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

[Jade]

Double digits. Raise the bat.

Can't go for triple now CAN I BONCE??

 

[Carlton lad]

No it isnt
Just like it ain’t acceptable for John Howard to give us tips on how to bowl in cricket

 

[Jade]

If the Essendon media starts posting about political topics frequently, people will pay less and less attention to their page, staff will realize

You give way too much credit to the Essendon staff...

 

[Jade]

Their current workplace culture isn't conducive to someone coming out publicly.

There is no reasonable evidence to support this position.

Think you're off the mark here.

 

[Occidental]

And Celtic title victories are celebrated by Catholics all over Ireland and the UK

Yes, of course they are. I only commented on what just happened this week.
It does no one any good to interweave religion and sport so closely.

 

[Jade]

In case you haven't picked up on it I'm subtly suggesting that the culture within the AFL does not match that of society outside in regards to openly gay men being made to feel comfortable.

The AFL holds onto some quite old school standards on lots of things.

I get what you're suggesting, and it absolutely used to be that way.

Don't really think it is now.

 

[Jade]

To the OP's question, what is or is not acceptable from a football club is decided by the members. If you don't like what the club is doing, vote out the board members.

Not all club members can vote out the Board of Directors, and others have a very diluted say.

 

[Jade]

You can vote out the club administration if you disagree with them.

Not all club members can. Some clubs have zero say, others only a diluted say.

 

[Altum Volantes]

Doesn't bother me. Seems most clubs are making statements that are in line with the trajectory that our society is heading anyway.

Hard Facts.

10-15 years ago, you could publicly state that ‘marriage is between a man and a woman!’ and people wouldn’t bat an eyelid.

5 years ago, public opinion had shifted, and if you felt the need to oppose gay marriage, you were in the minority - at this stage the likes of football clubs and other public entities are throwing their support behind that cause, representative of shifting views in society. Usually this happens at the later stages of the ‘movement’ - when it’s reached a point of social acceptance that doesn’t put the reputation of the company/club at risk.

3 years ago it becomes legal with a 60%+ majority - particularly strong in big cities (ie. key markets).

Publicly state that you oppose gay marriage now and you may as well be Margaret Court. A relic of the past with dated views of the world. No company/sporting club wants to be representative of that in this country.

Things change.

Same goes for ‘Changing the Date’. It’s not a matter of IF, it’s WHEN.

Probably within the next 2-3 years if we are using the current model as a guide. Next election cycle?

 

[Kozzie_Magic]

He didn't make an argument. He stated a couple of very simple facts.

And what exactly have AFL clubs taken a position on that would qualify as 'wokeaf leftie' or extreme right wing?

No, he shared his opinion, and no amount of repeating said opinion will make it a fact.

 

[Kozzie_Magic]

Same goes for ‘Changing the Date’. It’s not a matter of IF, it’s WHEN.

That's your opinion, not a fact. If the date is changed then it will become a fact, until then it's just an opinion.

 

[Jade]

No, he shared his opinion, and no amount of repeating said opinion will make it a fact.

No, he stated facts.

"AFL clubs are just that - clubs. As organisations comprised of individuals they are free to express their views however they so wish - whether on supporting 'Change the Date', Donald Trump or Holocaust denial."

It is a FACT that clubs are free to express their views as they see fit. Whether there are consequences for those views is an entirely different consideration, but again, it is a FACT that they can express those views.

"Its members are also free to agree or disagree, and if they disagree enough they are free to cancel their membership."

It is a FACT that members can disagree, and cancel their membership. That is a FACT.

 

[jatz14]

No, he stated facts.

"AFL clubs are just that - clubs. As organisations comprised of individuals they are free to express their views however they so wish - whether on supporting 'Change the Date', Donald Trump or Holocaust denial."

It is a FACT that clubs are free to express their views as they see fit. Whether there are consequences for those views is an entirely different consideration, but again, it is a FACT that they can express those views.

"Its members are also free to agree or disagree, and if they disagree enough they are free to cancel their membership."

It is a FACT that members can disagree, and cancel their membership. That is a FACT.

AFL positions on most issues are so mainstream that should a member disagree so vehemently that they would cancel their membership, then not only should that be allowed, it should be positively encouraged.

On moto g(6) plus using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Jade]

AFL positions on most issues are so mainstream that should a member disagree so vehemently that they would cancel their membership, then not only should that be allowed, it should be positively encouraged.

Agreed.

And further to that, as I said in an earlier post there are some political views that are NOT welcome at clubs, and should result in clubs actively expelling members.

 

[The 747]

Not all club members can vote out the Board of Directors, and others have a very diluted say.

Which clubs, out of interest? I know the plastic club members have limited rights but any of the traditional clubs (Sydney and Brisbane included?

 

[Jade]

Which clubs, out of interest? I know the plastic club members have limited rights but any of the traditional clubs (Sydney and Brisbane included?

I'd have to go through them one by one, but West Coast and Freo are 100% appointed; I think the SA clubs are too.

Essendon for example has actively diluted its member vote - now has four appointed Directors; and the six that are elected, they parachute popular candidates (such as Sheedy) in to the seats so that they can effectively 'appoint' most (if not all ) Directors. Dodgy as all hell and symptomatic of the shitful way the club has been run for some time.

 

[Checkered]

Is anyone on the left side of the spectrum agreeing with this or is just people on the right getting upset at being constantly reminded that their views are slowly being left behind?

 

[The 747]

I'd have to go through them one by one, but West Coast and Freo are 100% appointed; I think the SA clubs are too.

Essendon for example has actively diluted its member vote - now has four appointed Directors; and the six that are elected, they parachute popular candidates (such as Sheedy) in to the seats so that they can effectively 'appoint' most (if not all ) Directors. Dodgy as all hell and symptomatic of the shitful way the club has been run for some time.

That surprises me about Essendon as I would have thought the supporters had a lot of power at the club. Why do the member accept their rights being diluted? Appreciate it is probably a long answer so cliff notes are cool....

 

[Jade]

That surprises me about Essendon as I would have thought the supporters had a lot of power at the club. Why do the member accept their rights being diluted? Appreciate it is probably a long answer so cliff notes are cool....

Because most of them had NFI it was happening.

Was shuffled in amongst a slew of constitutional changes.

 

[ZedNotZee]

St Kilda have just announced Spud's Game which is designed to promote community conversations around mental health and destigmatise open communication around issues such as depression and anxiety in honour of our former captain Danny 'Spud' Frawley.

We were also the founders of the Pride Game alongside Sydney which was designed to promote inclusion in sport and ensure the LGBTIQ+ Community feel welcomed at the footy.

I wonder if the people that have an issue with the latter match also have an issue with the former?

 

[Jade]

St Kilda have just announced Spud's Game which is designed to promote community conversations around mental health and destigmatise open communication around issues such as depression and anxiety in honour of our former captain Danny 'Spud' Frawley.

We were also the founders of the Pride Game alongside Sydney which was designed to promote inclusion in sport and ensure the LGBTIQ+ Community feel welcomed at the footy.

I wonder if the people that have an issue with the latter match also have an issue with the former?

I suspect the Venn would be fairly closely aligned...