Nicky Winmar to take legal action against Newman, Scott and Sheahan

[Elmer_Judd]

Nicky Winmar was a far better footy player than Sad Sack Sammy, and his legacy in the game will forever be immortal with his heroic stance against racist hooligans at Victoria Park in 1993.

All leather face Sam will be remembered for is a more bogan less educated version of Andrew Bolt.

Also Wayne Ludbrey (who was Jim Stynes brother in law) is also considering legal action as well. He was there and had a perfect view and idea of what went down that day.

 

[The mighty Hawks]

Winmar is an absolute liar and laughing all the way to the bank, people saying otherwise need to look at the facts......

 

[Chief]

Winmar is an absolute liar and laughing all the way to the bank, people saying otherwise need to look at the facts......

I think Nicky said it best:

 

[Ricmel]

But I don't agree that you can label people for promoting freedom of speech either

Freedom of speech does not mean you can say anything you want. So many people mistake the two.

In the case of comments made by Sam, I think he can rely on freedom of speech because his opinion expressed is not filled with hate or overt racism themes or dealing with subjects unacceptable to society.

But the issue is really about none of that and most here are missing the point.

It doesn't really matter what was in Winmar's head at the time. The incident and the images resulting have become iconic in the conversation concerning the treatment of indigenous Australians at the time and almost sacred to past and current indigenous players (this is what Sheahan later realised). It doesn't really matter what was in Winmar's head and Newman's insistence that it was something that it wasn't is akin to arguing with a digger that the attack on Gallipoli shouldn't be celebrated because in fact it was a massive failure and a waste of time.

Newman deals in black and white issues. Most here follow one or the other like lemmings when really it is the middle ground that is the heart of the story.

 

[00Stinger]

Nicky Winmar was a far better footy player than Sad Sack Sammy

I would hazard a guess that no one on this board has been alive long enough to have seen all of both of their careers to defiantly confirm or deny this

 

[Ron The Bear]

So you won't accept the word of the person himself and the person who was on the spot and took the photo?

I think they believe they're telling the gospel truth, but I also think there's a possibility that they may have convinced themselves of it over time.

What would you say if the Herald-Sun reported that Winmar did declare he was proud to be black? My guess is "well they must have felt they had to back Winmar's version or be called racist". That's my belief based on your long history of posting on BigFooty.

I'm not contending that one report is accurate and the other inaccurate. Can you produce the article so that we can discuss it instead of hypotheticals, please.

So you think that it was more likely made up on the spot - to appear in an article written on the same day - and Winmar has dined out on it ever since, with the help of activists who took over the story. That's what you really believe on balance, given all the evidence? I'm just trying to get your actual belief straight here.

Photo captions aren't always accurate and I'm not sure Winmar has "dined out on it ever since". If it goes to court and Newman & co. have their arses sued off while producing no evidence to the contrary, any reasonable person must accept the skin version to be factual.

At this stage the skin version is very much the "official" version, and the other urban legend. A court verdict would very likely close the book.

 

[00Stinger]

Freedom of speech does not mean you can say anything you want. So many people mistake the two.

In the case of comments made by Sam, I think he can rely on freedom of speech because his opinion expressed is not filled with hate or overt racism themes or dealing with subjects unacceptable to society.

But the issue is really about none of that and most here are missing the point.

It doesn't really matter what was in Winmar's head at the time. The incident and the images resulting have become iconic in the conversation concerning the treatment of indigenous Australians at the time and almost sacred to past and current indigenous players (this is what Sheahan later realised). It doesn't really matter what was in Winmar's head and Newman's insistence that it was something that it wasn't is akin to arguing with a digger that the attack on Gallipoli shouldn't be celebrated because in fact it was a massive failure and a waste of time.

Newman deals in black and white issues. Most here follow one or the other like lemmings when really it is the middle ground that is the heart of the story.

Not sure why you had to cut out half of my post when quoting me like I was condoning what Newman said tbh

Then you go on about most people being lemming by sticking to one side or the other when the it should be the middle ground, which is exactly what my full comment was

 

[Elmer_Judd]

I would hazard a guess that no one on this board has been alive long enough to have seen all of both of their careers to defiantly confirm or deny this

I was old enough to have seen most of Winmar's career, He was a bloody legend, the fact he is not yet in the AFL Hall of Fame yet is a bloody disgrace.

There is a reason they have a statue of him outside Optus Stadium.

 

[00Stinger]

I was old enough to have seen most of Winmar's career, He was a bloody legend, the fact he is not yet in the AFL Hall of Fame yet is a bloody disgrace.

There is a reason they have a statue of him outside Optus Stadium.

so you only saw one of their careers?

That is a good base for your argument of one being better than the other

 

[Donakebab]

Winmar is an absolute liar and laughing all the way to the bank, people saying otherwise need to look at the facts......

When you want someone to look at the facts, the best practice is to provide them.

 

[Chief]

I think they believe they're telling the gospel truth, but I also think there's a possibility that they may have convinced themselves of it over time.

Over what period of time?

Going by the article I posted it was one afternoon. At what point do you think they might have convinced themselves it was about skin colour?

 

[Ricmel]

Not sure why you had to cut out half of my post when quoting me like I was condoning what Newman said tbh

I agree that Sams comments were ******* stupid and archadic

Sorry, did not mean to, just wanted a "Freedom of speech" reference. Wasn't particularly addressing my post to you.

 

[Ron The Bear]

There is a reason they have a statue of him outside Optus Stadium.

Something something Tayla Harris statue.

Carry on.

Over what period of time?

Going by the article I posted it was one afternoon. At what point do you think they might have convinced themselves it was about skin colour?

I have no idea whatsoever.

Cue the obvious response.

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Something something Tayla Harris statue.

Carry on.

Something something Christopher Colombus statue.

Carry on.

 

[Chief]

Something something Tayla Harris statue.

Carry on.

I have no idea whatsoever.

Cue the obvious response.

Have a guess.

Longer than one afternoon?

 

[Ron The Bear]

Have a guess.

Longer than one afternoon?

Think of it like when you denied turning down a challenge to make a charitable donation. I never called you a liar; I just think you were mistaken. The honourable thing to do would've been to acknowledge it.

 

[Chief]

Think of it like when you denied turning down a challenge to make a charitable donation.

Did I? On the same day? Day after? A year later?

 

[Ron The Bear]

Did I? On the same day? Day after? A year later?

Maybe you'll get a statue one day.

"Here stands Chief - the mighty philanthropist who commended all BigFooty profits to charity"

 

[Barrysballs]

Has anyone here changed there opinion of Nicky Winmar after hearing the opinions expressed in the podcast?

 

[Chief]

Maybe you'll get a statue one day.

"Here stands Chief - the mighty philanthropist who commended all BigFooty profits to charity"

OK you can't or won't answer.

 

[Ron The Bear]

OK you can't or won't answer.

You're asking an impossible question. I'm not offering a judgement on the photographer's or the newspaper's motivation or integrity.

 

[Chief]

Did I? On the same day? Day after? A year later?

You're asking an impossible question.

You're answering the wrong question.

I'm not offering a judgement on the photographer's or the newspaper's motivation or integrity.

Lol that's exactly what you did, citing The Age's "leanings".

 

[Ron The Bear]

Lol that's exactly what you did, citing The Age's "leanings".

Reckon people at the The Age believe they're completely impartial, but on my compass they tilt increasingly westward. That's why I asked for the article from the other major paper.

 

[Chief]

Reckon people at the The Age believe they're completely impartial, but against my compass they tilt increasingly westward. That's why I asked for the article from the other major paper.

So you've got:

Winmar
Ludbey
People who were at the ground
Allan McAlister
The Age report

vs

Some conjecture, and the Hun.

And you scratch your chin, look at the evidence, and pick the rumours and the Hun as the more likely source of truth.

OK.

 

[Ron The Bear]

And you scratch your chin, look at the evidence, and pick the rumours and the Hun as the more likely source of truth.

This is why I run out of patience with people like you. The wilful misrepresentations and outright lies.