متى تنتهي ثقافة يا تكون معي رياضياً أو أنت ضدي ؟
من الطبيعي أن تختلف الآراء وأن تتصادم وجهات النظر، فذلك جزء أصيل من جمال التنافس الرياضي وروحه.
لكن ما لم يعد طبيعياً بل بات ظاهرة مقلقة هو التصعيد الخطير لثقافة إما أن توافقني وتصفّق لي أو أنت عدوي وتستحق الإقصاء والتخوين !!
ما أثاره الإعلامي محمد نجيب من انتقادات مؤخراً تصدّر الترند الرياضي وتحول صوته من رأي مخضرم إلى خصم لدود في أعين من لا يقبلون بالنقد إلا إذا وافق هواهم.
البعض رأى في حديثه طرحاً جريئاً يستند إلى ملاحظات فنية وتنظيمية.. فيما اعتبره آخرون تلميحاً مسيئاً يتجاوز حدود النقد ليصل إلى الطعن في نزاهة المنافسات.
بين النقد والإساءة.. أين نقف؟
هنا يجب أن نقف بوضوح دون تعصب فإن كان ما قاله محمد نجيب يدخل في إطار النقد المهني فهو حقٌ مشروع ومكفول لكل إعلامي.. أما إن كان يقصد الإساءة أو التشكيك في الذمم الوطنية أو المؤسسات الرسمية فذلك تجاوز يجب أن يُواجَه بالمنطق والقانون.
ولكن المخجل فعلاً ما صدر عن بعض الإعلاميين والجماهير الهلالية الذين تعاملوا مع الموقف بمنطق الإقصاء وانهالوا بالشتائم والتخوين والتهديد لا على من صرّح فحسب بل على كل من وافقه أو لم يخالفه علناً !!
الناقد ليس عدواً.. والمشجع الواعي لا يتخندق
التعصب الرياضي لا يجب أن يُترجم إلى عداوات شخصية ولا إلى تصنيفات تعسفية تسلب الآخرين حقهم في التعبير، فالناقد الذي يوجّه ملاحظاته لإدارتك أو لاعبيك ليس بالضرورة حاقداً أو مندساً بل قد يكون أكثر غيرة على النادي منك.
فهناك فرق كبير بين المشجع الواعي الذي يقبل النقد ويبني عليه والمشجع العاطفي الذي يرى في كل رأي مخالف خيانة وجريمة.
فهذا الأسلوب لا يقتل فقط روح الحوار الرياضي بل يفرغ الساحة من كل رأي حر ويدفع الجماهير للعيش في دوائر مغلقة من التشجيع الأعمى.
نريد رياضة ناضجة.. لا قطيعاً غوغائياً
الرياضة السعودية تشهد اليوم قفزات هائلة على مستوى البنية التحتية والاحتراف والرؤية، ومن المخجل أن تُشوّه هذه الصورة بسلوكيات جماهيرية متطرفة تقفز مباشرة إلى السب والتخوين عند أول اختلاف.
نعم، يحق للإعلامي أن ينتقد
ويحق للمشجع أن يرد..
لكن لا يحق لأحد أن يعتدي لفظياً أو أن يُسقط على النوايا أو أن يُخوّن أبناء الوطن.
فمتى ننضج رياضياً ؟
متى نكف عن تقسيم الساحة إلى أبيض وأسود.. ومتى نتوقف عن إحراج كل صوت حر لأنه فقط لم يقل ما نريد سماعه.. ومتى يصبح الاختلاف قيمة مضافة لا تهمة جاهزة ؟
نحن بحاجة إلى رياضة أكثر وعياً وأقل ضجيجاً وبيئة تقبل بالنقد وتدير الحوار باحترام لا بصوت القطيع والتعصب المذموم.
ليلى الجابر
هدف صريح
محمد نجيب.. بين رأي محايد وتخوينٍ جاهز
8 أغسطس 2025 - 03:00
|
آخر تحديث 8 أغسطس 2025 - 03:00
تابع قناة عكاظ على الواتساب
When will the culture of "you are either with me or against me" come to an end?
It is natural for opinions to differ and for viewpoints to clash; this is an inherent part of the beauty and spirit of sports competition.
However, what has ceased to be natural and has become a concerning phenomenon is the dangerous escalation of a culture where you either agree with me and applaud me, or you are my enemy and deserve exclusion and vilification!!
The criticisms raised by the media figure Mohamed Naguib recently topped the sports trend, and his voice transformed from that of a seasoned opinion to a fierce adversary in the eyes of those who only accept criticism if it aligns with their preferences.
Some viewed his remarks as a bold proposition based on technical and organizational observations, while others considered it an offensive insinuation that transcended the limits of criticism to question the integrity of the competitions.
Between criticism and offense... where do we stand?
Here, we must stand clearly without bias. If what Mohamed Naguib said falls within the framework of professional criticism, it is a legitimate right guaranteed to every journalist. However, if he intended to offend or cast doubt on national integrity or official institutions, that is a transgression that must be confronted with logic and law.
But what is truly shameful is what came from some journalists and Al-Hilal fans who approached the situation with an exclusionary mindset, showering insults, accusations of treason, and threats not only on the one who made the statement but on anyone who agreed with him or did not publicly oppose him!!
A critic is not an enemy... and a conscious fan does not entrench themselves
Sports fanaticism should not translate into personal enmities or arbitrary classifications that strip others of their right to express themselves. The critic who directs their observations towards your management or players is not necessarily hateful or infiltrating; they may be more passionate about the club than you are.
There is a significant difference between a conscious fan who accepts criticism and builds upon it and an emotional fan who sees every opposing opinion as betrayal and a crime.
This approach not only kills the spirit of sports dialogue but also empties the arena of any free opinion and pushes fans to live in closed circles of blind support.
We want mature sports... not a chaotic herd
Saudi sports today is witnessing tremendous leaps in infrastructure, professionalism, and vision, and it is shameful that this image is marred by extreme fan behaviors that resort to insults and accusations of treason at the first sign of disagreement.
Yes, journalists have the right to criticize
And fans have the right to respond...
But no one has the right to verbally assault or to project intentions or to accuse fellow citizens of treason.
So when will we mature in sports?
When will we stop dividing the arena into black and white... and when will we cease to embarrass every free voice simply because it did not say what we wanted to hear... and when will disagreement become an added value rather than a ready-made accusation?
We need a sport that is more aware and less noisy, and an environment that accepts criticism and manages dialogue with respect, not with the voice of the herd and the condemned fanaticism.
It is natural for opinions to differ and for viewpoints to clash; this is an inherent part of the beauty and spirit of sports competition.
However, what has ceased to be natural and has become a concerning phenomenon is the dangerous escalation of a culture where you either agree with me and applaud me, or you are my enemy and deserve exclusion and vilification!!
The criticisms raised by the media figure Mohamed Naguib recently topped the sports trend, and his voice transformed from that of a seasoned opinion to a fierce adversary in the eyes of those who only accept criticism if it aligns with their preferences.
Some viewed his remarks as a bold proposition based on technical and organizational observations, while others considered it an offensive insinuation that transcended the limits of criticism to question the integrity of the competitions.
Between criticism and offense... where do we stand?
Here, we must stand clearly without bias. If what Mohamed Naguib said falls within the framework of professional criticism, it is a legitimate right guaranteed to every journalist. However, if he intended to offend or cast doubt on national integrity or official institutions, that is a transgression that must be confronted with logic and law.
But what is truly shameful is what came from some journalists and Al-Hilal fans who approached the situation with an exclusionary mindset, showering insults, accusations of treason, and threats not only on the one who made the statement but on anyone who agreed with him or did not publicly oppose him!!
A critic is not an enemy... and a conscious fan does not entrench themselves
Sports fanaticism should not translate into personal enmities or arbitrary classifications that strip others of their right to express themselves. The critic who directs their observations towards your management or players is not necessarily hateful or infiltrating; they may be more passionate about the club than you are.
There is a significant difference between a conscious fan who accepts criticism and builds upon it and an emotional fan who sees every opposing opinion as betrayal and a crime.
This approach not only kills the spirit of sports dialogue but also empties the arena of any free opinion and pushes fans to live in closed circles of blind support.
We want mature sports... not a chaotic herd
Saudi sports today is witnessing tremendous leaps in infrastructure, professionalism, and vision, and it is shameful that this image is marred by extreme fan behaviors that resort to insults and accusations of treason at the first sign of disagreement.
Yes, journalists have the right to criticize
And fans have the right to respond...
But no one has the right to verbally assault or to project intentions or to accuse fellow citizens of treason.
So when will we mature in sports?
When will we stop dividing the arena into black and white... and when will we cease to embarrass every free voice simply because it did not say what we wanted to hear... and when will disagreement become an added value rather than a ready-made accusation?
We need a sport that is more aware and less noisy, and an environment that accepts criticism and manages dialogue with respect, not with the voice of the herd and the condemned fanaticism.


