Skip to main content

Where big debatable topics collide

It's not the case of club or country. It's now the case of club or religion
This year, Ramadan lies in the middle of August. This event in the Islam calendar leads to the run up to Eid, celebrated by almost a billion across the world where followers "fast", meaning not eating, during the day to remember those who are suffering around the developing world. In the Middle East, where this occasion is celebrated most is at its hottest. On average in places such as Dubai and Pakistan see temperatures soar up to between 44-47 degrees Celsius during the summer days.
Where am I getting at? Last weekend, it was announced that Iran football star, Ali Karimi has been sacked by his team, Esteel Azin for failing to fast. It's a very strict policy which every player in Iran, or even the whole of the Middle East has to abide by.
The news came to a shock to a lot of people. One of the best players in Asia, better known as "Asia's Maradona" has been kicked out of the team due to religious purposes. One way in looking at it, Iran is an "Islamic Republic" and he has to respect this. However, if he was at another country playing football, say in Europe, this debacle would never had happened.
Last year, for example, Jose Mourinho, when he was in charge of Inter Milan was heavily criticised by Ghana's football federation for substituting Sulley Muntari off after 30 minutes in a game. During the high temperatures in Italy and having not to have food or water during the day for anyone is a challenge, let alone playing football for a major footballing side who eventually won the Champions League that season. This is what Muntari had to face and being substituted may have been a wise decision made by "The Special One".
Of course I'm not criticising the way people must fast because with me being half Iranian, I respect everything my home nation does. But to do something like this is unreasonable and mean and I certainly hope that Ali Karimi's next career move will be a good one. It seems unlikely though, that it would be in Iran.

Immigration rules getting slightly out of hand
From tomorrow, it will mark 100 days since Nick Clegg had agreed with David Cameron to join a coalition government. Not supported by many, Clegg and Cameron have formed a partnership which leads to even more political debate. One of which being immigration.
During the Prime Ministerial debates prior to the election, immigration was one topic which the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats disagreed on. The Tories wanted a "immigration cap" whilst Clegg wanted "to section the immigrants where they're needed most".
Cameron seemed to have gotten his way so far as this immigration cap will be introduced soon (yet no numbers have been announced). However, one football headline comes to mind which makes me puzzled about the whole thing.
Andranik Teymourian, another Iranian international mentioned in this blog has been denied a chance to join Blackburn Rovers because he missed out on one international match in the last two years - against Saudi Arabia in a World Cup Qualifier. When he first went to the Premiership and joined Bolton Wanderers in 2006, he didn't play "the required 75% of international matches". It wasn't until an appeal which allowed Teymourian to join them.
It was easy for a non-EU citizen to come and live in the UK. We have doctors and nurses who are part of this category and are saving lives and are dedicated to live in the UK. We're living in a country full of opportunities. It's a shame that we don't take them. That's why the immigrants are coming here. So this cap is only going to reduce the amount of doctors for the NHS and even football players who make the Premier League the best competition in the world.
Andranik now has to wait for contacts in Iran and UAE so he can join a club there until January so he could meet the Home Office requirements and become a Blackburn player - if their proposed takeover lets him!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The 'cancel culture' myth

Let's cancel the term 'cancel culture' once and for all (Image: Fox News) In recent months, we have seen the UK's Supreme Court declare ' what a woman is ', the rise of the 'far right' in the United States and larger parts of Europe and the centre-left being accused of echoing words which were deemed unacceptable the day before. These stories as isolated items don't seem a big deal but, through their individual merits, have become significant societal shifts. That's largely thanks to the campaign groups who led them. For a long time, they have been playing cry wolf, sharing viral sop stories about how their 'plight' has resulted them being on the verge of 'losing everything', including relevance. With victories heading their way, and their crocodile tears turning into money eyes, it is fair to say that 'cancel culture' is officially over. Let's be honest, 'cancel culture' never existed. The myth has brainwashe...

The ultimate Bond review

Bonds from left to right: Timothy Dalton, Roger Moore, Daniel Craig, Sean Connery, Pierce Brosnan and George Lazenby (Image: Daily Express) Earlier this year, I set myself a challenge - an unserious one at that. yet it was something I took seriously. For years, I have been fascinated by the James Bond franchise but only based my interest on Daniel Craig's films, which were the only ones I had seen up to that point. April this year, I couldn't answer the important questions - what was my favourite Bond film? Who played the iconic character best? I could tell you which song I rated the highest because I knew and love each of them - I feel the 'Bond theme' is a genre of its own, they are that good. So over the last six months or so, I did it. I watched all 25 films, in order from Dr No to No Time To Die. Yes, there are two other 'unofficial' films - Never Say Never Again and the 1967 version of Casino Royale. While they included Bond as the protagonist, they aren...

A divided world cannot afford another Trump term

Donald Trump with Vladimir Putin (Image: The Atlantic) This time next month, we get to find out whether it is Kamala Harris or Donald Trump to replace Joe Biden as President. For the first time since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1968 , the chief in the White House is not seeking to fight on.  Biden didn't want to step back. Right up until his final decision, he stubbornly insisted he was the right person to take on former President Trump for a second time. However, questions were being asked about his wellbeing as the 81-year-old had been seen stumbling his words and steps , panicking key Democrat politicians and donors . Their warnings were stark and quite honestly, if he was to carry on by the party's convention, I doubt he'd have been endorsed by his peers. He, nor they, could afford any division when there is threat of another Trump administration looming. It's hard to define Biden's presidential legacy. I suppose he secured it in November 2020 when he defeated Trump w...