Fan threatened with eviction from MCG for barracking too loud

[Mr Magic]

I'm not denying the security guard did the wrong thing. Lack of knowledge doesn't make someone out of touch culturally, how you can string those two together is ridiculous. Anyone including Aussies who don't have an interest in the AFL could have a lack of.knowledge regarding the game. Doesn't make them.out of touch with Aussie culture. Nor footy culture. Can't tell me security guards need to read the AFL rule book now.

He clearly showed a lack of knowledge and made a mistake with his reaction, no one's denying that. I'm sure he'll be pulled up and the security company will have to pull it's socks up. It's a mistake that needs addressing between the venue and security company. It has nothing to do with the AFL or general public.

Actually Aussies that do not have a interest in the AFL makes them out of touch with contemporary footy culture!!!!

I never stated it was to do with the AFL, clearly its a gross failure in the provision of a service between the suppliers and stakeholders!!!

Culture and knowledge are not mutually exclusive.

As an Australian you cannot think I would be as successful in the Chase TV competition program UK version as someone from the UK as it is knowledge based and I do not live in UK and there are many questions that naturally are UK and locally based where I would not have acquired the necessary knowledge compared to a UK contestant regarding exposure to the necessary information to obtain the required knowledge

 

[The Gong]

The questioning from the journos in that presser served no purpose other than to be the one to catch Gil out. Our sporting media values got ya journalism far more than discussing the actual issue and working out how to fix it.

I thought for a second it was a contingent of Bigfooty posters at the presser.

 

[zyzzbruh]

The questioning from the journos in that presser served no purpose other than to be the one to catch Gil out. Our sporting media values got ya journalism far more than discussing the actual issue and working out how to fix it.

Had nothing to do with catching Gil out. Completely to do with jumping into the criticism bandwagon in order to create a rolling story that would benefit themselves. As someone totally on Gil's side, I would've acted like I was against him as a journo just so people can read my rubbish. And the amount of people falling for it is hilarious. The general public will literally beleive a conspiracy theory over a fact and enjoy arguing a point of view that they really have no idea what actually is.

 

[blackcat]

As an ex security guard, I may be a little biased but I will say this, Jeff Kennett is a moron and anyone who agrees with him or says similar comments are morons.

Kennett was not distilling issue into concerns over security guards, that would be too reductive by half. This issue is far more complex than security guards, their uniforms, and toeing the line in the Fairfax diversity editorial room sans diversity(???) <RIDDLE ME that one, how does an editorial room preach diversity when demographically they are identical!!! They are reducing it to skin-colour diversity, but in the lead article on page 2 they speak/write of racist attack on someone with unique physiognomy >

 

[zyzzbruh]

Actually Aussies that do not have a interest in the AFL makes them out of touch with contemporary footy culture!!!!

I never stated it was to do with the AFL, clearly its a gross failure in the provision of a service between the suppliers and stakeholders!!!

Culture and knowledge are not mutually exclusive.

As an Australian you cannot think I would be as successful in the Chase TV competition program UK version as someone from the UK as it is knowledge based and I do not live in UK and there are many questions that naturally are UK and locally based where I would not have acquired the necessary knowledge compared to a UK contestant regarding exposure to the necessary information to obtain the required knowledge

I understand your point. However it is irrelevant because you can't sack these people from their jobs because they're out of touch. If they're out of touch then they're out of touch. If they make mistakes they'll learn from it. End of story, that bloke won't run into the ground again. If the security company is committing fraud then that's between them and their client.

 

[zyzzbruh]

I thought for a second it was a contingent of Bigfooty posters at the presser.

They're playing the cards perfectly. And the general public are jumping on it just like they planned.

 

[Ron The Bear]

So that would please you. However what will he then say to the other side of the fence?

There is a clear distinction between "safety" issues and "barracking".

"Automatic life bans will apply to any patron exercising physical violence at AFL games" would've satisfied the former. Not conflation of the two.

He spoke for what, 15 minutes? And somehow failed to say anything of substance.

 

[skipper kelly]

Is it OK to like the crackdown on boorish behaviour and also believe that this is a directive from the AFL?

 

[Sentinel]

Fckn dumb people again. He's allowed to say what was quoted to him because that is direct from the sources mouth. He can't come out and say that Jeff will retract his words, cause what if he doesn't come out and say it publicly. Just because he said it to him personally doesn't mean he will say it publicly. Speaking for him and speaking what was said are two total different things that absolute peanuts like yourself won't be able to comprehend.

In announcing to the press conference that Jeff Kennett regrets his words, he spoke for Jeff. He then said he couldn't do exactly that about 30 seconds later.

Not that hard to comprehend unless you're a 'fckn dumb' person.

 

[blackcat]

Had nothing to do with catching Gil out. Completely to do with jumping into the criticism bandwagon in order to create a rolling story that would benefit themselves. As someone totally on Gil's side, I would've acted like I was against him as a journo just so people can read my rubbish. And the amount of people falling for it is hilarious. The general public will literally beleive a conspiracy theory over a fact and enjoy arguing a point of view that they really have no idea what actually is.

No, being a political Statesman is Not triangulating the popular rhetoric or zeitgeist of the day, It Is, coming over those popular mores, distilling the issue into gobbits for nightly broadcast news and murdoch, then using (a) different fora/forum to elucidate in detail.

But that is asking too much of the AFL to achieve, or have access to that Statesman, heck, we can't ruffle him/her up in Canberra, and we have missed since JWH & PJK.

 

[Mr Magic]

I understand your point. However it is irrelevant because you can't sack these people from their jobs because they're out of touch. If they're out of touch then they're out of touch. If they make mistakes they'll learn from it. End of story, that bloke won't run into the ground again. If the security company is committing fraud then that's between them and their client.

Actually somebody is not entitled to be out of touch if they are required to be in touch to do a job and/or provide a service.

If a job needs you to have a drivers license and you do not have it for example then you do not get the job.

Just because somebody has been employed does not mean they have provided an adequate service because they are employed. Apart from other laws the security officer has to comply with the regulator as well as any protocols/procedures/policies of the employer.

An employee and/or business has responsibilities outside of a contractual agreement as a citizen and/or resident and/or visitor on a visa of the country!!!

Ignorance is not a defence in a profession requiring a level of expertise.

If you are saying the employee or service provider is not at fault then the state regulator is at fault because someone is to blame as other service providers in other states would not enter into such controversial behaviour!!!

Its like getting a cleaner to be a concierge and then the inadequate service is because the previous cleaner did not know about the clients need to be comfortable and conveniently afforded and was only worrying about ensuring the client was clean!!!

 

[zyzzbruh]

In announcing to the press conference that Jeff Kennett regrets his words, he spoke for Jeff. He then said he couldn't do exactly that about 30 seconds later.

Not that hard to comprehend unless you're a 'fckn dumb' person.

Wow. Just wow. He said he told HIM that he regretted his words.... Thats what was said to GIL, and that is all that he is allowed to say. You might tell someone something, doesn't mean it's the truth. Maybe Jeff doesn't really mean it and won't admit that publicly. You're allowed to say what someone told you, however you can't speak further about their intentions on their behalf. They're different things mate.

 

[blackcat]

Is it OK to like the crackdown on boorish behaviour and also believe that this is a directive from the AFL?

you forgot one of the corollary(ies). Said <boorish behaviour> may be materially motivated backlash to overbearing strategy from AFL hq, circular dynamics, greater crackdown, greater protest, more secret police

 

[The Gong]

No, being a political Statesman is Not triangulating the popular rhetoric or zeitgeist of the day, It Is, coming over those popular mores, distilling the issue into gobbits for nightly broadcast news and murdoch, then using (a) different fora/forum to elucidate in detail.

But that is asking too much of the AFL to achieve, or have access to that Statesman, heck, we can't ruffle him/her up in Canberra, and we have missed since JWH & PJK.

Amongst all that literary gymnastics I'm sure there's a statement of some sort.

 

[zyzzbruh]

Actually somebody is not entitled to be out of touch if they are required to be in touch to do a job and/or provide a service.

If a job needs you to have a drivers license and you do not have it for example then you do not get the job.

Just because somebody has been employed does not mean they have provided an adequate service because they are employed. Apart from other laws the security officer has to comply with the regulator as well as any protocols/procedures/policies of the employer.

An employee and/or business has responsibilities outside of a contractual agreement as a citizen and/or resident and/or visitor on a visa of the country!!!

Ignorance is not a defence in a profession requiring a level of expertise.

If you are saying the employee or service provider is not at fault then the state regulator is at fault because someone is to blame as other service providers in other states would not enter into such controversial behaviour!!!

Its like getting a a cleaner to be a concierge and then the inadequate service is because the previous cleaner did not know about the clients need to be comfortable and was only worrying about ensuring the client was clean!!!

Well being culturally in touch was obviously not a requirement of the job. Nor does it still have to be in the future as long as appropriate actions in certain situations are discussed to their employees. That way they'll be informed, not necessarily culturally in touch. How can you judge the level of being culturally in touch if it is all of a sudden a requirement anyway?

 

[blackcat]

Wow. Just wow. He said he told HIM that he regretted his words.... Thats what was said to GIL, and that is all that he is allowed to say. You might tell someone something, doesn't mean it's the truth. Maybe Jeff doesn't really mean it and won't admit that publicly. You're allowed to say what someone told you, however you can't speak further about their intentions on their behalf. They're different things mate.

Depends on what conditions were expected of a private conversation.

 

[ItsGameTime]

I don't rate his umpiring but yeah, he did well.

Interesting. Not to turn this into a thread about the umpiring but I think he is one of the best umpires in the league at the moment.

 

[blackcat]

Amongst all that literary gymnastics I'm sure there's a statement of some sort.

Gillon beholden to popular mores of the day.
Not a chief Statesman (nor CEO for that matter)

 

[Sir_Loin]

So venue management unilaterally decided to crack down on fan behaviour. Wonder what it was that forced them to overreact in such a way.

 

[zyzzbruh]

Depends on what conditions were expected of a private conversation.

We can assume Jeff didn't literally say to GIL that he can announce his intentions if he wanted to. Thats just common sense. How often do you come across a verbal contractual agreement after a general conversation jeez.

 

[longsuffreosupp]

We're not stupid Gil.

It's like when they have a rule of the week..

 

[Mr Magic]

Well being culturally in touch was obviously not a requirement of the job. Nor does it still have to be in the future as long as appropriate actions in certain situations are discussed to their employees. That way they'll be informed, not necessarily culturally in touch. How can you judge the level of being culturally in touch if it is all of a sudden a requirement anyway?

How do you know being in touch was not required to be a part of the job???

As a crowd controller part of the training is an understanding of crowds in other state jurisdictions!!!! Usually the trainer, if competent, will go through examples and have interactive discussions on whats acceptable in the classroom using case by case examples.

Part of the role of the service provider is to put competent people in place to provide the required service!!

How can a security officer judge crowd behaviour if they are out of touch??

 

[zyzzbruh]

So venue management unilaterally decided to crack down on fan behaviour. Wonder what it was that forced them to overreact in such a way.

It's a fair question that should be directed at the venues. That would be the rational decision here rather than absolutely battering who someone who is stating that it has nothing to do with him or the AFL. Yet another example of the masses jumping on a bandwagon if an issue that doesn't actually exist.

Let's say the conspiracy theory that Gil behind it is actually not true and that he's actually telling the truth. And because of it all he gets sacked. Are you all content of stripping someone from their job and publicly humiliating them of something that is not true? it's actually sad that public opinion has gotten to the point that things have become personal. Then they wonder why people are actually stamping their foot down on abuse and blatant bullying.

 

[zyzzbruh]

How do you know being in touch was not required to be a part of the job???

As a crowd controller part of the training is an understanding of crowds in other state jurisdictions!!!! Usually the trainer, if competent, will go through examples and have interactive discussions on whats acceptable in the classroom using case by case examples.

Part of the role of the service provider is to put competent people in place to provide the required service!!

How can a security officer judge crowd behaviour if they are out of touch??

Crowd behaviour wasn't the topic here. We were talking about breaking up an on field fight. And I can tell you it is definitely not part of the job description for guards to know how the game is played.

 

[Godfather32]

It's a fair question that should be directed at the venues. That would be the rational decision here rather than absolutely battering who someone who is stating that it has nothing to do with him or the AFL. Yet another example of the masses jumping on a bandwagon if an issue that doesn't actually exist.

Let's say the conspiracy theory that Gil behind it is actually not true and that he's actually telling the truth. And because of it all he gets sacked. Are you all content of stripping someone from their job and publicly humiliating them of something that is not true? it's actually sad that public opinion has gotten to the point that things have become personal. Then they wonder why people are actually stamping their foot down on abuse and blatant bullying.

You understand that the AFL own the stadium where most of this stuff has happened right? So it's a fair chance that any crackdown by stadium management has come down from above, it's not that much of a leap.