I am an adherent of two religions: Judaism and Leeds United Football Club. Generally, despite a narrow swath of vocal racists in the LUFC crowd and on social media, the two combine pretty well. When my Jewish friends who support Leeds United go to Elland Road, our home stadium, they refer to it as “going to church.” If that means some days they go to synagogue before lunch and then to “church” in the afternoon, so much the better—that’s two supportive communities in one day. But recently, “church” and its surrounding communities have felt uncomfortable.
The Hamas-Israel war in Gaza has stirred up all politics, and LUFC’s recent signing of Manor Solomon, a Jew who plays on Israel’s national team, has muddied soccer politics in Leeds. Historically, supporters from the National Front boo Black players and make it clear that they hate Jews. But now we also have the new racists who are happy to tell the world, on X, “Manor Solomon not welcome at LUFC, we don’t do genoicde [sic] supporters at LUFC” or, if that point is too subtle, “No kike is welcome at my club #freepalestine.”
Just to be clear, there is nothing for even a bigot to object to about the sportsman himself; he wields no influence and expresses almost no opinions. Despite having almost been caught in the Ukraine war as a player in Donetsk, the most political that Solomon has been—indeed, the only vaguely political post of an otherwise quiet social media year for the winger—was to note that the Israel vs. Switzerland match on October 10, 2023, was postponed because of “the barbaric massacre of more than 1,200 innocent Israeli civilians by Hamas.” And that, as a consequence, “Our stadium is depressingly quiet tonight.”
Given their lack of rationale, it’s difficult to see how to argue against the haters. There is no real way to engage with people who have a deep, albeit narrow, bigotry against a player on their own team. Maybe the most effective way of combatting them is through attrition. They dwindled into an even smaller minority when Solomon was awarded the man of the match (MVP) award in his first game, on August 31, in a victory for LUFC. But as amply illustrated by the three Black players for England who were racially abused on Twitter after missing their penalties in the 2021 Euro Final, avoiding racial hate shouldn’t be contingent on success.
Even the messages of support for Solomon are difficult to read for Leeds’s Jews. Solomon is both Jewish and Israeli, and many non-Jewish Leeds fans thoughtlessly combine both identities along with an imputed right-wing worldview. One supporter’s retort that these anti-Jewish bigots should “Go support fc Gaza then” hardly represents the type of caring response that the situation in Israel/Palestine merits.
Avoiding racial hate shouldn’t be contingent on success.
Leeds Jews are mostly of long-established Yorkshire families who are understandably wary of being identified as foreign nationals, while also having a deep affinity with Israel. Furthermore, far from the Israel/Hamas war being a binary situation, the majority of British Jews have strong feelings of sympathy for the plight of Palestinians, pulled into war with Israel by a brutal, repressive, Islamist autocracy.
In a famous story from the Book of Kings, King Solomon has to pick which of two women who live together is the true mother of the infant they bring to him. He selects the woman who protests when he proposes to cut the baby in half, because she clearly cares more about the baby’s welfare than about her own rights. So how do we raise our sword over this situation and reach clarity?
Well, there are enough people wielding weapons in the name of justice without soccer supporters taking up more, even as a metaphor. And, though the three Abrahamic religions have ethics enough, their religious qualms do not seem to help them avoid or solve the major wars in which they are embroiled. That’s true especially in the mess around the Holy Land, but also true for Yemen, Syria, Sudan, and Ukraine. Religious leaders all seem to get dragged into the mire of politics where there are no rules, and where combatants constantly devalue life.
So, instead of a sword, I want to take up a whistle in the judgment of Manor Solomon. Not least because, like most members of the public on billionaire-owned platforms, I have almost no power whatsoever. But that’s okay. After all, it is unlikely that Solomon would actually have cut the baby in two. The king’s wisdom story is just about making the path of justice apparent, and a whistle will work well for that.
According to the Laws of Football (not “rules,” mind you, “laws”!), the referee must take action against any player who is guilty of “using offensive, insulting or abusive language” or of “acting in a provocative, derisory or inflammatory way.” So, although it seems like a pipe dream that the stands of a soccer stadium could be governed by the referee’s whistle, those laws for the players should also be the principles that pertain to conversations about the game.
And why should it be the case that we have such low standards for the level of public discourse? Why should “offensive, insulting or abusive language” be the norm online? Just as it’s not acceptable to attack a person on the soccer field because of their national, religious, or racial identity, it’s not acceptable to do that on the real or virtual bleachers. I blow the referee’s whistle on the whole debate. A yellow card for the callously ignorant and a red card for the racists.