Harry Kane’s OneLove armband protest was always a hollow gesture but real villains here are FIFA

It was always a hollow gesture, an empty, elasticated symbol long after the opportunity for meaningful protest had passed. Even so, the FA are not the bad guys here. That would be FIFA, again.

Why always them? Their president, Gianni Infantino, bears a striking resemblance to Thunderbirds villain The Hood and, in Qatar, that similarity extends to the strings working him.

The reason the OneLove armbands have caused such controversy out here is that they imply tacit support for the gay community in a country where homosexuality is illegal. So what would not draw a sideways glance at home — a basic endorsement of tolerance — is seen as a challenge to the moral code of the hosts.

England backed down from their OneLove captain’s armband (pictured on Kane during England’s UEFA Nations League game) protest after being threatened with punishment by FIFA

FIFA stepped in to protect them. Forget Infantino feeling gay, as he announced in his weekend press conference. On Monday, he woke up and decided he had prayed, or merely chucked, that gay away.

The FA, and the other OneLove countries, were told last night that a captain wearing the armband would receive a yellow card on entering the field of play. So would any manager or member of staff in the technical area.

At which point it became what the FA termed ‘a performance issue’. They had already accepted they would absorb any FIFA fine. Perhaps, with hindsight, saying that wasn’t their smartest move. The armbands then became a game of chess.

Threatening to book the captain was FIFA’s rook F2, queen G1. Checkmate. European nations can afford to be without a small slice of their revenue. They cannot be without their captain at a World Cup. Even Virgil van Dijk — and this was Holland’s idea in the first place — said on Sunday that he would reconsider if FIFA introduced a sporting sanction.

The England skipper had planned to wear the OneLove armband during the 2022 World Cup

The England skipper had planned to wear the OneLove armband during the 2022 World Cup

However, FIFA told players they would be sanctioned if they wore the rainbow armband

However, FIFA told players they would be sanctioned if they wore the rainbow armband  

Alternatives? England could have selected a different captain for each game and spread the sanctions, but does Gareth Southgate really want to be troubled with that?

Equally, it still leaves a senior player one mistimed tackle away from a red card for 90 minutes and who wants that pressure?

And yes, to some, to fold like this looks weak. Yet that was always the problem. An armband protest was weak, too little, too late.

The time to stand and unite against the World Cup being held in a part of the world in which tolerance is not a virtue was in 2010 when it was awarded. Had the strongest nations in Europe banded together then, FIFA may have had to think again. This, by comparison, was meaningless, which is why it was dropped as casually as it was picked up.

The FA, and other federations, know they have been made to look foolish because they made a stand right up until the moment it started to genuinely affect them. ‘These are my principles,’ said Groucho Marx ‘and if you don’t like them — well, I have others.’

Harry Kane instead donned one of the FIFA-provided 'No Discrimination' armbands (above)

Harry Kane instead donned one of the FIFA-provided ‘No Discrimination’ armbands (above)

Yet, even so, they are still not the villains. For why should an armband bearing the sweetly ambiguous message OneLove be at all unpalatable or controversial? It is not armband slogans that FIFA oppose anyway. They actually have their own, which were planned to be worn from the quarter-finals onwards, but have now been brought forward.

‘FIFA,’ the armband says, ‘We will crush you like ants’. No, seriously. ‘FIFA,’ it says, ‘Probably not the most corrupt sporting organisation in the world because that’s still the IOC’. Joking. ‘FIFA,’ it says. ‘No discrimination.’ No, honestly, it does. That last one’s true.

The organisation that clamped down on a rainbow now wants to present itself as our moral guardians? Maybe on the reverse it says ‘Unless you’re gay’.

So whatever the FA might have got wrong about this, FIFA are worse and Infantino’s speech on Saturday only shines more light on the hypocrisy. The Football Supporters’ Association released their own take in the light of Monday’s news.

‘To paraphrase FIFA president Gianni Infantino, today LGBT supporters and their allies feel angry. Today we feel betrayed. Today we feel contempt for an organisation that has shown its true values by giving the yellow card to players and the red card to tolerance.

Fans were disappointed in the armband change for England's opening game against Iran

Fans were disappointed in the armband change for England’s opening game against Iran

Alex Scott decided to wear the OneLove armband while reporting on the game for BBC Sport

Alex Scott decided to wear the OneLove armband while reporting on the game for BBC Sport

‘Never again should a World Cup be handed out solely on the basis of money and infrastructure. No country which falls short on LGBT+ rights, women’s rights, workers’ rights or any other universal human right should be given the honour of hosting a World Cup. Since 2010 we have been raising questions about the suitability of Qatar.

‘Everyone could see this coming and it’s astonishing that, on the morning of England’s World Cup opener, FIFA are censoring players and the nine national FAs who wish to share a positive message.’

And that’s all it was. A positive message. It wasn’t insurrection, it wasn’t a call to arms, it wasn’t confrontational or even political. That was the FA’s point. The armband had been created to not fall foul of FIFA’s policy on political statements.

Yet it was still too much. So Infantino can feel like whoever he likes or whatever he wants.

The rest of the world knows what he really is. This is The Hood’s true face.

***
Read more at DailyMail.co.uk