In some ways, the Premier League is fortunate there is always another game to create the next controversy. It is such a content machine that there is very little space for any individual story to go on for that long. So it was on Wednesday, in how the very nature of Manchester United’s defeat to Arsenal meant that the post-game discussion centred on the actual match rather than the decision of the squad not to wear rainbow jackets due to Noussair Mazraoui’s refusal.
Not all themes are the same, though, and it is right that this story is returned to for Ruben Amorim’s Friday press conference.
The entire story around the Rainbow Laces campaign is one of those that poses questions of what football actually stands for, and reflects how it has a genuine social value that goes beyond the mere playing of games or making profits for businesses. The last few days have seen a lot of people within the sport say that this is the start of “a backlash” against “political campaigns”.
That in itself is a deeply flawed framing. It also means it is never more important to remind people what this is actually about. For one, sexuality is not “political”. That inherently ensures this campaign isn’t political, but it goes beyond that.
The sole point of the Rainbow Laces campaign is to make people feel comfortable coming to football - to literally signal that it is a welcoming environment. That’s it. There really is no more to it.
It’s an incredibly small and human gesture, that barely takes up any space in any given season. And that in a sport - at least in the men’s game - that is someway behind the rest of society on LGBTQ+ representation.
Really, every club should be constantly saying to their community that everyone is welcome - as many do. That is who they're supposed to represent, which makes the role of the captain - and the wearing of the rainbow armband - more important in that regard. These are the traditional parameters of the status. It is not just leading on the pitch but representing what the club is about.
There is also a genuine real-world power in this, that is never more important to point out. Football is filled with countless stories of members of the LGBTQ+ community feeling empowered or just welcomed by one of their heroes wearing the colours. That is what the sport is really about, that individual impact that illustrates its community value. It is sport as a force for good.
Many in football are now citing other values in a more multicultural sport of multiple viewpoints, but there is a liberal view on this that fits with the liberal economics the Premier League has adopted.
No one is forcing anyone to come to a secular democracy like Britain and play in a competition that guarantees such personal wealth. If you want to benefit from the Premier League's economy, it isn’t unreasonable to ask people to briefly go along with the Premier League’s values.
One key question that rises from that, of course, is just how strong those values actually are.
Some lines that are being repeated a lot in the Premier League right now are about how so many campaigns are being imposed upon players, where there isn’t that much information on what they’re about. Nobody could say that about the Rainbow Laces campaign. It’s been going on for years and, as illustrated above, the explanation doesn’t require much elaboration. It can be summed up in a sentence.
The one area where it’s possible to feel more sympathy for players is when they don’t have an issue with the armband but are acutely conscious of the backlash they will personally get from their backgrounds or home countries. That does bring a different dimension. You only have to look at some social media responses, and acres of abuse.
Again, however, it’s difficult not to return to a core point. The issue has been politicised and brought into a wider culture war in a way that was never intended. It is solely about making people feel welcome, in a way every club should strive to do. Meaning has been imposed upon it that was never there. The response to this shouldn't be to diminish or dilute the actual message.
That of course brings us to a crux, that may evolve out of this. If some in football do believe there will be a pushback against such campaigns, the question is how much the game actually believes in these values. Did they just get involved initially because of the PR benefits, that they are willing to jettison now the wind is blowing another direction due to wider political changes?
That’s why this may now become a test. It’s a test of how much the game stands by such values.
And, from that, there is one thing worth remembering in all this. It is remarkable any of this is being said, when we are talking about the idea of making people feel welcome.
