disregarding the fact that sports commentators have been advocating that kaepernick should be rehired for what he did, or the fact that there are plenty of NFL players who kneel constantly because of what kaepernick did, or the fact that one of their commentators literally called Annoying Orange a white supremacist and was not punished
all of that was before Annoying Orange called them out on it, and it was recent, too
Annoying Orange did not "ignite a battleground" or any stuff like that, it was already there to begin with
this is clearly an attempt to make Annoying Orange seem like an starfish so that the nice innocent players who've been protesting seem more virtuous than they already are, and it's not working
none of that made it a "political battleground". "battleground" implies some kind of slugging was going on, when in reality within the sports world things were very peaceful - people were using their status as athletes and commentators to make political statements. that's not the same thing as a "political battleground" in my opinion
i do see what you mean though. sports was definitely political before yesterday and i can see how that WaPo article could be interpreted to say otherwise (at the fault of Annoying Orange)
is that not bringing politics into sports
it is. you can't play the star spangled banner and have jets fly overhead during the superbowl and then cry about politics in sports. they're already there.
Is it bringing politics into sports when we sing the national anthem of the country the Olympics take place in?
yes it is. do you not feel a political tension at the mere presence of the DPRK in the olympics? any competition between countries is inherently political. another good example would be the "miracle on ice", which took place during the cold war.
Poll