Mega Thread Oh yeah ... did you know there are 17 other teams? - General AFL discussion #9 - Blues posters only

[BlueTouchPaper]

The biggest problem with the way this debate is going, is that you have no reason for any 'moderates' to get involved.

Voices of Alan Jones, Bolt, and Newman make it dangerous going should you find yourself of a view that even remotely resembles theirs.

This to me is the problem with the race debate in this country. It's left/right diatribe that sees commentators like Jones offer some narrow-minded non-sense to inflame the situation, then the holier-than-thou response from sycophants in it for media point-scoring as much as anything else (ie Channel 10s team at 'The Project').

All the while, we haven't actually taught the 'next-generation' anything of the struggle that Aboriginal Australia still faces today, and how we can actively go about helping improve it. Instead the debate is mired in abstraction and rhetoric.

Over the course of the past few weeks I've asked those vehemently defending Goodes, what Adam actually 'does' for the Aboriginal community. The response was pretty muted other than that he is an 'advocate'. No-one able to pinpoint the name of his 'Recognise' movement, nor what it did, nor how the Go Foundation works with indigenous youth in getting them through school.

It seems to me that today, people are more interested in promoting the idea of advocacy, rather than actively involving themselves in the causes of their Champions. And they put all their energies into this promotion, so discussion turns to point-scoring and supposed bigotry-shaming, when the point is being missed entirely.

This is my biggest issue with the Goodes saga, and by extension the way Goodes hasn't taken the opportunity to actually actively promote these great causes - despite he and the club being in the media so frequently over the past month or two.

 

[thylacine60]

When it's all you've known........................mate.

 

[ShanDog]

No doubt, but doesn't excuse it nor make it any easier on the person copping it.

Of course it won't have the same effects, but its still just as wrong.

 

[ShanDog]

Thy, I'm not trying to be antagonistic. Apologies if it has come out that way.

 

[thylacine60]

All good, Shan.

 

[Windhover]

It was inherently aggressive - how could it have been anything else?

Is the Haka aggressive? Yep. It's meant to be - as this was. It wasn't a threat of physical violence towards them, nobody is saying he was planning to assault the crowd - but it was an aggressive gesture towards opposition supporters that was designed to intimidate.

In a round that was supposed to celebrate Indigenous Australians and promote unity amongst the community, he found a surefire way to drive a wedge right through the middle of it.

And he is yet to take ownership of that.

If the dance was NOT a threat of physical violence towards the crowd how can it possibly be inherently aggressive? Surely it was just exuberant entertainment. Not to your taste? Go to the ballet.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

If the dance was NOT a threat of physical violence towards the crowd how can it possibly be inherently aggressive? Surely it was just exuberant entertainment. Not to your taste? Go to the ballet.

A 'war cry' is inherently aggressive.

Should've been fined/warned by the AFL for aiming it at the crowd - or more accurately, for aiming it at the opposition fans - like countless gestures before it - would've helped put this saga to bed.

 

[ShanDog]

Pretty soft to be concerned by an obviously cultural wardance from a lone bloke 30 m away behind a fence.

 

[ShanDog]

Do you think it fair to surpress that cultural display but not the cultural display in booing?

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

Pretty soft to be concerned by an obviously cultural wardance from a lone bloke 30 m away behind a fence.

No need to target the man. Don't defend one mans right to express himself, and simultaneously rob another of the right to express offense.

Treat everyone the same, help end racism.

 

[Windhover]

Do you think it fair to surpress that cultural display but not the cultural display in booing?

Great question Shan. Don't expect BTP to give you an answer though.

 

[ShanDog]

No need to target the man. Don't defend one mans right to express himself, and simultaneously rob another of the right to express offense.

Treat everyone the same, help end racism.

I didn't say people weren't allowed to express anything, just that if they did feel aggrieved I would say they are being soft.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

Do you think it fair to surpress that cultural display but not the cultural display in booing?

That's a loaded question that implies I condone the booing. Anywhere I've said it shouldn't stop?

I would either suppress both, or suppress neither.

Such that both have proven harmful, it seems both should be supressed.

The issue is one was supressed for some people, and not for others.

Great question Shan. Don't expect BTP to give you an answer though.

Another rubbish go at the man just for opposing your view.

 

[BluStreak]

...I walk past you everyday on your way to work. One day I point my finger at you an mimic pulling a trigger.
What is your take on that action?
The next day I do it again and the next and every time I see you.
What is your take on that action?


first time you may not have seen it, the second or third time, its like wtf then subsequently it becomes threatening.

 

[Jatz]

...I walk past you everyday on your way to work. One day I point my finger at you an mimic pulling a trigger.
What is your take on that action?
The next day I do it again and the next and every time I see you.
What is your take on that action?


first time you may not have seen it, the second or third time, its like wtf then subsequently it becomes threatening.

Last time I walk past you on my way to work

 

[ShanDog]

...I walk past you everyday on your way to work. One day I point my finger at you an mimic pulling a trigger.
What is your take on that action?
The next day I do it again and the next and every time I see you.
What is your take on that action?


first time you may not have seen it, the second or third time, its like wtf then subsequently it becomes threatening.

If you are doing it with a bit of a grin, I could take it to being a friendly action like a thumbs up.

If I were a lady, I could take it as you telling me you think I am pretty.

Communication is difficult enough when it doesn't involve cross-cultural elements.

Do you know exactly what Goodes' wardance represents, what sort of emotion it comes from or what sort of reaction it is supposed to achieve? Or are you assuming based on your own cultural behaviours and norms?

 

[ShanDog]

That's a loaded question that implies I condone the booing. Anywhere I've said it shouldn't stop?

I would either suppress both, or suppress neither.

Such that both have proven harmful, it seems both should be supressed.

The issue is one was supressed for some people, and not for others.

Was just a question to think about and fair answer. Personally not a fan of banning things in order to deal with them.

 

[Windhover]

A 'war cry' is inherently aggressive.
Should've been fined/warned by the AFL for aiming it at the crowd - or more accurately, for aiming it at the opposition fans - like countless gestures before it - would've helped put this saga to bed.

So you see no difference between a "war dance" that celebrates a goal (done in the reconciliation round) and flipping the bird when a player responds to a crowd razzing a player for missing a goal? Really?

When I watched on tv Adam Goodes doing his war dance my reaction was mild distraction. I thought his mind was not entirely on the football and this may not be a bad thing for us. Like the Carlton players and coaching staff I gave it no further thought.

Had I been in the crowd "attacked" I cannot imagine feeling anything other than privileged to witness the confronting entertainment. I would probably have reflected on how timid the actual indigenous response was to the invasion and how easily and brutally indigenous struggle to protect their land and customs was overcome. I might have thought had they had a few more Adam Goodes it might have been a bit more brutal.

Surely all those thoughts would have been absolutely appropriate for the reconciliation round?

 

[Blue__Balls]

If you are doing it with a bit of a grin, I could take it to being a friendly action like a thumbs up.

If I were a lady, I could take it as you telling me you think I am pretty.

Communication is difficult enough when it doesn't involve cross-cultural elements.

Do you know exactly what Goodes' wardance represents, what sort of emotion it comes from or what sort of reaction it is supposed to achieve? Or are you assuming based on your own cultural behaviours and norms?

That's part of the problem - isn't it. Context.

I find it very hard to believe that Adam did not expect to create such a media shitstorm through his actions, albeit probably not such a protracted one. Maybe that was his intent, maybe he just didn't give it that much thought.

I'd love to see this thing over and done with so we can all move on, and I sincerely think it's going to be easier for one man to take that first step than for the nameless, faceless crowd to do so. There are plenty of times in life that we have to swallow our pride and make the step towards reconciliation. For years our government failed to do so. I think it would be a great show of strength from Adam to put aside his personal misgivings and lead people out of this overblown media circle-jerk.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

The biggest problem with the way this debate is going, is that you have no reason for any 'moderates' to get involved.

Voices of Alan Jones, Bolt, and Newman make it dangerous going should you find yourself of a view that even remotely resembles theirs.

This to me is the problem with the race debate in this country. It's left/right diatribe that sees commentators like Jones offer some narrow-minded non-sense to inflame the situation, then the holier-than-thou response from sycophants in it for media point-scoring as much as anything else (ie Channel 10s team at 'The Project').

All the while, we haven't actually taught the 'next-generation' anything of the struggle that Aboriginal Australia still faces today, and how we can actively go about helping improve it. Instead the debate is mired in abstraction and rhetoric.

Over the course of the past few weeks I've asked those vehemently defending Goodes, what Adam actually 'does' for the Aboriginal community. The response was pretty muted other than that he is an 'advocate'. No-one able to pinpoint the name of his 'Recognise' movement, nor what it did, nor how the Go Foundation works with indigenous youth in getting them through school.

It seems to me that today, people are more interested in promoting the idea of advocacy, rather than actively involving themselves in the causes of their Champions. And they put all their energies into this promotion, so discussion turns to point-scoring and supposed bigotry-shaming, when the point is being missed entirely.

This is my biggest issue with the Goodes saga, and by extension the way Goodes hasn't taken the opportunity to actually actively promote these great causes - despite he and the club being in the media so frequently over the past month or two.

This attitude of "what does the GO Foundation even do?!" really grinds my gears. They partner with the Australian Indigenous Education Foundation to provide scholarships to young Indigenous people. The fact that they do it quietly and not in the spotlight completely contradicts people's assumption that Adam Goodes is only in it for attention. He has been working on the foundation tirelessly every year since 2009. When most footballers are enjoying the off season on holidays and taking time to themselves (not that there's anything wrong with that), Goodes has been out in Indigenous communities and developing a foundation that helps see youths complete schooling to year 12. He provides direct mentoring to the scholarship recipients.

Last night I had dinner at Charcoal Lane, a restaurant that is staffed by Indigenous young people, with the aim of developing hospitality skills in them so they can gain meaningful employment. Inevitably the conversation turned to Adam Goodes. My waitress pronounced that he's deadly as, and said that he has been into the restaurant many times while he's in Melbourne. She, and a few others there, love that he's outspoken because they don't feel like there's much representation for Indigenous youths out there.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

So you see no difference between a "war dance" that celebrates a goal (done in the reconciliation round) and flipping the bird when a player responds to a crowd razzing a player for missing a goal? Really

Murphy kicked the goal. Both were a 'razz'.

I do see the difference, and I'm largely with you - it's more interesting than anything.

But this is a sport - free of any cultural inference, players shouldn't actively target the opposition supporters. That Goodes came out and said "If there was Carlton supporters offended by it, I'm sorry, but it's a war cry, it's a battle. It's supposed to intimidate you..." tells us the intent of it.

The statements he made following it have proven divisive - and that's partly due to a lack of thoughtful dialogue - from him and others.

 

[Azzurro]

Bob Murphy. Dead set legend.

http://m.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news...d-in-despair-20150730-ginnob?skin=smart-phone

Why is Adam being booed?

We did it to Milburn for years because of a dog act against one of our favourite sons. No other team's supporters piped up to fly the flag.

People did it to Jobe Watson as a result of the "supplements saga." Commentators along with the AFL fraternity and its management reached out pretty quickly and let everyone know it wasn't on. People stopped doing it without too much fuss.

Adam speaks out. A lot. And he won't hide behind the AFL fraternity when things get rough. He'll generally take it on the chin, as Bob Murphy wrote in the article above.

So now, as of this round, Jobe and Adam will both be absent from this game of ours. The Brownlow medal hangs very heavily indeed.

Jobe is absent due to injury. That's the official line according to the PR juggernaut at Essendon - and we all know how much we trust that club to divulge the full story without any spin! Oddly enough his season ending injury coincided with an interview conducted prior to his 200th game about how football is not enjoyable for him any more. So it's an injury indeed - but it's most likely an injury to his soul, his spirit, that is keeping him away, rather than the physical pressures that accompany a difficult footy season.

So if we assume Jobe feels similarly to Adam, although for vastly different reasons, then let's call this for what it is.

Bullying.

Let's not call it that because it's a more palatable name for abuse according to the general population. Let's call it bullying because that's exactly what it is.

Adam has decided to make it known that he is deeply affected by the actions of spectators, and specifically pointed to this as the reason why he won't be playing until further notice.

Jobe it seems is hiding behind an injury cloud. And that's completely understandable, because both of these situations are utterly absurd! There's more to the Jobe story than just the boos I know - but the parallels are frightening in their impact on the champions involved.

I'd be hiding behind an excuse too. Because I'm not as candid nor as brave as Adam Goodes, and not many of us are.

The behaviour of some, and the subsequent outcries of support their actions have received from people who should know better, serve only to drag me further away from this game I once loved.

Layer racism on top of all this, and it's no wonder that this issue has escalated. So let's for one second take it out of the equation to make it easier for some to understand.

Stop the ******* bullying. Life is hard enough.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

This attitude of "what does the GO Foundation even do?!" really grinds my gears.

Well it shouldn't - people should know. They need to extract the most from this saga.

Unfortunately, many of those defending Goodes (for lack of a better phrase) don't see past the rhetoric.

Those on the other side of the fence I simply presume don't know (and more to the point don't care) so to think that the levels of ignorance are the same is worrying.

She, and a few others there, love that he's outspoken because they don't feel like there's much representation for Indigenous youths out there.

There isn't.

I think that's a big issue - the approach by advocates like 'The Man' can be very insular.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

Well it shouldn't - people should know. They need to extract the most from this saga.

Unfortunately, many of those defending Goodes don't see past the rhetoric.

Those on the other side of the fence I simply presume don't know (and more to the point don't care) so to think that the levels of ignorance are the same is worrying.
There isn't.

I think that's the largest issue - the approach by advocates like 'The Man' can be very insular.

You know how you learn this stuff? You do some research. There is so much easily accessible information at your fingertips but no one can be bloody bothered anymore.

 

[Windhover]

That's a loaded question that implies I condone the booing. Anywhere I've said it shouldn't stop?

I would either suppress both, or suppress neither.

Yes BTP. Read your next sentence, very slowly. You say in the second part that, if "war dances" are condoned then you condone booing, at least to the extent that you would not surpress it.

There are two parts. You condemn Adam Goodes for his "war dance", despite the cultural circumstance that is said to justify it. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. To understand why others do not agree with you would require you to understand the historic and continuing discrimination against indigenous people in Australia.

But permitting booing because others (in particular the AFL) disagree with you and permit Adam Goodes (and Leroy Jetta) war dances, when the effect and intent of that booing is itself racially motivated and hurtful (which it must be if it is a response to the racial "war dance") must be wrong.

Such that both have proven harmful, it seems both should be supressed.

How have the war dances be proven harmful in themselves? Where are the traumatised members of the crowd coming forward saying they will never go to the footy again? We should celebrate the war dances for their entertainment value, not condemn them.