Discussion Nicky Winmar

[Joffaboy]

maybe it's a FACT that these days you can have an opinion but only if it doesn't hurt someones feelings

Ask your racist mate Sam Newman who has to make a grovvelling apology to Nicky Winmar and Wayne Lubley, the photographer for completely lying about a fact and making a monetary donation so they don't need to go to court under dedamation laws.

No jog on noddy,I don't know if it is fact, but you sound like a brainless 12 y.o with the comprehension skills of a gnat, but hey thats just my opinion and freedom of speech and s**t hey noddy?

Now jog on back to the cesspool you crawled out of.

 

[IKE TURNER]

Ask your racist mate Sam Newman who has to make a grovvelling apology to Nicky Winmar and Wayne Lubley, the photographer for completely lying about a fact and making a monetary donation so they don't need to go to court under dedamation laws.

No jog on noddy,I don't know if it is fact, but you sound like a brainless 12 y.o with the comprehension skills of a gnat, but hey thats just my opinion and freedom of speech and sh*t hey noddy?

Now jog on back to the cesspool you crawled out of.

as far as comprehension skills go you spelt grovelling and defamination wrong but that aside: sam Newman is a racist good to know, also he just gave an opinion on an incident and maybe he just gave a grovelling apology to nip this silliness in the bud

 

[jwikked]

as far as comprehension skills go you spelt grovelling and defamination wrong but that aside: sam Newman is a racist good to know, also he just gave an opinion on an incident and maybe he just gave a groveling apology to nip this silliness in the bud

It's not really something you can have an opinion on, though. You can have an opinion on whether a movie is good or not, or if a song is great or s**t. You can't have an opinion on someones intentions though. Especially when the person involved knows what they were doing.

Newman was wrong, and was spreading lies about Nicky Winmar and its as simple as that. It has nothing to do with not being able to have an opinion. I like Sam more than probably most people that post here, but he was wrong to say what he said.

 

[gringo2011]

no, Robbie( quite rightly) let emotion take over and was more a man of action which unfortunately for him opposition players and supporters used to their advantage. Don't get me wrong Longy does a great job and gives a voice to indigenous people but he was also paid thousands to have a centre for indigenous youth named after him

He’s got a foundation set up for indigenous youth because he started a foundation to keep kids in education and teach life skills. Many of which are missing in indigenous communities because under past government we institutionalised them. We now realise religious and government institutions weren’t always great places. They missed out on family environments and life skills. He’s used his position as a footballer to leverage support from government. There is no reason you couldn’t start your own foundation for the Preservation if Antiquated Thinking and lobby government too. I know someone who runs similar programs in the NT. They barely have enough to operate. No one is pulling big salaries. You do it because you give a s**t.

 

[IKE TURNER]

It's not really something you can have an opinion on, though. You can have an opinion on whether a movie is good or not, or if a song is great or sh*t. You can't have an opinion on someones intentions though. Especially when the person involved knows what they were doing.

Newman was wrong, and was spreading lies about Nicky Winmar and its as simple as that. It has nothing to do with not being able to have an opinion. I like Sam more than probably most people that post here, but he was wrong to say what he said.

I think sam thought (as I did) that Nicky lifted his jumper to show he had heart unlike the loudmouth supporters at game and the media just ran with the proud of my skin thing which got a life of its own. Only one person knows for sure and that's Nicky and if that's what he says I believe him but sam doesn't have to believe him and can give his opinion although that means he is calling Nicky a liar

 

[jwikked]

I think sam thought (as I did) that Nicky lifted his jumper to show he had heart unlike the loudmouth supporters at game and the media just ran with the proud of my skin thing which got a life of its own. Only one person knows for sure and that's Nicky and if that's what he says I believe him but sam doesn't have to believe him and can give his opinion although that means he is calling Nicky a liar

Actually, there was a photographer there that heard what Nicky had said. It was never in doubt. If you believed that, you were wrong.

It's not an opinion, it's an incorrect view of what happened. You can't have an opinion when there are facts.

 

[jwikked]

as far as comprehension skills go you spelt grovelling and defamination wrong but that aside: sam Newman is a racist good to know, also he just gave an opinion on an incident and maybe he just gave a grovelling apology to nip this silliness in the bud

And you spelled "defamation" wrong, too. You're just a foolish idiot arguing worthless points on something that happened a long time ago. You and Sam are the only ones that think Nicky was pointing to himself for showing "guts". There's nothing to argue.

 

[pebblesofsand]

I would also add that Goodes knew he would make headlines with what he said.

1) Adam Goodes had every right to call out anything he believes is racist toward him. Calling an indigeneous person an ape is always considered a racist slur. Did a 13 y.o girl know that or was she referring to Goodes being a hulking footballer? He certainly wasn't to know and in my eyes did the correct thing.
2) However Goodes had received media training and knew the soundbite that would head the news.
" The face of racism in Australia is a 13.y.o girl". That is what everybody took from that presser.
That was the first thing he said. The grab. Everything after that is superflous to the headline in many peoples minds.
3) so we have many fans seeing a young girl humiliated and perp walked out of the stadium being labelled the ,"Face of Australian racism". Even if thats not what his intention was, that was reality.
4) So we have fans with a grievance against Goodes who long perceived he was a (in the casual racist vanecular) a 'protected species' because he went into contests legs first and the AFL club, Sydney, had been given preferences that others didn't get ( see Barry Hall for one example). This is exacerbated by his running at the crowd with a pretend spear. Many believed once again Goodes and Sydney were given preferencial treatment and others would have been charged with inciting the crowd.
5) So we have a big named aboriginal football player ripe for 'barracking' by the opposition crowds. How is this traditionally done? Every time the player gets the ball they are boo'ed. Is it fair? Of course not, Bluey McKenna got booed for five years by Saints fans for being knocked out by Plugger.
6) Now the SJW's and talking heads come in and blithely brand every single person booing Goodes racist. The most ridiculous imposition of PC onto a crowds right to voice their duspleasure.
I am sure bogans and racists took the opportunity to vent their spleen at an indigeneous player.
7) when argued even one point I laid out above the person would be shut down and screamed at they were also racist. When asked why other indigenous players weren't booed for their race, we had people like Francis Leach saying they ' were the right type of aboriginal" in crowds eyes.
Excuse me? Nicky Winmar, Michael Long, David Wirrpinda, Gil McAdam were the right type of aboriginal? One of the most racist patronising things I think I ever heard.
8) So it reaches a cresendo, all football fans who boo are racist because it is deemed so, no nuance, no grey, if you boo you are labelled.
I hear Stan Grant say the only sensible thing. Basically it has got to bullying by the crowd, which I totally agreed it.
There will always be racists, one is POTUS, personally I never booed Goodes, I was always in despair as he usually tore us a new one to do that, but the hectoring and labelling of the talking heads like Richard Hinds without even counterancing or considering other factors drove a wedge into the footballing public and therefore the Goodes argument will never be resolved.
Also to also believe Goodes is just a victim of this issue is disingenuous to say the least.

I think you should read this. It might help you understand the difference between what the media chooses to make a soundbite and what a person actually says.

No Cookies | Herald Sun

No Cookies

www.heraldsun.com.au

 

[IKE TURNER]

And you spelled "defamation" wrong, too. You're just a foolish idiot arguing worthless points on something that happened a long time ago. You and Sam are the only ones that think Nicky was pointing to himself for showing "guts". There's nothing to argue.

so just to recap: sam or no one else is allowed to have an opinion on this incident he/we have to accept what Nicky/media say and can't question it?

 

[pebblesofsand]

And here's Francis Leach's article - hard but fair.

Adam Goodes: Footy has become a redneck wonderland

The gutless drongos who boo Adam Goodes should have the courage to admit they're a bunch of ugly racists.

www.smh.com.au

 

[Moquo]

so just to recap: sam or no one else is allowed to have an opinion on this incident he/we have to accept what Nicky/media say and can't question it?

In that case, in my opinion, Sam does believe Nicky was pointing to his skin, but makes more money telling racists what they want to hear.

 

[jwikked]

so just to recap: sam or no one else is allowed to have an opinion on this incident he/we have to accept what Nicky/media say and can't question it?

You can't have an opinion. Everyone (except you and Sam) know what Nicky meant when he did that. Someone heard Nicky's words and it was in the paper the following day. There is no excuse other than a militant determination to go against everyone else to believe after all these years it had nothing to do with the racist abuse he had copped from the crowd that day.

It's not about opinion, it's about fact.

 

[Highlander35]

so just to recap: sam or no one else is allowed to have an opinion on this incident he/we have to accept what Nicky/media say and can't question it?

As long as you understand that your opinion is both objectively incorrect and willfully ignorant, then yes. The consistent and unchanging narrative from Nicky, Gilbert McAdam, St.Kilda (both other players and the club itself), the AFL and the media outlet that was actually close enough to the incident to report accurately could have deliberately reframed a very unusual and specific gesture, that just so happened to occur after torrents of racial abuse, from its true meaning, that is to say, an incredibly vapid generic sports message, into a racial statement, and have done so from day one, right through the last 28 years.

 

[gringo2011]

so just to recap: sam or no one else is allowed to have an opinion on this incident he/we have to accept what Nicky/media say and can't question it?

But it's not an opinion is it. It's a false narrative designed to mislead. I could say it's my opinion that Trump is a paedo, not with actual evidence but claim it's okay because it's my opinion....only It's not based on anything so not a reasonable supposition.

 

[George]

I think we are done here. Nicky's issue with what happened was hashed out in mediation, glad it is resolved. I don't think this thread serves any further purpose.