Well, here’s what seems to be a case of genuine Islamophobia: penalizing someone who shows their Islamic belief in public while letting off others who do the same thing in the name of the Christian God. Addictinng Info reports that a Muslim football player, Husain Abdullah, the safety for the Kansas City Chiefs, prostrated himself before Allah after scoring a touchdown in a 31-14 win over the New England Patriots. For his religious display he was penalized, his team losing 15 yards.
In an extraordinary display of top-notch athleticism, Abdullah picked off a pass in the fourth quarter from New England Patriots’ all-star quarterback Tom Brady and maneuvered his way down the field 39-yards for a touchdown.The fans excitement reached a record high noise level of 142.2 decibels, shattering the Guinness world record of 137.6 decibels set last December in Seattle by the Seahawks. The unexpected penalty that followed spontaneously shifted the celebratory cheers into angry outbursts.
Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1 (d) of the NFL rulebook states that “players are prohibited from engaging in any celebrations or demonstrations while on the ground.”
The penalty was called immediately after Husain kneeled and bowed his head down in the end zone. It is fundamentally no different than “Tebowing” or “sign of the cross” the most common Christian celebratory religious expression prevalent on the football field. Apparently, the NFL exception that was made for Tim Tebow—kneeling in prayer—only applies for religious expressions with one leg kneeled down. If Muslim players wish to thank God by traditionally bowing down on two knees, it will cost their team 15-yards and a possible fine.
Here’s Abdullah doing his thing:
As the article notes, Tim Tebow, a Heisman Trophy winner, a Christian, and now a free-agent quarterback, used to regularly fall on one knee, put his head on his fist, and thank God after a touchdown. The gesture, which was copied by others, became so common that it was known as “Tebowing”. Here it is:
Tebow never got penalized, nor, I think, do the many other Christian players who genuflet, point to the sky, or do other goddy things when the Lord hath favored them with a few points in a game.
The only difference is that Tebow has one leg on the ground, while Abdullah has two, and is nearly prostrate.
This is ridiculous, and does smack of bigotry against Muslims. Either they enforce the rule against all players, regardless of their faith, or they don’t enforce it at all. Frankly, I don’t care if they prohibit religious displays (we see them all the time in soccer) or allow them all, but in a secularist country you can’t discriminate against any faith—or against displays of nonbelief. Will we ever have an NFL player who makes an atheist “A” with his fingers after a touchdown? That would be legal so long as he’s not on the ground.
h/t: Don
Hemant covered this and pointed out some cases where Christians have been penalized for breaking the rule in the past. I think this is a case where you’ve got an unclear rule, individual referee foibles (not necessarily religious, could just be ‘I’m feeling strict/lax today’), and so lots of room for inconsistent application.
For myself, I think if the goal is to stop excessive celebration, just put a time limit on it and let people dance/genuflect whatever way they want. How about just making it a “three second rule”: if you aren’t back in “football mode” in 3 seconds, it’s a penalty. If your celebration lasts 3 seconds or less, it’s not excessive.
I like this idea. The rule as is is just bad in it’s ambiguity and inconsistent application.
I’m not convinced that this was an example of Islamophobia. It seems more likely to me that the referee in question was ignorant of the fact that Abdullah was making a religious gesture at all. Especially since he slid on his knees into the prostration. Abdullah has said that he feels it was the slide he was penalized for.
The ambiguity of the rule doesn’t help. Does on the ground refer to any position that isn’t standing?
For what it’s worth, the NFL has come out and said that they don’t believe that Abdullah should have been penalized to begin with.
This may be correct. According to the rules, any celebration while the player is *on the ground* is subject to the penalty. Before he bowed in prayer, Abdullah slid perhaps 5-6 yards on his knees in celebration. This kind of display has been flagged before.
Sub
I suggest looking at the video of the touchdown.
What the penalty was for was his going on his knees; the knee slide is an old football taunt.
The referee didn’t recognize this as his getting in position to pray.
You see this at 1:52-1:53 of this video:
“https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6ivTXDWZZw”
Great Caesar’s Ghost, is there a special place in Hell where they got the music for that video?
There’s more chagrin to go around: the pats lost 41-14, not 31-14.
I think the rule is that you are not allowed to go to the ground to celebrate a touchdown. So it seems he was in violation of the rule.
A religious exception does not seem like a good idea to me. Just another case of “it’s against the rule/law except that religion gets a special pass”.
I didn’t see him play that many pro games, but in the ones that I saw Tim Tebow did his “Tebowing” along the sideline. If you look at the picture in the post, he’s not even wearing his helmet so it obviously wasn’t right after a score.
The penalty was for the slide, as people have said, the referee even said, “you can’t slide.” But, in another case of religious privilege, the league statement says, “However, the officiating mechanic in this situation is not to flag a player who goes to the ground as part of religious expression…”
Jerry I think the title is misleading and we certainly don’t know enough to call this islamophobia. Do we know the ref knew he was praying? That would be the first question. Until we answer that question I think your title is misleading. from a Western perspective the played looks like he’s having stomach cramps…
Sub
sub
The NFL just announced they made a mistake and have rescinded the penalty. That of course doesn’t affect the game’s outcome, but it does seem to be an admission that they were applying the penalty inequitably.After all, Abdullah did violate rule 12 section 3. By failing to enforce an obvious violation, they’re sending some kind of message.
When I have to watch Fox News shortly, I’m sure this will be discussed ad infinitum. They’ve probably been at it all day. It all sounds a bit ridiculous to me. The real problem is a stupid rule, and you’ve got to expect stupid rules to be challenged. The NFL is trying to control on-field behaviour in the most minute detail, but tolerates the most appalling things off-field until/unless the media get involved. It’s a sign of a poorly managed organisation.
So many levels:
1. If there’s going to be a religious exception to the celebration rule, of course it should apply to all religions.
2. He should have been penalized. Anyone who thinks that slide was all about getting into position to pray is incredibly gullible.
3. There should NOT be a religious exception to the celebration rule.
4. The celebration rule is idiotic in the first place.
Yes, yes, yes, and yes!
If you are tackled and a knee hits the ground, you’re down. So, for game action one knee counts as being on the ground but for celebrations like Tebowing, it apparently doesn’t. I don’t know that this is Islamophobia so much as it is a demonstration that logic isn’t the NFL’s strong suit.
There is without a doubt a christian bias to that sport and I’m certain that a player being penalized for an overtly christian display would result in a far greater number of angry letters to the league office than penalizing an islamic player for doing the same. When Fisher DeBery was the head football coach at the Air Force Academy he made his players, who are active US military personnel, engage in all manner of overt religiosity. If that’s happening at the Air Force Academy, imagine what goes on in the average Texas high school locker room at half time.
In the bible belt, the line between football and religion is razor thin. The number of adult human beings in Northern Florida who feel that it is an unassailable fact that Tim Tebow does not have a job in the NFL because christians are discriminated against could freeze a herd of wildebeest in their tracks.
I’ve seen highlights of the play and the subsequent celebration. Christian athletes go way beyond that all the time and they don’t get penalized. Granted this isn’t necessarily evidence of any kind of religious discrimination but, Antonio Brown practically acted out a skit after he caught a touchdown pass this past Sunday and he received no penalty.
There’s a case at the moment where a Georgia public high school team is touching a statue with Bible verses on it and a King Arthur style Sword stuck in it before going on the field. The AHA is involved. It’s portrayed in local media as the evil atheists against the Christians.
A King Arthur-type sword??
Players at Arkansas State University chose to put crosses on their uniforms in memoriam of two fallen team mates. The university initially ruled that the players could not display crosses on their uniforms as it is a public institution. The conservative press, staunch defenders of the bill of right don’t ya know, went double-super bananas in response and the university predictably caved and reversed their decision. This is being spun as a victory over the meddling atheists, which is why this issue is important. Because most people in the bible belt don’t understand or care what the establishment clause actually says and a culture has been allowed to grow around violating it, a public university is being applauded for violating the first amendment.
Perhaps they should have made up their own unique symbol, and should some curious soul ask whether it were a religious symbol, decline to answer. 😉
D’ya think you could wear a collander instead of a helmet?
Will we ever have an NFL player who makes an atheist “A” with his fingers after a touchdown? That would be legal so long as he’s not on the ground.
The NFL frowns on hand gestures as there have been incidents of players “throwing gang signs” at television cameras. I’m not sure if there is a specific rule that bans gestures, but making the “A” sign would probably draw a fine. But that doesn’t matter anyway. I was glad to see that Michael Sam was almost universally accepted, but don’t let that fol you. The NFL is a long, long way away from being able to accept an out and proud atheist. I all but guarantee that some of his teammates would refuse to take the field with him should a player come out as an atheist.
“I all but guarantee that some of his teammates would refuse to take the field with him should a player come out as an atheist.”
Right. After all, sportiness is next to godliness.
Yes. In some cases, right next to it.
sub
This is Christian bias but not Islamophobia. There are few Muslim players in the NFL and this is probably the first celebration of its kind in the NFL. The NFL has come out and said this won’t be punished going forward. Basically, the ref on the field did not understand what he was witnessing. He did not even know he was witnessing an Islamic expression of faith so how can he be “Islamophobic”?
Prof. Coyne is correct: this is Islamophobia. It doesn’t matter if the ref was aware that Abdullah was praying or not. In other words, it doesn’t matter if it was intentional Islamophobia or not. Regardless of any motives involved, a Muslim player was penalized for doing something for which a Christian player is celebrated. Case closed.
All of these arguments about intent are troubling to me. They imply that blatant discrimination against a religious minority is fine as long as it isn’t malicious. That’s not secularism, and that’s not religious neutrality. That’s protecting the pro-Christian status quo, and this is the last website where I expected to find that going on.
Can you give an example of racial or sexual discrimination where it doesn’t matter if the person’s race or sex is known? The definition of discrimination requires categorical prejudice as opposed to individual prejudice; i.e. discriminating to due to a group characteristic. If this discrimination is because the player is Muslim, then it seems that the referee would’ve had to have known he was penalizing the player for being Muslim.
He was penalizing him for what he saw as a rule violation (a rule which penalizes all players equally for specific actions, not traits), not a characteristic of a group the player belongs to. The referee would need to at least know about the player’s religious views or else how can he possibly discriminate based on them? I can see your point if we establish an actual discriminatory pattern; e.g. other players of differing religious beliefs lying prostrate in violation of the rule, but then not being penalized. I can also see your point if the Muslim player continues to receive penalties after the league having clarified that his behavior is acceptable going forward.
You’re talking about intentional discrimination; I’m talking about discrimination. Discrimination treats two similar things differently for no justifiable reason. Intentional discrimination intentionally treats two similar things differently with no reasonable justification. Both of these are a problem, and litigating the “intent” element is beside the point.
Well, yes, I think the key here is “justifiable reason.” The NFL seems to think there’s a justifiable reason for prohibiting ground celebrations and thus made a rule about it.
It also seems to me that if we consistently apply your definition, then there exists something called justifiable discrimination. E.g. a religion that practices human sacrifice is obviously being discriminated against since there are laws against murder. There’s no intent to discriminate against a religion requiring such a practice, nonetheless we are, but the primary intent is not to ban people from freely practicing their religion.
I’m not even sure I disagree with applying the definition of discrimination in a broad way, but I do disagree with labeling someone racist, sexist, Islamophobic, etc. If they don’t intend to discriminate against these groups and there are other primary justifications for the behavior. I doubt we’d label people Aztecophobes were the Aztecs still around trying to sacrifice their young.
Of course there’s justifiable discrimination. Height requirements on roller coasters discriminate against short people and children for reasons of safety.
Also, saying “That thing he did is an example of Islamophobia” is not the same thing as saying “That man who did that thing is an Islamophobe.” Only the second point, which is not my position, amounts to labeling anyone an Islamophobe.
I’m just praying for better games on MNF. That game was a snooze.
I watched this game and the yellow flag was wrong. As long as the Edomites can make their religious hand signals, all player must be allowed to do the same.
As others have pointed out, going to the ground in celebration is always a penalty of “excessive celebration”. As you aren’t a big sports fan, I forgive you, Jerry. 😉
In the picture of Tebow standing in the endzone, removal of your helmet while on the field is also a penalty, so I doubt very much that the Tebow picture was a TD celebration. Probably taken before or after the game.