Miki Koppel Apologizes for Remarks on Hapoel Tel Aviv Fans
Miki Koppel, a sponsor for Maccabi Tel Aviv and the Referees Association, issued an apology on Friday for remarks he made regarding fans of rival club Hapoel Tel Aviv. Koppel clarified his statements in a Twitter post, expressing regret to any fan who was offended by his words, particularly those who do not participate in chants referencing the Holocaust, slander, or incitement.
Koppel stated his apology is sincere and stems from respect and love for sports and its people. He urged listeners to consider his full remarks, which he claims were selectively edited into a short video clip that presented a biased narrative. He asserted that his original comments included praise for Hapoel's passionate fanbase and their dedication, even during their time in the lower National League.
He reiterated his consistent stance against offensive chants, specifically mentioning a "rape chant" that is no longer heard, and calls of "terrorist" directed at player Salim Tuama. Koppel emphasized that while he values spirited and even wild sports rivalries, there are boundaries. He explicitly stated that references to Hamas, Hezbollah, the Holocaust, and terrorism have no place in sports stadiums, especially given the current sensitive period.
Koppel concluded by advocating for mutual respect, stating that despite 90 minutes of intense rivalry, fans should remember their shared humanity and identity as one Israeli people. He wished everyone a happy and blessed holiday, encouraging passionate support for one's team alongside mutual respect.
The controversy arose from a short video clip circulating on social media, which was amplified by Hapoel Tel Aviv fans. In the clip, Koppel expressed intense hatred for Hapoel Tel Aviv, stating it was not purely professional and went beyond just football. He cited chants like "May there be a Holocaust for Maccabi Tel Aviv," objects being thrown during games, and personal fear of returning home after youth matches as reasons for his animosity.
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.