Analysis Is it acceptable for AFL clubs to be politically biased?

[Dan Moody]

Well, on the global level the bankers drowned us in debt by forcing the nationalisation of failed banks in order to stave complete collapse of the world financial system.

Closer to home bankers drown us in debt largely through their influence on government to keep house prices artificially high.

No.
Banks don't necessarily want high prices for property, lending plummets and banks make millions less direct contribution to their balance sheets.
60% of society is financially unintelligent, it is those people that purchase homes on emotion and way out of their price bracket. This is what drives property prices up.
And yes, I am

 

[The Warlord]

Banks don't necessarily want high prices for property, lending plummets and banks make millions less direct contribution to their balance sheets.

Yes, the last two decades of sharply rising Australian house prices and sharply rising Australian bank profits proves this theory.

Are you by any chance starting a Commerce degree this year?

 

[Dan Moody]

Yes, the last two decades of sharply rising Australian house prices and sharply rising Australian bank profits proves this theory.

Are you by any chance starting a Commerce degree this year?

Lol, I'm a bit beyond the Commerce Degree.

 

[Some Idiot]

It seems like a big assumption to suggest that the political stance isn't being driven by the members. I would suggest that the big ticket holders at the clubs are in fact the ones driving it.

 

[00Stinger]

Hypothetically, would you have supported the Australian sporting position on boycotting South Africa during apartheid?

We can agree that in theory politics and sport should not mix because of the risk of it being hijacked for political purposes which would be distasteful for many fans - but politics and sport have always been intermingled ever since humans made the first ball. I reiterate - you don't have to watch sport you don't like.

The bolded is a pretty dumb argument when you think about it logically

Just because two things have always been intertwined doesn't mean that they should always be intertwined

 

[The Warlord]

Lol, I'm a bit beyond the Commerce Degree.

Oh dear, Liberal MP?

 

[The Warlord]

It seems like a big assumption to suggest that the political stance isn't being driven by the members. I would suggest that the big ticket holders at the clubs are in fact the ones driving it.

Completely.

When North survived the Gold Coast near death experience, we became a lot more political for a variety of reasons, but one being that's how Peter Scanlon was going to get much needed cash to us.

 

[Kwality]

which poison do you think the afl are selling us? not abusing women and children, treating trans/gay people as equals, abolishing racism in society and sport, doing things to improve the quality of life for aboriginal people to be equal to non-aboriginals? what terrible poisons they are.

Anything political has no place in sport. There is a forum for change.
Welcoming aboriginals to footy was a case of the recalcitrant VFL clubland being forced to accept change for fear of being left behind.

 

[Hoops]

Surely WA has a holiday to celebrate being WA?

They should call it Bitchin' day. where they can all get together and complain about the Vic centric AFL, GST, eastern media, daylight savings 'til the cows come home.

 

[Kwality]

we became a lot more political

Members getting off their bronze is not the context of this thread & you well know it. Current Australian politics are driven by cheer squads, footy clubs are not.

Dont let these mugs use footy clubs or their supporters.

 

[Kwality]

No.
Banks don't necessarily want high prices for property, lending plummets and banks make millions less direct contribution to their balance sheets.
60% of society is financially unintelligent, it is those people that purchase homes on emotion and way out of their price bracket. This is what drives property prices up.
And yes, I am

Lifestyle & ambition drives property. New housing drives jobs.
Some people prefer to walk to work, other want acreages.

 

[Some Idiot]

If you truly think your club is being too political, you can always attend the AGM and raise it with the board of directors and other members and stakeholders.

 

[Soberian Tiger]

I fully supported the cricket ban of South Africa, although it wasn't great for the sport the issue was too big to ignore and Prime Minister Whitlam did not ignore it, unlike McMahon.

That was a national response naturally. A mere club has some room for social involvement bordering on politics, but the question becomes one of where to draw the line. And a line must be drawn lest the club morphs into an activist organisation, dividing its membership and not fulfilling its primary role of uniting people in entertainment.

While it is true that this site seems to divide people rather too easily, nothing divides more than those who seek to hijack community activities for political gain. Such people do not wear horns and carry a trident (well, they might if infiltrating the Dees). They do not always stand out immediately. This is where one must be careful. Extremism can be a gradual process. Not all extremists parachute in and immediately take over Poland.

Just as those who railed against the South African Apartheid cricket ban needed to look at themselves and seriously question if they were too right wing, there are some today who need to look at themselves and question if they are too left wing.

The World works best when a balance is struck.

Of course, saying this here will make me a hardline conservative in the eyes of some vocal people. They will ignore that my avatar is a statue of a man who was a Labor candidate and that my first paragraph was wholly complimentary to an action undertaken by a polarising Labor prime minister. That is because everyone else's position on the left/right spectrum is relative to one's own. I can equally speak of words written by a famous Australian hardline conservative who called me, effectively, a raving socialist. Evoking such responses are the lot of those who seek balance. It is far easier to simply join one mob or another.

AFL clubs should not do that.

 

[owen87]

???

Player base?

Surely the members who are the actual heart and sould of the club, not the players who are employees, often for very short periods.

Disagree here, the players are the product. We don't go to the football to watch the pre-game entertainment, the board members, the trainers or the umpires. We go to see the players.

Sure, clubs are answerable to the members, and they would cease to exist without the support of those members, but at the same time you can't be a football supporter without football players to support.

 

[Leon]

It’s always a good laugh how the “Hur hur get over it snowflake!” crowd are the first ones to squeal “OMG just focus on footy!!!”

 

[ADL9798]

I’ve noticed a recent trend of AFL clubs making comment on political issues, such as Australia Day etc.

Is it fair for them to make comment on issues that over 50% of their members disagree with?

Who decides to post on behalf of the club on this stuff?

Discuss.

Every AFL club has a supporter base which covers a broad political spectrum and injecting themselves into political debates is a great way of sending a message that supporters of certain political leanings aren't welcome. Or unless there's a broad consensus for the political position in Australian society, but that really isn't Australia Day where you have a majority who want to keep the date as it is and a very irate minority who don't, and clubs injecting themselves into the debate by calling for a day everyone can celebrate are coming out against the majority of their fanbases.

This assumes that maintaining silence on this or any other issue = not taking a position, or being apolitical.

And finally with all of that said clubs are going to do this anyway. Too many activists on too many issues are pushing clubs to make political statements out of a belief that sport clubs are better served leading political debates than acting as a unifying force in society, and there's simply too much pressure to not just be seen as being with the zeitgeist.

I wonder if the Indigenous players and their families to whom the game owes so much (as well as their team mates and coaches) would view the AFL as a unifying force if they didn't stand with them on this.

It seems to me you've got Group A who want a day for everyone to come together and celebrate being Australian (a worthy cause), but are generally ambivalent about what date that celebration occurs on, and do not appear to be beholden to 26 January for any meaningful reason.

You then have Group B who sit at the core of our Australian cultural identity, and are deeply upset by the notion of celebrating on this day.

If we're truly all in this together and are interested in unity, I wouldn't have thought it would be too much of a stretch to ask Group A to be considerate of their brothers and sisters in Group B and shift the celebrations to another date. Who are the losers here?

This isn't politics, it's called being a community that respects and looks out for one another.

 

[Kwality]

Just as those who railed against the South African Apartheid cricket ban needed to look at themselves and seriously question if they were too right wing, there are some today who need to look at themselves and question if they are too left wing.

What wing of politics you need to describe it as, made no difference. You need ordinary unaligned folk to go with you to effect change & not some idelogical change ascribed to the political class/nutters retrospectively.
Wanting it to be some wing thing when considering racism is more about nutters than class.

 

[The Warlord]

It’s always a good laugh how the “Hur hur get over it snowflake!” crowd are the first ones to squeal “OMG just focus on footy!!!”

Almost like they're not operating in good faith hey.

 

[Forward Press]

The bolded is a pretty dumb argument when you think about it logically

Just because two things have always been intertwined doesn't mean that they should always be intertwined

I'd normally agree with you but the reality in sport is that banning politics from it always invariably fails because it's a platform that is readily viewed by millions that may otherwise not watch the news or are politically engaged. It will always be 'hijacked' for political purposes no matter what we as fans may think.

Soccer federations dish out cards and fines for players making political statements but the players keep doing it anyway. I'd rather we don't go down the path of the AFL fining an indigenous player for celebrating a goal by revealing a BLM shirt underneath, for example.

 

[Virgin Dog]

It’s always a good laugh how the “Hur hur get over it snowflake!” crowd are the first ones to squeal “OMG just focus on footy!!!”

"Businesses shouldn't have to serve gay couples if they don't want to, it's a free market"
Rugby Australia cuts ties with Israel Folau because of the damage he does to their brand
"No not like that"

 

[dave10]

I understand wanting to have a day to celebrate being Australian. Why does the 26 January date matter to you? Why not any other date?

TBH, the actual date isn’t the issue. My issue is the movement to not want a day at all to celebrate our national day..

 

[dave10]

If you are going to withdraw finacial support for a club taking a seemingly non-radical political stance then I have no words.

It's not like this is some alt-left stance since there's a proper reasoning why so many people protest for the day to be changed.

For me I couldn't care less about if it changes and I think most people are similar, I could only tell you a few people off the top of my head that I think would care if the date was changed

If you are offended by one's non-radical political stance YOU are the problem

Speaking of being offended by one's political stance, do you believe that radical feminists getting offended by reasonable conservative or centre stances is unreasonable?

You can still be a proud Australian but acknowledge that there is a very dirty stain in our history regarding the treatment of aboriginal people.

After all, how would you feel if the Chinese came in, took all of our land away, enslaved, genocided and tortured us only to celebrate when they first landed their soliders onto our country. Wouldn't feel good huh? Wouldn't feel right? That's why this discussion is happening.

A club has a right to the freedom of speech, just like you do. I know what you're about to say "what about twitter." Well, there's a difference between freedom of action and freedom of speech. Twitter did the former, Essendon did the other.

I’m sorry, I don’t agree.
Whether you like it or not I don’t care.

Most Australians want to recognise the day and I along with many are offended that the minority view overrides the majority view.

I understand there’s a sizeable minority that is justifiably uncomfortable with celebrating the day on January 26. Simply however I don’t believe they would be satisfied with any alternative date. There’s many hundreds of thousands more who are offended with every minority interest movement leading to drastic changes to our way of life, this being the latest one.

Essendon should focus more on inclusivity rather than dividing its supporter base at the core and turning our beloved passion and pastime into a political football.

Im sick if it.

 

[Papa G]

I always - because I'm an inner city Melbourne flog - find it astounding that West Coast happily train at Mineral Resources Park.

I totally get why and in ye greater scheme of things it isn't a big deal.

But where I live - in a Green seat federal and state - that is a massively political statement.

Yet I imagine for the vast vast majority of West Coast supporters, it is basic common sense.

Ah the inner Malbun Leftie flog. The most pro Aboriginal Rights. The least likely to run into an Aboriginal person.

 

[ADL9798]

TBH, the actual date isn’t the issue. My issue is the movement to not want a day at all to celebrate our national day..

Is anyone arguing this? The slogan is “change the date” not “no date”, right?

 

[Virgin Dog]

TBH, the actual date isn’t the issue. My issue is the movement to not want a day at all to celebrate our national day..

Can't say I've seen any mainstream push to just cancel the date altogether. Anyone who believes that would have to be in a very small minority.

Seems the main argument is to move the date away from January 26th due to historical events, not to end the celebration of Australia Day altogether.