Discussion Nicky Winmar

[Yawkey way]

I just don't understand how people on the right of politics can act this racist without realising what they are doing. Is it a form of superiority complex? Is it religion? Or is a delusion of being in a bubble of so many people with the same terrible attitude that they feel obliged to adopt the same stances in order to fit in?

This era of Trump and Murdoch press normalising far right attitudes has seen so many societal norms bend to immoral then to outright evil.

Ignorance, stupidity who knows.

 

[gringo2011]

Ignorance, stupidity who knows.

Yeah a whole lot of complex issues. People with marginal jobs and less education are often the most racist. If you are on the bottom rungs in society, everyone seems like they are taking the tiny bit of esteem you have a tenuous grip on. It always surprises me that people who immigrated here are racist but I guess it's from a similar place. I think when people say that Australia is the worlds most successful multicultural society, it's actually a success of wealth distribution and egalitarianism. We are moving away from that and people are getting more cut-throat and less forgiving.

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

I can see this is a sharp topic for you given what you've said about being villified so I'm not going to be an arsehole here and respond in kind. I'll just state, once again, that you should read what I've said in this thread instead of jumping to conclusions about what you think I think.

indeed it is a sharp topic for me .... as it would be for anyone who has been subject of racial abuse ... by all means have your opinion but understand that unless you have been in the shoes of racially attacked person you have ZERO clue as to the subject on how to respond...

you talk about goodes responce to being attacked like it was some sort of pre planned workshopped responce ... the guy was called an ape not for the first time while going about his work in that moment he reacted .. he had no idea who was behind that comment he heard it he turned and he pointed ... the fact it was a teenage girl (i love the fact that everytime this story gets told the girl gets portayed younger and younger pretty soon it will be a preschooler) is not Goodes fault ... the actions of Goodes was then twisted and turned to make him the bad guy ...
can you imagine being abused for years then the one time you stand up it gets twisted that you are the bad guy... then the reaction to that is you cop even more abuse !!!
even when Goodes made comments that he didnt blame the girl and that she shouldnt be punished but supported and that education is the key people still came at him .. came at him hard ...

ill give you the tip this is a topic that triggers me HARD... i have told the story of how Nickys stand gave me the strength to keep on playing my sport after i was ready to give it away because of the abuse i copped, the side of the story i havent told is that after that i did stand up to the racist attacks at me , i raised it with my coach and my clubs youth director only to get told i was being too sensitive and i "was not that black anyway". so i sucked it up and the abuse continued and got worse til i snapped one day and belted a teammate, i was then banned and never played at that level again .. so i did the "right way" and got nothing.. i did the "wrong way" and got thrown out all i wanted to do was play my sport without copping the crap but i was not allowed that so when people who have never copped the abuse try to speak with authority on the "right way" to go about it its a red flag to me cause you have Zero idea the feelings going through you when you are getting abused .. you have no idea the anger, the fear, the hurt, the shame and the worthlessness you feel. you want to scream kick fight run cry all at the same time the fact Goodes had the class andthe restraint to just point is an indication of his strength of character, the fact his thoughts after were for the welfare and wellbeing of the girl shows his compassion ...

the main point that gets missed in all the right way and wrong way to point it out is the fact that the abused person would 100% of the time rather the abuse didnt happen so they wouldnt HAVE to point it out . so instead of making the victim accountable of HOW they point it out maybe look at WHY they have to point it out..

honestly this dredges up lots of emotions and feelings for me and the fact that in 2020 we still have to have guys like Nicky being questioned about their actions in the face of abuse is really very disapointing

 

[StCicatriz]

Ignorance, stupidity who knows.

feels like a lot of dunning-kruger with it. i've yet to see someone who can self reflect on their thoughts and behavior and understand that they are racist.

they genuinely do not see it. even if you sit them down and say "here are the reasons why what you expressing is racist" they won't buy it. they'll dig their heals in, deny it, then try and spin their way out of it.

 

[Crusty Undies]

indeed it is a sharp topic for me .... as it would be for anyone who has been subject of racial abuse ... by all means have your opinion but understand that unless you have been in the shoes of racially attacked person you have ZERO clue as to the subject on how to respond...

you talk about goodes responce to being attacked like it was some sort of pre planned workshopped responce ... the guy was called an ape not for the first time while going about his work in that moment he reacted .. he had no idea who was behind that comment he heard it he turned and he pointed ... the fact it was a teenage girl (i love the fact that everytime this story gets told the girl gets portayed younger and younger pretty soon it will be a preschooler) is not Goodes fault ... the actions of Goodes was then twisted and turned to make him the bad guy ...
can you imagine being abused for years then the one time you stand up it gets twisted that you are the bad guy... then the reaction to that is you cop even more abuse !!!
even when Goodes made comments that he didnt blame the girl and that she shouldnt be punished but supported and that education is the key people still came at him .. came at him hard ...

ill give you the tip this is a topic that triggers me HARD... i have told the story of how Nickys stand gave me the strength to keep on playing my sport after i was ready to give it away because of the abuse i copped, the side of the story i havent told is that after that i did stand up to the racist attacks at me , i raised it with my coach and my clubs youth director only to get told i was being too sensitive and i "was not that black anyway". so i sucked it up and the abuse continued and got worse til i snapped one day and belted a teammate, i was then banned and never played at that level again .. so i did the "right way" and got nothing.. i did the "wrong way" and got thrown out all i wanted to do was play my sport without copping the crap but i was not allowed that so when people who have never copped the abuse try to speak with authority on the "right way" to go about it its a red flag to me cause you have Zero idea the feelings going through you when you are getting abused .. you have no idea the anger, the fear, the hurt, the shame and the worthlessness you feel. you want to scream kick fight run cry all at the same time the fact Goodes had the class andthe restraint to just point is an indication of his strength of character, the fact his thoughts after were for the welfare and wellbeing of the girl shows his compassion ...

the main point that gets missed in all the right way and wrong way to point it out is the fact that the abused person would 100% of the time rather the abuse didnt happen so they wouldnt HAVE to point it out . so instead of making the victim accountable of HOW they point it out maybe look at WHY they have to point it out..

honestly this dredges up lots of emotions and feelings for me and the fact that in 2020 we still have to have guys like Nicky being questioned about their actions in the face of abuse is really very disapointing

I'm sorry that happened to you. It makes sense why you see things the way you do, and I'm not trying to convince you otherwise. The "you're not that black" kind of comments are rife throughout Australia given that skin colour in aboriginal progeny is recessive. I've seen people with 1 white parent and 1 aboriginal parent look the same as some other white kids and people then say things like that, it's obviously not ok.

But I have been racially abused, being white doesn't make you immune to that despite the claims of racebaiting critical theorists. It's happened to me on the footy field, at school, at work, online. It's not too the same degree as you, and obviously that makes it harder to deal with in your case. All this too say though that I do have some idea what it's like. I'm not completely clueless just because it's happened to me less. At the end of the day, the argument isn't about whether Goodes was justified to do what he did, because he probably was. But the way Goodes acted generated essentially zero change. Not on a cultural level, not at an AFL level, nothing really happened and like it or not that's because of who he called out and the way he did it.

Compare that too Nicky who is now a cultural icon and regarded as a hero in sporting circles for responding the way he did. He rose above the petty abuse and he rose above pointing out the culprits. Him dominating the game then just lifting his jumper and saying he's proud of who he is no matter what anyone said made him more human in everyone else's eyes and humanizing someone makes them harder to hate. That's just my opinion.

 

[gringo2011]

indeed it is a sharp topic for me .... as it would be for anyone who has been subject of racial abuse ... by all means have your opinion but understand that unless you have been in the shoes of racially attacked person you have ZERO clue as to the subject on how to respond...

you talk about goodes responce to being attacked like it was some sort of pre planned workshopped responce ... the guy was called an ape not for the first time while going about his work in that moment he reacted .. he had no idea who was behind that comment he heard it he turned and he pointed ... the fact it was a teenage girl (i love the fact that everytime this story gets told the girl gets portayed younger and younger pretty soon it will be a preschooler) is not Goodes fault ... the actions of Goodes was then twisted and turned to make him the bad guy ...
can you imagine being abused for years then the one time you stand up it gets twisted that you are the bad guy... then the reaction to that is you cop even more abuse !!!
even when Goodes made comments that he didnt blame the girl and that she shouldnt be punished but supported and that education is the key people still came at him .. came at him hard ...

ill give you the tip this is a topic that triggers me HARD... i have told the story of how Nickys stand gave me the strength to keep on playing my sport after i was ready to give it away because of the abuse i copped, the side of the story i havent told is that after that i did stand up to the racist attacks at me , i raised it with my coach and my clubs youth director only to get told i was being too sensitive and i "was not that black anyway". so i sucked it up and the abuse continued and got worse til i snapped one day and belted a teammate, i was then banned and never played at that level again .. so i did the "right way" and got nothing.. i did the "wrong way" and got thrown out all i wanted to do was play my sport without copping the crap but i was not allowed that so when people who have never copped the abuse try to speak with authority on the "right way" to go about it its a red flag to me cause you have Zero idea the feelings going through you when you are getting abused .. you have no idea the anger, the fear, the hurt, the shame and the worthlessness you feel. you want to scream kick fight run cry all at the same time the fact Goodes had the class andthe restraint to just point is an indication of his strength of character, the fact his thoughts after were for the welfare and wellbeing of the girl shows his compassion ...

the main point that gets missed in all the right way and wrong way to point it out is the fact that the abused person would 100% of the time rather the abuse didnt happen so they wouldnt HAVE to point it out . so instead of making the victim accountable of HOW they point it out maybe look at WHY they have to point it out..

honestly this dredges up lots of emotions and feelings for me and the fact that in 2020 we still have to have guys like Nicky being questioned about their actions in the face of abuse is really very disapointing

My cousin is half indigenous. He's got baggage from it and when you see what being left out, discriminated against and discounted is like, you realise that it's a serious issue. He's never had jobs where he goes up and got left behind while others with less talent went past him. He was really angry when he was younger. He got a big inheritance and ended up buying a house and some land and is doing pretty well now but he was seriously self destructive when he was young. Both his siblings had a different dad and their lives worked out so much different from exactly the same background apart from his skin.

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

I'm sorry that happened to you. It makes sense why you see things the way you do, and I'm not trying to convince you otherwise. The "you're not that black" kind of comments are rife throughout Australia given that skin colour in aboriginal progeny is recessive. I've seen people with 1 white parent and 1 aboriginal parent look the same as some other white kids and people then say things like that, it's obviously not ok.

But I have been racially abused, being white doesn't make you immune to that despite the claims of racebaiting critical theorists. It's happened to me on the footy field, at school, at work, online. It's not too the same degree as you, and obviously that makes it harder to deal with in your case. All this too say though that I do have some idea what it's like. I'm not completely clueless just because it's happened to me less. At the end of the day, the argument isn't about whether Goodes was justified to do what he did, because he probably was. But the way Goodes acted generated essentially zero change. Not on a cultural level, not at an AFL level, nothing really happened and like it or not that's because of who he called out and the way he did it.

Compare that too Nicky who is now a cultural icon and regarded as a hero in sporting circles for responding the way he did. He rose above the petty abuse and he rose above pointing out the culprits. Him dominating the game then just lifting his jumper and saying he's proud of who he is no matter what anyone said made him more human in everyone else's eyes and humanizing someone makes them harder to hate. That's just my opinion.

this bolded part ... its not up to Goodes to make the stand that changes the cultural perception and generate the change ... Goodes is a footballer who just wanted to do his job without the abuse ... change is brought on by the people not the action ... the way nicky reacted did get huge responce but it also wasnt without backlash ... 30 years later we still have Eddie Betts having bannanas thrown at him so how much change has really been made ?
the champions of change are not decided by the action of the person staning up against the racisim it needs to come from the competition it needs to come from our govermental leaders . the fact the AFL sat on its hands when goodes was copping it is the reason no change was made ... weak leadership at that time is the reason nothing got done and nothing improved if Nickys actions had been met with the same inaction would his stance been the "wrong way"
change needs to be championed by people in power Goodes provided the spark to initiate change but society instead threw water on it

 

[Crusty Undies]

this bolded part ... its not up to Goodes to make the stand that changes the cultural perception and generate the change ... Goodes is a footballer who just wanted to do his job without the abuse ... change is brought on by the people not the action ... the way nicky reacted did get huge responce but it also wasnt without backlash ... 30 years later we still have Eddie Betts having bannanas thrown at him so how much change has really been made ?
the champions of change are not decided by the action of the person staning up against the racisim it needs to come from the competition it needs to come from our govermental leaders . the fact the AFL sat on its hands when goodes was copping it is the reason no change was made ... weak leadership at that time is the reason nothing got done and nothing improved if Nickys actions had been met with the same inaction would his stance been the "wrong way"
change needs to be championed by people in power Goodes provided the spark to initiate change but society instead threw water on it

Why do you think the AFL sat on it's hands? It's because there wasn't enough public backlash at their lack of action. And why wasn't there enough public backlash at their lack of action? Because Goodes alienated people when he went after a teenage girl. I don't really care what way you want to spin it or who's fault it is or who's responsibility it is. The facts are that the AFL is a business fairly devoid of morals that will only be forced into action by threatening income. The way to threaten their income is by threatening attendance boycotts, membership boycotts or any other means of income ransom. And the way that happens is by getting enough of the general public onside that maintaining the status quo is untenable. Public opinion is everything in our society for better or worse. It's unfortunately why cancel culture has been relatively successful. It's also the reason America is now in the midst of what looks like a revolution at least for race relations, because enough people got angry at the injustice of the George Floyd situation that the government will be forced to make changes.

Finally. 30 years ago if people had thrown bananas at Betts it would've been laughed off. Now there is a concerted effort from every level of the AFL and general public to condemn that sort of action. So yes I'd say things have changed. I don't think you're listening to what I'm saying given I've responded to essentially the same thing 5 times in a row now so with that, I'm finished with this conversation. Hopefully we can all enjoy the footy tonight.

 

[Verdun]

Why do you think the AFL sat on it's hands? It's because there wasn't enough public backlash at their lack of action. And why wasn't there enough public backlash at their lack of action? Because Goodes alienated people when he went after a teenage girl. I don't really care what way you want to spin it or who's fault it is or who's responsibility it is. The facts are that the AFL is a business fairly devoid of morals that will only be forced into action by threatening income. The way to threaten their income is by threatening attendance boycotts, membership boycotts or any other means of income ransom. And the way that happens is by getting enough of the general public onside that maintaining the status quo is untenable. Public opinion is everything in our society for better or worse. It's unfortunately why cancel culture has been relatively successful. It's also the reason America is now in the midst of what looks like a revolution at least for race relations, because enough people got angry at the injustice of the George Floyd situation that the government will be forced to make changes.

Finally. 30 years ago if people had thrown bananas at Betts it would've been laughed off. Now there is a concerted effort from every level of the AFL and general public to condemn that sort of action. So yes I'd say things have changed. I don't think you're listening to what I'm saying given I've responded to essentially the same thing 5 times in a row now so with that, I'm finished with this conversation. Hopefully we can all enjoy the footy tonight.

Sorry mate saying the same thing 5 times does not make it right especially this:


'Because Goodes alienated people when he went after a teenage girl'

Goodes did not go after a teenage girl - that is re writing history; he called out racism. Makes him out to be something he is not.

Goodes accepts apology for teen's slur

The AFL has condemned a 13-year-old girl for calling AFL star Adam Goodes an ''ape'' at the MCG on Friday. And Victorian Premier Denis Napthine promised a new school program to combat racism.

www.smh.com.au

He also accepted her apology the day after and actually said:


''Just received a phone call from a young girl apologising for her actions. Let's support her please,''

These are also his words:

''She's 13 years old, still so innocent, I don't put any blame on her,'' he said. ''Unfortunately it's what she hears and the environment that she's grown up in has made her think that it's OK to call people names.'

I repeat "Unfortunately it's what she hears and the envrionment that she's grown up in has made her think that it's OK to call people names"

This is what need to change.

I agree it is time to watch the footy, CARN SAINTS

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

Why do you think the AFL sat on it's hands? It's because there wasn't enough public backlash at their lack of action. And why wasn't there enough public backlash at their lack of action? Because Goodes alienated people when he went after a teenage girl. I don't really care what way you want to spin it or who's fault it is or who's responsibility it is. The facts are that the AFL is a business fairly devoid of morals that will only be forced into action by threatening income. The way to threaten their income is by threatening attendance boycotts, membership boycotts or any other means of income ransom. And the way that happens is by getting enough of the general public onside that maintaining the status quo is untenable. Public opinion is everything in our society for better or worse. It's unfortunately why cancel culture has been relatively successful. It's also the reason America is now in the midst of what looks like a revolution at least for race relations, because enough people got angry at the injustice of the George Floyd situation that the government will be forced to make changes.

Finally. 30 years ago if people had thrown bananas at Betts it would've been laughed off. Now there is a concerted effort from every level of the AFL and general public to condemn that sort of action. So yes I'd say things have changed. I don't think you're listening to what I'm saying given I've responded to essentially the same thing 5 times in a row now so with that, I'm finished with this conversation. Hopefully we can all enjoy the footy tonight.

lets not go down the Newman path and RE-Write history here .... Goodes never "went after" the teenage girl... he pointed her out for making a racist remark .. and at every point after that was very very clear it wasnt the girls fault that it was the lack of education .. he went to great lengths to ensure the girl's welfare was looked after he made comments that she needed to be supported for her mistake not lynched for her actions ... so to say Goodes "went after her" is a gross exageration ...
The AFL sat on its hands because it never got on the front foot to support Goodes , it never put out any education peice about what is acceptable it just let it play out itself and when the likes of Tony Jones, Newman and co went after goodes they ran away .. when Goodes was beeing boo'ed out of the game they gave a limp wristed "dont boo him" reply thats weak and Goodes deserved better than that ...

 

[Crusty Undies]

Sorry mate saying the same thing 5 times does not make it right especially this:


'Because Goodes alienated people when he went after a teenage girl'

Goodes did not go after a teenage girl - that is re writing history; he called out racism. Makes him out to be something he is not.

Goodes accepts apology for teen's slur

The AFL has condemned a 13-year-old girl for calling AFL star Adam Goodes an ''ape'' at the MCG on Friday. And Victorian Premier Denis Napthine promised a new school program to combat racism.

www.smh.com.au

He also accepted her apology the day after and actually said:


''Just received a phone call from a young girl apologising for her actions. Let's support her please,''

These are also his words:

''She's 13 years old, still so innocent, I don't put any blame on her,'' he said. ''Unfortunately it's what she hears and the environment that she's grown up in has made her think that it's OK to call people names.'

I repeat "Unfortunately it's what she hears and the envrionment that she's grown up in has made her think that it's OK to call people names"

This is what need to change.

I agree it is time to watch the footy, CARN SAINTS

Firstly, when someone poses the same dilemma 5 times without addressing my response, I will respond the same way 5 times. Correct or otherwise. That is how a discussion works, 1 person says their part then the other responds and then the first responds and so on.

Second of all. He did go after a teenage girl. The fact that he softened his stance later when he found out who it was that he pointed out among ALL OTHERS in a crowd of 50+ thousand people doesn't change that. I'm not rewriting history by stating what occurred. It is rewriting history to pretend that Goodes didn't single out a teenage girl or to be so pedantic as to imagine that me saying "went after a teenage girl" means anything other than pointing her alone out in a crowd.

Finally, I don't disagree with the rest of what you said. We do need to change the environment people grow up in to prevent the inheritance of racism. So I'd appreciate it if you could stop pretending I did disagree with that or posting your last 4 sentences as some sort of gotcha.

 

[Crusty Undies]

lets not go down the Newman path and RE-Write history here .... Goodes never "went after" the teenage girl... he pointed her out for making a racist remark .. and at every point after that was very very clear it wasnt the girls fault that it was the lack of education .. he went to great lengths to ensure the girl's welfare was looked after he made comments that she needed to be supported for her mistake not lynched for her actions ... so to say Goodes "went after her" is a gross exageration ...
The AFL sat on its hands because it never got on the front foot to support Goodes , it never put out any education peice about what is acceptable it just let it play out itself and when the likes of Tony Jones, Newman and co went after goodes they ran away .. when Goodes was beeing boo'ed out of the game they gave a limp wristed "dont boo him" reply thats weak and Goodes deserved better than that ...

Did you just rewrite what Verdun said directly above you? See above for my response to the rewriting history bs.

And once again you completely ignore everything I've already said. Clearly the AFL didn't do enough to support Goodes. No one is disagreeing with you, so why are you still arguing that point like anyone IS arguing that with you? Have you even once considered doing anything more than the barest, most superficial analysis of WHY the AFL sit on their hands? Of course not, you'd rather have a whinge at me like I'm the bad guy for suggesting that maybe if you want to see change from what is essentially a corporation constantly in the public spotlight with no guiding force but income, you might have to go about it a different way than what Goodes or Lumumba did.

 

[Verdun]

Firstly, when someone poses the same dilemma 5 times without addressing my response, I will respond the same way 5 times. Correct or otherwise. That is how a discussion works, 1 person says their part then the other responds and then the first responds and so on.

Second of all. He did go after a teenage girl. The fact that he softened his stance later when he found out who it was that he pointed out among ALL OTHERS in a crowd of 50+ thousand people doesn't change that. I'm not rewriting history by stating what occurred. It is rewriting history to pretend that Goodes didn't single out a teenage girl or to be so pedantic as to imagine that me saying "went after a teenage girl" means anything other than pointing her alone out in a crowd.

Finally, I don't disagree with the rest of what you said. We do need to change the environment people grow up in to prevent the inheritance of racism. So I'd appreciate it if you could stop pretending I did disagree with that or posting your last 4 sentences as some sort of gotcha.

No mate totally disagree - she called him a monkey ffs, he pointed at her. Seriously how is that going after a teenage girl. It is calling out racism.

Also interested what you believe he should have done, continue to ignore it and not be a angry aboriginal??

''She's 13 years old, still so innocent, I don't put any blame on her,'' he said. ''Unfortunately it's what she hears and the environment that she's grown up in has made her think that it's OK to call people names.'

You can dislike him if you like if it makes you feel better, how many times do you think he has heard that stuff.

 

[IKE TURNER]

!. What has that got to do with anything if he did or did not?

2. Why are you here?

so sam Newman can have an opinion about an event and is a Nazi racist while winmar can punch the s**t out of a taxi driver trying to make a living and is a saint. The reason I'm here is because I'm allowed to have a different opinion than you

 

[Verdun]

Mediation has occured between the bloke who used to be on the footy show and Nicky Winmar mediated by Stan Grant and a former Federal Court Judge. With an apology being issued and:

- a cash settlement to an indigeonous charity.

Nicky Winmar said he 'is pleased it is resolved but we still need to work on a few things'.

Now what i expect from a lot of people yelling out to have their voices heard is that Nicky Winmar was only in it for the money (even though the money is going to indigenous charity.

He will only be in it for the money, like others in the past and others in the future who call out racism their character will be attacked not the racism.

 

[Verdun]

just confirming that's the same Nicky winmar who bashed a taxi driver?

so sam Newman can have an opinion about an event and is a Nazi racist while winmar can punch the sh*t out of a taxi driver trying to make a living and is a saint. The reason I'm here is because I'm allowed to have a different opinion than you

Here we go.

This is what I'm talking about.

 

[jwikked]

so sam Newman can have an opinion about an event and is a Nazi racist while winmar can punch the sh*t out of a taxi driver trying to make a living and is a saint. The reason I'm here is because I'm allowed to have a different opinion than you

No one said Winmar is a saint (pun ignored), but because he did one thing that is horrid doesn't discount the situation he's in. Are you suggesting because he belted a taxi driver, he's not allowed to stick up for himself in unrelated matters? Should he just roll over and accept untruths spoken about him, because he's not a perfect human?

Sam Newman isn't a nazi racist, don't be dramatic. He had an opinion of that moment, he voiced it and Nicky took offense and took action. Sam was wrong with what he said, but he was able to speak his mind and he isn't banned from speaking. Freedom of speech is still alive.

For what its worth, it's pretty obvious that Nicky wasn't just referring to a gutsy win when you see which finger he was pointing with.

 

[Verdun]

so sam Newman can have an opinion about an event and is a Nazi racist while winmar can punch the sh*t out of a taxi driver trying to make a living and is a saint. The reason I'm here is because I'm allowed to have a different opinion than you

Yep you can have a different opinion, I am pleased it is very different to mine. I also did not call anyone a Nazi racist - you are being over the top.

Actually you are wrong - Nicky Winmar was a great Saint ; great servant of the St Kilda football club.

My point is he called out racism, then the version of what he did was changed.

I was asking why you are here as you on another clubs forum I always find that very odd.

Freedom of speech is alive but so is responsibility to own what you say.

 

[Crusty Undies]

No mate totally disagree - she called him a monkey ffs, he pointed at her. Seriously how is that going after a teenage girl. It is calling out racism.

Also interested what you believe he should have done, continue to ignore it and not be a angry aboriginal??

You can dislike him if you like if it makes you feel better, how many times do you think he has heard that stuff.

I don't dislike him. I don't think we're really disagreeing either, it's just semantics about what you want to call what he did. I said went after but if it makes you feel better you can substitute those 2 words with "singled out" or any other synonym for picking an individual out of a crowd. The fact is the person he singled out is someone the public is inclined to be sympathetic towards. He could've singled out her parents or any of the thousands of other filth supporters who were undoubtedly saying much worse things and it's arguably unlucky that the thing he happened to hear was from who it was. I'm not even saying that Goodes was unjustified in calling out the girl who did it. My argument has been and still is that if people actually want to see change in regards to racism in sport they need to go about it a different way because nothing will change doing what Goodes or Lumumba did. I'm not arguing any other points.

 

[Crusty Undies]

so sam Newman can have an opinion about an event and is a Nazi racist while winmar can punch the sh*t out of a taxi driver trying to make a living and is a saint.

Given that the two events are about as connected as you are to this board. Yes.

Newman is a racist for attempting to rewrite what is at this point football lore. I wasn't even alive and I know exactly what happened that day. I've heard it first hand from my father that the level of abuse Nicky and McAdam copped was worse than anything he'd ever heard before or since; on another level of disgusting. So for Newman to try and not only reduce the importance of that moment but to then have the audacity to suggest that Winmar has changed his story for profit is racist. And not only that, it's deplorable and precisely what I've come to expect from as low a calibre human being as Sam Newman.

Nicky punching a taxi driver while first of all being wrong, is irrelevant to this situation. No one's perfect. No one is claiming that Winmar is perfect and everyone makes mistakes, some bigger than others. For you to try and dismiss either; what happened in 1993 or Sam Newman trying to rewrite what happened in 1993 because Nicky Winmar has been accused of assaulting a taxi driver is an insidious and revolting a red herring as I've seen in my life. Shame on you.

 

[Verdun]

To be fair goodes and lumumba both have elements of attention seeking sook about them and neither went about calling out racism in the right way. They deservedly also copped flak for the way (particularly Lumumba after the whole speak to the president thing) they acted.

I don't dislike him. I don't think we're really disagreeing either, it's just semantics about what you want to call what he did. I said went after but if it makes you feel better you can substitute those 2 words with "singled out" or any other synonym for picking an individual out of a crowd. The fact is the person he singled out is someone the public is inclined to be sympathetic towards. He could've singled out her parents or any of the thousands of other filth supporters who were undoubtedly saying much worse things and it's arguably unlucky that the thing he happened to hear was from who it was. I'm not even saying that Goodes was unjustified in calling out the girl who did it. My argument has been and still is that if people actually want to see change in regards to racism in sport they need to go about it a different way because nothing will change doing what Goodes or Lumumba did. I'm not arguing any other points.

Fair call but I still disagree with this comment and that is fine.

'Because Goodes alienated people when he went after a teenage girl'

He did not go after a teenage girl, if people are put off by him pointing to where he the racist comment came from in the middle of a game frankly they should get over themselves.

He is ironically then called a sook!!!

I am sure he would have loved to have the time to identify the parents etc in a middle of a game. Sure he would have liked to have had a nice cup of tea with the rest of the Collingwood supporters who were probably hurling abuse but he had probably ignored that for ages up to that point..

Goodes and others have done a lot more than just that, but he was also hounded out of public life he is not the one to blame.

How could he single out the parents, to me that is just blaming him for standing up for himself, I respect him as I do Winmar for that act that he did at Victoria Park and for calling out the dinosaurs out who tried to re write history on his behalf

Racism has to stop from the racists and one's hearing it not the one's it is directed at.

 

[IKE TURNER]

Given that the two events are about as connected as you are to this board. Yes.

Newman is a racist for attempting to rewrite what is at this point football lore. I wasn't even alive and I know exactly what happened that day. I've heard it first hand from my father that the level of abuse Nicky and McAdam copped was worse than anything he'd ever heard before or since; on another level of disgusting. So for Newman to try and not only reduce the importance of that moment but to then have the audacity to suggest that Winmar has changed his story for profit is racist. And not only that, it's deplorable and precisely what I've come to expect from as low a calibre human being as Sam Newman.

Nicky punching a taxi driver while first of all being wrong, is irrelevant to this situation. No one's perfect. No one is claiming that Winmar is perfect and everyone makes mistakes, some bigger than others. For you to try and dismiss either; what happened in 1993 or Sam Newman trying to rewrite what happened in 1993 because Nicky Winmar has been accused of assaulting a taxi driver is an insidious and revolting a red herring as I've seen in my life. Shame on you.

so Nicky is allowed to make mistakes but sam isn't? nickys feelings are hurt and that's a travesty but taxi driver getting beat up is just boys being boys?

 

[Verdun]

so Nicky is allowed to make mistakes but sam isn't? nickys feelings are hurt and that's a travesty but taxi driver getting beat up is just boys being boys?

Who has said Nicky Winmar's mistakes should be forgiven - you have brought it up no one else.

 

[IKE TURNER]

if I was cynical I would suggest saint Nick probably hasn't much coin once footy finished and a lawyer might have mentioned being a professional victim pays okay and gets you on all sorts of boards or organisations, we will see

 

[IKE TURNER]

Who has said Nicky Winmar's mistakes should be forgiven - you have brought it up no one else.

I brought it up cause everyone else swept it under the carpet