Just use the bubbly non alcoholic stuff they give at the Bahrain and UAE GP's
That stuff is carbonated rose water. When I saw the thread I thought they might have changed it to Prosecco! It seems to have taken over from Champagne in this country.
the cynic in me thinks this is about not upsetting the sponsors rather than the players.
wouldn't be surprised if it was brought up when it was renewed and rather than announcing it as soon as it was signed they agreed to do it by a certain time.
Edit...assume you mean in the article and comments on mail website rather than on this thread...the daily mail exists on punting and generating faux outrage!
Religious dogma has no place in dictating what prizes/gifts should be offered in a secular country.
Just decline the offer of the gift when offered and say that your absolutely misplaced faith in the existence of a god means you can't accept it. At the same time explain that you in no way think your beliefs should shape what gifts are given until such a time that the burden of proof has been fulfilled and answered in full.
The inclusivity argument is an interesting one seeing as it'd be the least inclusive wanting the inclusivity. The same folks who say that their book cannot change but want everything else to change on the grounds of inclusivity.
I'd up the size of the champagne bottle awarded to a Melchizedek.
We're a secular country, ridiculous to pander to archaic religious beliefs.
Is it pandering or is it inclusivity? I'd lean toward the latter.
It's tradition, get over it. Just read a story that a Scottish maritime museum is changing all its descriptive signage on its exhibits as some moronic visitor vandalised them by scratching out the word 'she' hwne a ship was mentioned. For hundreds of years ships have been described as female. "God bless all who sail in her" etc. Why not install CCTV (in which case the perpetrator could have been identified and prosecuted)? Or even cover the signage with plastic for a fraction of the price? This country is fast becoming a laughing stock.
Religious dogma has no place in dictating what prizes/gifts should be offered in a secular country.
Just decline the offer of the gift when offered and say that your absolutely misplaced faith in the existence of a god means you can't accept it. At the same time explain that you in no way think your beliefs should shape what gifts are given until such a time that the burden of proof has been fulfilled and answered in full.
The inclusivity argument is an interesting one seeing as it'd be the least inclusive wanting the inclusivity. The same folks who say that their book cannot change but want everything else to change on the grounds of inclusivity.
I'd up the size of the champagne bottle awarded to a Melchizedek.
We're a secular country, ridiculous to pander to archaic religious beliefs.
Is it pandering or is it inclusivity? I'd lean toward the latter.
'Inclusivity' a word that raises my hackles. For me all are welcome into the great footballing family, but like any 'club' if you don't like the harmless traditions enjoyed by millions - feel free to leave.
Religious dogma has no place in dictating what prizes/gifts should be offered in a secular country.
Just decline the offer of the gift when offered and say that your absolutely misplaced faith in the existence of a god means you can't accept it. At the same time explain that you in no way think your beliefs should shape what gifts are given until such a time that the burden of proof has been fulfilled and answered in full.
The inclusivity argument is an interesting one seeing as it'd be the least inclusive wanting the inclusivity. The same folks who say that their book cannot change but want everything else to change on the grounds of inclusivity.
I'd up the size of the champagne bottle awarded to a Melchizedek.
Are you sure you’re a Millwall fan ?
I have regular check ups but am assured that my c-bomb-ty levels are still in that range
We're a secular country, ridiculous to pander to archaic religious beliefs.
Is it pandering or is it inclusivity? I'd lean toward the latter.
'Inclusivity' a word that raises my hackles. For me all are welcome into the great footballing family, but like any 'club' if you don't like the harmless traditions enjoyed by millions - feel free to leave.
Totally agree. Inclusivity means a race to a low common denominator which becomes meaningless and excludes individual differences rather than be inclusive.
To be truly inclusive then a vast selection of beverages should be available to enable freedom of choice - champagne, a nice single malt, milk (cows and vegan alternatives), fruit juice, Lilt, Umbongo, a range of cocktails, and, if really necessary, Adam's Ale.
I'll get me coat (other inclement weather apparel is available).
We're a secular country, ridiculous to pander to archaic religious beliefs.
Is it pandering or is it inclusivity? I'd lean toward the latter.
This victim mentality pisses me off.
If you don't want the champagne, don't take the champagne. Or in advance make the organisers aware of your beliefs so they can give you a non-alcoholic version.
Champagne has been and always will be a celebratory beverage even if it tastes vile.
"The FA will instead put a case of an alcohol-free champagne substitute in the winning dressing room so players can replicate those spraying celebrations.
The FA's decision is not believed to have been the result of complaints from teams or players in the past but prompted within the organisation.
Sportsmail understands the FA had considered implementing the change sooner but were fully aware of being branded 'party-poopers'."
"The FA will instead put a case of an alcohol-free champagne substitute in the winning dressing room so players can replicate those spraying celebrations.
The FA's decision is not believed to have been the result of complaints from teams or players in the past but prompted within the organisation.
Sportsmail understands the FA had considered implementing the change sooner but were fully aware of being branded 'party-poopers'."
Perfect. Hopefully the clubs will supply a boozy version for their players that would prefer that.
It's not like anyone will drop the cup off the bus...
Comments
The first for those who see it as being against their religious beliefs
The second option for those who dont have issue with it and get a choice if they want Champagne or not
understandable of course.
And people entertain this crap ffs.
wouldn't be surprised if it was brought up when it was renewed and rather than announcing it as soon as it was signed they agreed to do it by a certain time.
I can think of a couple on CL in particular - unless it was coconut or almond milk!
#nutshavefeelingstoo
Edit...assume you mean in the article and comments on mail website rather than on this thread...the daily mail exists on punting and generating faux outrage!
Just decline the offer of the gift when offered and say that your absolutely misplaced faith in the existence of a god means you can't accept it. At the same time explain that you in no way think your beliefs should shape what gifts are given until such a time that the burden of proof has been fulfilled and answered in full.
The inclusivity argument is an interesting one seeing as it'd be the least inclusive wanting the inclusivity. The same folks who say that their book cannot change but want everything else to change on the grounds of inclusivity.
I'd up the size of the champagne bottle awarded to a Melchizedek.
It's tradition, get over it. Just read a story that a Scottish maritime museum is changing all its descriptive signage on its exhibits as some moronic visitor vandalised them by scratching out the word 'she' hwne a ship was mentioned. For hundreds of years ships have been described as female. "God bless all who sail in her" etc. Why not install CCTV (in which case the perpetrator could have been identified and prosecuted)? Or even cover the signage with plastic for a fraction of the price? This country is fast becoming a laughing stock.
'Inclusivity' a word that raises my hackles. For me all are welcome into the great footballing family, but like any 'club' if you don't like the harmless traditions enjoyed by millions - feel free to leave.
Totally agree. Inclusivity means a race to a low common denominator which becomes meaningless and excludes individual differences rather than be inclusive.
To be truly inclusive then a vast selection of beverages should be available to enable freedom of choice - champagne, a nice single malt, milk (cows and vegan alternatives), fruit juice, Lilt, Umbongo, a range of cocktails, and, if really necessary, Adam's Ale.
I'll get me coat (other inclement weather apparel is available).
If you don't want the champagne, don't take the champagne. Or in advance make the organisers aware of your beliefs so they can give you a non-alcoholic version.
Champagne has been and always will be a celebratory beverage even if it tastes vile.
"The FA will instead put a case of an alcohol-free champagne substitute in the winning dressing room so players can replicate those spraying celebrations.
The FA's decision is not believed to have been the result of complaints from teams or players in the past but prompted within the organisation.
Sportsmail understands the FA had considered implementing the change sooner but were fully aware of being branded 'party-poopers'."
It's not like anyone will drop the cup off the bus...