson”, he dismissed it as “bad judgement” and regretted posting it, but didn’t say he regretted creating it.

Instead he played it down by insisting it was just a “joke” and commented: “come on; it was just a picture!” His club at the time, Stoke City fined him two weeks wages for his “inappropriate” actions.

Could have taken an alternative

Many former team-mates and high-profile pundits have suggested to the player that he should have taken the route of no resistance and to simply wear the poppy, stay silent and get on with the job, but he was never going to do that, preferring to make his point.

Nevertheless, whilst not wearing a poppy for the reasons he stresses possibly justifies not taking the red poppy, he could easily carry the purple poppy, which is often worn to remember animals that have died in service, particularly horses, a large number of which were killed during World War One.

Alternatively, he could put on a black poppy to commemorate the contributions of black, African and Caribbean communities to the war effort.

Poppies worn with pride

Perhaps his issue was better explained when he said: “I would never force my beliefs on others and I am not naïve or stupid enough to expect the matter to be reciprocated, especially as the poppy is forced now on everyone in the UK.

He seems to feel that many only wear the poppy due to some sort of obligation, when the true fact is that everyone who wears one also contributes financially to the charity and nobody can ever be forced to do that; they purchase their poppies and wear them with pride.