Oppo Camp Non-Essendon Football Thread XVIII

[JayJ20]

I know what you're saying but this was an actual case of antisemitism not someone just being pro Palestine or outspoken about the actions of the Israeli government.
The guy he had on the show was claiming Israelis were responsible for WWII and 9/11, thats full cooker conspiracy theorist territory.

My point is, the guest said what he said and that is his opinion. He may be antisemitic, but Tredrea made it clear it was only the guest's view.

Brendon Gale can bully Houli into taking down Pro-Palestinian posts at the request of Zionists supporting a literal genocide with no backlash.

He makes a statement on X about about how disgraceful antisemitism in Melbourne is, but says absolutely nothing about the rise of Islamophobia and anti-Arab hatred fuelled by those very same Zionists. How do you think Bachar Houli feels about that? Is there any consideration given to the Muslim community?

How many people are sacked because of association or platforming advocates of genocide, discrimination against Arabs and Islamophobia?

The outrage is very selective and curated to fit a particular narrative.

 

[joey_jo_jo]

My point is, the guest said what he said and that is his opinion. He may be antisemitic, but Tredrea made it clear it was only the guest's view.

Brendon Gale can bully Houli into taking down Pro-Palestinian posts at the request of Zionists supporting a literal genocide with no backlash.

He makes a statement on X about about how disgraceful antisemitism in Melbourne is, but says absolutely nothing about the rise of Islamophobia and anti-Arab hatred fuelled by those very same Zionists. How do you think Bachar Houli feels about that? Is there any consideration given to the Muslim community?

How many people are sacked because of association or platforming advocates of genocide, discrimination against Arabs and Islamophobia?

After the BS we've put up with for the last 2 years, I don't have time for selective outrage.

I think this is more a "last straw" situation with trederea, he has been flirting with a lot of fringe stuff (sov cit, anti vaccine, etc) and I think his position as a board member was becoming untenable.

I wholeheartedly agree with your argument in general (eg. what happened with Antoinette Latouf at the abc was despciable) but i don't think this is the same scenario, I think this veers into actual hate speech not just free speech, and tredrea may not have said the opinion himself but he platformed it.

Anyway as ant said I dont want to derail the thread, I'll just leave it at that.

 

[ant555]

My point is, the guest said what he said and that is his opinion. He may be antisemitic, but Tredrea made it clear it was only the guest's view.

Brendon Gale can bully Houli into taking down Pro-Palestinian posts at the request of Zionists supporting a literal genocide with no backlash.

He makes a statement on X about about how disgraceful antisemitism in Melbourne is, but says absolutely nothing about the rise of Islamophobia and anti-Arab hatred fuelled by those very same Zionists. How do you think Bachar Houli feels about that? Is there any consideration given to the Muslim community?

How many people are sacked because of association or platforming advocates of genocide, discrimination against Arabs and Islamophobia?

The outrage is very selective and curated to fit a particular narrative.

You need to take this somewhere else.

 

[dank420_]

You need to take this somewhere else.

You’re not a mod anymore

 

[Beerfish]

Sorry. Wrong account.

You need to take this somewhere else

 

[ant555]

You’re not a mod anymore

Thankfully

 

[JayJ20]

You need to take this somewhere else.

I'm not going to fight it and can't be bothered continuing anyway, but it's pretty strange that we cannot talk about the topic a board member was sacked for.

I think this is more a "last straw" situation with trederea, he has been flirting with a lot of fringe stuff (sov cit, anti vaccine, etc) and I think his position as a board member was becoming untenable.

I wholeheartedly agree with your argument in general (eg. what happened with Antoinette Latouf at the abc was despciable) but i don't think this is the same scenario, I think this veers into actual hate speech not just free speech, and tredrea may not have said the opinion himself but he platformed it.

Anyway as ant said I dont want to derail the thread, I'll just leave it at that.

I understand he has history and I'm not against his sacking, but we can't say the result wouldn't be the same if he had no prior history. Antoinette Latouf as you mentioned, Peter Lalor who was sacked by SEN and even Carlton's mascot didn't require previous transgressions.

If you've been following that area of politics, you would know this is common place.

 

[Phone]

eh, it was about time Tredrea's departure happened and I don't see any real comparison with other people who lost their jobs. Obviously Port had to go through a certain process which meant this took far longer than anyone would have liked, but his sov citizen nonsense meant that he had no place on an AFL board. it was inevitable that Tredrea would give some very dodgy people a platform. Israel has got almost nothing to do with this imo.

 

[Lore]

I'm not going to fight it and can't be bothered continuing anyway, but it's pretty strange that we cannot talk about the topic a board member was sacked for.

I understand he has history and I'm not against his sacking, but we can't say the result wouldn't be the same if he had no prior history. Antoinette Latouf as you mentioned, Peter Lalor who was sacked by SEN and even Carlton's mascot didn't require previous transgressions.

If you've been following that area of politics, you would know this is common place.

It’s not that you can’t discuss it. It’s that this is a football thread and his former position on the board of the PAFC has next to nothing to do with latouf or lalor or any of the other political stuff you want to discuss.

We have a politics thread for that in the hangar, and many here would participate in a robust discussion on this topic, in that thread, if you initiated it there. Many here probably agree with you, if I read it right.

 

[Old Campaigner]

Good riddance to a dumb cooker. The sovcit stuff was always going to be the end of him after the shooting in Vic

 

[faible]

Good riddance to a dumb cooker. The sovcit stuff was always going to be the end of him after the shooting in Vic

Also hard to see how someone who doesn’t believe in the rule of law is compatible with a board of directors at a major organisation.

 

[fairbump_playon]

Sorry. Wrong account.

You need to take this somewhere else

Dream big!

 

[mike14]

So does that mean we see more ridiculous frees paid for a stupid rule to begin with?

First few rounds are going to hilarious viewing.

It will be interesting to see how quickly the teams adapt. I can imagine that there will a lot of occasions where a defender won't bother following a lead up player (especially 2-ish kicks from goal) and will make sure there's a 5+m gap when they take the mark so they can zone back and then press up if needed. Could be lots of uncontested possession on the wings.

 

[Phone]

eh, it was a pretty rubbish article in the first place which was quickly debunked.

 

[The Airing of Grievances]

No. If the player can make an attempt on the ball and doesn't its a throw in.

Is that what the new rule actually states though? Commonsense says that what you say is what should happen. But I can recall under the 2025 insufficient intent rule, in a Final at that, the opposition player who had a clear opportunity to take possession thus preventing the ball going out , chose instead to let it go across the line. Umpy immediately paid the kick to him .
So unless there is a clearly stated exception to the last disposal ruling to cover that scenario, I can see commonsense running a distant second with at least some umps.

 

[boncer34]

Is that what the new rule actually states though?

Yes. Players can't shepherd the ball over the line or block opponents from getting to it in order to obtain a free kick.

 

[The Airing of Grievances]

First few rounds are going to hilarious viewing.

It will be interesting to see how quickly the teams adapt. I can imagine that there will a lot of occasions where a defender won't bother following a lead up player (especially 2-ish kicks from goal) and will make sure there's a 5+m gap when they take the mark so they can zone back and then press up if needed. Could be lots of uncontested possession on the wings.

Given the generally low footy IQ of many on our list, I think we are likely to fall foul of these new rules for a good part of next season more than most clubs. On the bright side, not like it's going to cost us a place in the finals or even a finals win.

 

[The Airing of Grievances]

Yes. Players can't shepherd the ball over the line or block opponents from getting to it in order to obtain a free kick.

Well that's certainly a plus.

 

[JayJ20]

What Josh Giddey is doing for the Bulls is wild. Single handedly turning them from a near certain bottom half finish to leading the Eastern Conference 7 games in. The first back-to-back triple doubles since Michael Jordan in the 88-89 season. Exciting to watch.

Win from 24 points down against the 76ers. I'm not holding my breath because like Essendon, the Bulls have given us a lot of false dawns, but Giddey is in all stars form right now.

 

[rumply]

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Terrible idea, wait for 20 teams.

 

[eth-dog]

Not surprising considering there's Tassie on the horizon and I doubt they want a 19 team comp for too long so team 20 likely to come in as well.

 

[Duckworth]

Does this count as us winning a final (from 10th)

 

[rumply]

Does this count as us winning a final (from 10th)

11thdon?

 

[joey_jo_jo]

A night grand final feels inevitable