Akermanis

[G-Mo77]

or, even if he was, he still thought, as do I, that it was inappropriate for the state to give him a funeral. Jim was inspirational, his accomplishments awesome (in the literal meaning of the word) but the publicity and hype went right over the top.

So you disagreed with EJ having a state funeral then?

 

[Drunken Bum]

So you disagreed with EJ having a state funeral then?

Probably going to get hung drawn and quartered here but i believe Stynes had more claim to a state funeral than EJ and i questioned Stynes receiving one.
I read somewhere that Stynes was Victorian of the year 3 times, is this true? Some of the things i have heard about Stynes, maybe he did deserve one, i don't know, but i doubt very much if he would have if he wasn't a footballer, which i think was what Aker was trying to say albeit very badly.
Aker is still a knob of the highest order though.

 

[dogsbody]

Probably going to get hung drawn and quartered here but i believe Stynes had more claim to a state funeral than EJ and i questioned Stynes receiving one.
I read somewhere that Stynes was Victorian of the year 3 times, is this true? ....

Not by me you won't. Neither should have been given state funerals, certainly not Ted. State funerals should be restricted to those who's service has been to the state e.g. former heads of state, perhaps the Chief Justice as in NSW. Governments do exercise a discretion, far too liberally, to give them to other prominent people, Bud Tingwell got one. Jim was far and away the more admirable character of the 2 footballers but the state still shouldn't have stepped in - it just shows how lacking in perspective we all become when it comes to football.

Stynes received 2 Victorian of the year awards, one by the Victoria Day Committee, the other by the Herald Sun in the same year the the Victoria Day Committee gave its to Fr Bob Maguire. He also received a Melburnian of the year last year by the Council. Nothing official.

 

[dogwatch]

State funerals should be for a man or woman "of the people" (and I don't just mean so-called celebrities).

So I'm happy to take the opposite view and say EJ was one of those and deserved a state funeral.
Stynes? maybe ... I certainly don't take exception to it.

But I do agree they get dished out too often, usually by governments ingratiating themselves to voters or to exalt their own partisan heroes.

 

[dogsbody]

State funerals should be for a man or woman "of the people"
...

But I do agree they get dished out too often, usually by governments ingratiating themselves to voters or to exalt their own partisan heroes.

Admittedly from Wikipedia, the convention in Australia, covering C'wealth & State governments, is to give them to former heads of state and long serving members of Parliament. NSW looks to be the only one that gives them to former Chief Justices. The C'wealth, Vic, NSW and Qld exercise discretions. The last non head of state to get a C'wealth state funeral was Mawson in 1958. The Whitlams rightly declined an offer for Margaret, I imagine Gough will get the offer in a few years time, particularly if Labor is still in. Tas, SA, WA and NT don't exercise a discretion. It seems to me that Victoria offers more than the others. I'd be against further liberalisation.

Bailleau is a bit wobbly at the moment, perhaps that's why the Stynes family got the offer. They should have declined.