Quebec Soccer Federation says "No" to turbans when the CSA says "Yes".

[Olympique_de_Marseille]

English:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/04/17/quebec-soccer-association-forbids-turbans.html

Français:

http://www.radio-canada.ca/sports/soccer/2013/04/17/002-turban-canada-soccer.shtml

I think this is foolish if not outright racist for the Quebec Soccer Federation to ban them.

The only excuses I could think of for banning them would be:

a) Does it put players at greater risk for injury?

(I would think not because it's simply extra padding around your head, it would make aerial contact between two players' heads less dangerous)

Does it provide and unfair advantage for controlling the ball with your head.

(Having never worn one, I honestly don't know. I wouldn't think so)

Seems a "no brainer" to me: if it doesn't interfere with the game, let people practice their religion.

If there is a serious risk of injury (like having a kirpan on you whilst playing) then it makes sense to ban it.

Thoughts?

[elmateo]

Bigoted. There are different styles of turbans that could be used; it is probably safer anyways because most Sikhs have a huge amount of long hair under their turbans. That has to go somewhere, in a turban is a pretty neat and tidy way. And it is not necessary to head the ball to play, it can make you a better player maybe, but it isn't a requirement of the game. I don't think a turban makes a header anymore dangerous; I think it would make it more difficult. If a player makes that choice then whats the matter?

It is just some weird notion of 'secularism' in public - no symbols of religion allowed... which is bizarre because all its going to do is drive Sikhs away from participating in a secular public and they will form their own unaffiliated leagues. That is not going to help anything: secularism, social inclusion, or soccer development.

[Macksam]

English:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2013/04/17/quebec-soccer-association-forbids-turbans.html

Français:

http://www.radio-canada.ca/sports/soccer/2013/04/17/002-turban-canada-soccer.shtml

I think this is foolish if not outright racist for the Quebec Soccer Federation to ban them.

The only excuses I could think of for banning them would be:

a) Does it put players at greater risk for injury?

(I would think not because it's simply extra padding around your head, it would make aerial contact between two players' heads less dangerous)

Does it provide and unfair advantage for controlling the ball with your head.

(Having never worn one, I honestly don't know. I wouldn't think so)

Seems a "no brainer" to me: if it doesn't interfere with the game, let people practice their religion.

If there is a serious risk of injury (like having a kirpan on you whilst playing) then it makes sense to ban it.

Thoughts?

I don't even think the most fundamental Sikh would have a kirpan on them while playing soccer. Even though these (and four other items) are suppose to be on your person at all times, most Sikhs don't have them glued on them.

Bigoted. There are different styles of turbans that could be used;

This. Not to derail the thread, but I know a few Sikhs who wear turbans and take them off for basketball or soccer. This isn't sacreligious or anything.

[Trillium]

The Honourable Baljit Singh Gosal PC, MP

Minister of State (Sport)

Incumbent

Assumed office

May 18, 2011

Member of the Canadian Parliament

for Bramalea—Gore—Malton

Incumbent

Assumed office

2011

Personal details

Born (1960-05-04) May 4, 1960 (age 52)

Ratainda, India

Political party Conservative

Spouse(s) Pawanjit Gosal

Profession insurance broker

Baljit Singh Gosal, (Punjabi: ਬਲਜੀਤ ਗੋਸਲ) (born May 4, 1960) is a Canadian Sikh politician, who was elected to the Canadian House of Commons in the 2011 election.[1] He represents the electoral district of Bramalea—Gore—Malton as a member of the Conservative Party, and serves as Minister of State (Sport) in the cabinet of Prime Minister Stephen Harper.[2]

Its always a confusing issue.... the Minister of Sport ( Federal ) is a Sikh, and yet he does not always wear a Turban, so it appears the wearing of a Turban is personnel choice made by some Sikh's to show their individual adherence to thier religion.

( photo with no head cover )

http://sikhchic.com/article-detail.php?id=2434&cat=8

( see photo at the Golden temple )

http://www.demotix.com/news/1584753/canadian-sports-minister-visits-golden-temple-amritsar#media-1584749

Note the photo shows a head covering but not a Turban, much like a woman would wear a head covering when entering the Vatican, or a yarmaluke is worn when a non-beliver is in a Jewish Temple.

It should be noted that the tenth Guru .... Guru Gobind Singh ordered all Sikh men to wear the Turban to break down class distinctions, the eleventh and last and Eternal Guru of the Sikhs, the Guru Granth Sahib.

The purpose of the Turban for Sikh's was to stand out amongst the people they lived amoung, and to protect and keep clean their hair which is to be allowed to grow long and not cut ( Kesh ), one of the Five K's ...

I suspect the Quebec Federation will back off on this in time, it will take some cooler heads to talk to them, but the CSA should have done a bit better job of sensitizing the folks in Quebec.

[Guest Ed]

I am a bit conflicted with this one. From a purely personal point of view, I am aligned with the French (as in France) model where church and state are very much kept apart from each other. I would agree with the ban myself as it is in line with Quebec's 'progressive' (IMHO) dismantling of the Catholic School Board among other initiatives that clearly show that no church has any influence in government or law at municipal, provincial or federal level.

[Macksam]

Its always a confusing issue.... the Minister of Sport ( Federal ) is a Sikh, and yet he does not always wear a Turban, so it appears the wearing of a Turban is personnel choice made by some Sikh's to show their individual adherence to thier religion.

He never wears one as your point out in both pictures. This isn't about whether if he wears one or not. He's just defending the ones who do.

[Olympique_de_Marseille]

I am a bit conflicted with this one. From a purely personal point of view, I am aligned with the French (as in France) model where church and state are very much kept apart from each other. I would agree with the ban myself as it is in line with Quebec's 'progressive' (IMHO) dismantling of the Catholic School Board among other initiatives that clearly show that no church has any influence in government or law at municipal, provincial or federal level.

I guess I like my 1982 Canadian Charter model: if it doesn't bother anybody or obstruct the usual running of things, let people have their religious symbols.

Maybe in this case, require them (turbans) to be neutral coulours (black or grey) or team colours.

The church should never have any influence IMO. Unfortunately it does it Ontario; we still have Catholic Public schools.

[mowe]

I am a bit conflicted with this one. From a purely personal point of view, I am aligned with the French (as in France) model where church and state are very much kept apart from each other. I would agree with the ban myself as it is in line with Quebec's 'progressive' (IMHO) dismantling of the Catholic School Board among other initiatives that clearly show that no church has any influence in government or law at municipal, provincial or federal level.

Your logic is flawed. This is nothing like the Catholic School Board influencing government. This is letting kids play soccer with turbans on.

elmateo is right, sometimes people take secularism too far and want to remove all religious symbols from the public. You run into problems when part of a person's appearance is a religious symbol.

These kids wear turbans all day as part of their religious beliefs, no problems there right? They go to school, work, etc with no issues. But if they want to play soccer they have to remove them or they get kicked out? That sounds like the state interfering needlessly. Turbans have NO safety risk in soccer. They do NOT provide an advantage. It's actually a disadvantage on headers.

This ban is rooted in an agenda that has nothing to do with the good of the game. NOTHING harmful will come from letting kids wear a turban to play soccer, the CSA knows this, that's why they've allowed it. Hopefully Quebec can catch up soon enough.

[narduch]

Quebec: Canada's hicks.

[Olympique_de_Marseille]

Quebec: Canada's hicks.

That is just spamming!

[Grizzly]

Quebec: Canada's hicks.

This is an unfortunate decision that hopefully will be reversed and has a lot to do with the whole reasonable accommodation debate in Quebec and the climate of intolerance that the present PQ government is promoting. Nevertheless, Quebec does not have a monopoly on "hickery" and there are enough hicks in Ontario and the other Canadian provinces and the world as a whole that such comments are not really called for. The decision should get the criticism it deserves but those who resort to name calling should look in the mirror. It is always easier to criticize when someone else is doing something foolish or ignorant than when it is yourself or your own region.

[tmcmurph]

How is this different from the protective headgear worn by a well known Chelsea keeper? I think one player in MLS wears one as well. They are the soft rugby helmets that absorb impact and lessen injuries. Make a turban shaped one for games? Headers will be less powerful as the headgear will absorb the impact and the energy return will be much less.

1) Is there any metal or plastic clasps that hold it in place? If yes then you can't wear it. If no then go to point 2.

2) If it starts to unravel the player must leave the field immediately and take care of it.

Done.

[Blackdude]

How is this different from the protective headgear worn by a well known Chelsea keeper? I think one player in MLS wears one as well. They are the soft rugby helmets that absorb impact and lessen injuries. Make a turban shaped one for games? Headers will be less powerful as the headgear will absorb the impact and the energy return will be much less.

Laws of the Game 4

The basic compulsory equipment must not have any political, religious or personal statements.

[dmont]

Laws of the Game 4

The basic compulsory equipment must not have any political, religious or personal statements.

Ok

So as long as a turban isn't compulsory (as in "wear a turban if you feel like it that day") then it doesn't violate this rule?

[Trillium]

Laws of the Game 4

The basic compulsory equipment must not have any political, religious or personal statements.

Decisions of the International F.A. Board

Decision 1

Players must not reveal undergarments showing slogans or advertising. The

basic compulsory equipment must not have any political, religious or personal

statements.

A player removing his jersey or shirt to reveal slogans or advertising will be

sanctioned by the competition organiser. The team of a player whose basic

compulsory equipment has political, religious or personal l slogans or statements

will be sanctioned by the competition organiser or by FIFA.

So the Quebec position is the Turban as worn by Sikhs is a religious statement and the player must be sanctioned by the competition organiser or FIFA will step in a do the sanctioning. ( which they would never do for a amateur player in youth soccer or indeed in senior soccer ).

[Grizzly]

Decisions of the International F.A. Board

Decision 1

Players must not reveal undergarments showing slogans or advertising. The

basic compulsory equipment must not have any political, religious or personal

statements.

A player removing his jersey or shirt to reveal slogans or advertising will be

sanctioned by the competition organiser. The team of a player whose basic

compulsory equipment has political, religious or personal l slogans or statements

will be sanctioned by the competition organiser or by FIFA.

So the Quebec position is the Turban as worn by Sikhs is a religious statement and the player must be sanctioned by the competition organiser or FIFA will step in a do the sanctioning. ( which they would never do for a amateur player in youth soccer or indeed in senior soccer ).

The question here is what is the definition of FIFA (do they provide one in the document) of basic compulsory equipment. I would interpret it as required soccer equipment, ie. a team or league could not force players to wear turbans, something I would agree with. Otherwise I think it would be classed as an optional form of dress which should be legal. If it were not legal like this, then necklaces with crosses should be banned also.

[Blackdude]

The question here is what is the definition of FIFA (do they provide one in the document) of basic compulsory equipment. I would interpret it as required soccer equipment, ie. a team or league could not force players to wear turbans, something I would agree with. Otherwise I think it would be classed as an optional form of dress which should be legal. If it were not legal like this, then necklaces with crosses should be banned also.

Yes, it is called Law 4. It's where everything about the player's equpiment is.

"The basic compulsory equipment of a player comprises the following separate items:

a jersey or shirt with sleeves - if undergarments are worn, the colour of the sleeve must be the same main colour as the sleeve of the jersey or shirt

shorts - if undershorts or tights are worn, they must be of the same main colour as the shorts

stockings- if tape or similar material is applied externally it must be the same colour as that part of the stocking it is applied to

shinguards

footwear"

There is one thing called interpretation of Law that mentions rules on other equpiment.

"A player may use equipment other than the basic equipment provided that its

sole purpose is to protect him physically and it poses no danger to him or any

other player.

All items of clothing or equipment other than the basic equipment must be

inspected by the referee and determined not to be dangerous.

Modern protective equipment such as headgear, facemasks and knee and

arm protectors made of soft, lightweight padded material are not considered

dangerous and are therefore permitted.

In view of the new technology that has made sports spectacles much safer,

both for the wearer and for other players referees should show tolerance

when authorising their use, particularly for younger players.

If an item of clothing or equipment that has been inspected at the start of a

match and determined not to be dangerous becomes dangerous or is used in a

dangerous manner during the match, its use must no longer be allowed."

[sulfur]

And of course, IFAB rulings override that and will show up in the interpretations in the following year typically.

Right now, FIFA has stated that they're allowed while they do research and prepare to make a final decision on the matter. Which is the position that the CSA sent out to all provinces two weeks ago, and the provinces communicated to all referees about 10 days ago.

Except in Quebec.

[ted]

Ok

So as long as a turban isn't compulsory (as in "wear a turban if you feel like it that day") then it doesn't violate this rule?

Clearly someone <cough>Blackdude</cough> does not understand the meaning of the word "compulsory".

[Blackdude]

Clearly someone <cough>Blackdude</cough> does not understand the meaning of the word "compulsory".

I knew I should have read the Laws in French. The only thing that would be against it is for "Safety reasons" I don't think it's unsafe to play with a turban, but I've never done it so I can't really tell. If it's considered safe, it shouldn't cause a problem.

[sulfur]

As an aside, this was sent out to all OSA referees this morning:

The CSA, FIFA or the OSA HAS NOT approved the wearing of a Kirpan during a soccer game.

The Kirpan is a ceremonial sword or dagger carried by baptized Sikhs.

Like it really needed to be said...

Although, I expect Quebec to announce that, while turbans are not allowed, Kirpans are.

[Bully]

Who ever is calling this bigoted, you have to reevaluate your use of words. Maybe "controversial" or "debatable". When I play I am not allowed to wear a hat, so, its not racist. Its looking at it from a equipment perspective.

[CDNFootballer]

Who ever is calling this bigoted, you have to reevaluate your use of words. Maybe "controversial" or "debatable". When I play I am not allowed to wear a hat, so, its not racist. Its looking at it from a equipment perspective.

Yup, not bigoted or racist, they would ban it as well if it were Muslim, Christian, or Hindu etc headress if there were such a thing. Labelling people with those words in this case is a simplistic knee jerk reaction and the person doesn't understand the whole reason why the decision was made.

[Cheeta]

Who ever is calling this bigoted, you have to reevaluate your use of words. Maybe "controversial" or "debatable". When I play I am not allowed to wear a hat, so, its not racist. Its looking at it from a equipment perspective.

Bigoted might be harsh. Insensitive might be lenient. Either way I see where you're going with the hat example but it's maybe not the best example in trying to make the point. Keepers wear hats all the time. As do outfield players sporting enthusiastic locks. Maybe not hats but ski caps, hair bands, blah, blah, blah.

None invasive, soft fabric, harmless for all intents and purposes articles of clothing which allow the player in question to play this game without being visually handicapped by the sun or long hair.

The only way those items are any different than a turban is that a turban is a piece of religious dress. And there's no way around it, it's a piece of religious dress.

I will fiercely defend the (intended) secular nature of football. But, if there was ever an article of religious dress where some accommodation could be found its got to be a turban. There's room to make the wearing of a turban in a footie match possible. Maybe not for the extremes on both sides of the issue but for the other 90% of us I'm sure something acceptable can easily be reasoned out.

ZenCheeta

[sulfur]

FYI, here's the CSA clarification on what a headscarf is and what a turban is:

http://www.ontariosoccer.net/Portals/11/referee/Headscarves%20and%20Turbans%20%5BCompatibility%20Mode%5D.pdf