Opinion The 'Carlton related stuff that doesn't need it's own thread' thread

[Bluey24]

What about different environments?

Skills coaching and growing up in different areas, such as carpet like decks in WA, compared to muddy grounds in Victoria?

Yeah, no issue with that

But know, 3 out of 4 Indigenous Australians live and work in urban areas. The image of a black guy standing on one leg with a spear in the desert is long gone

 

[thebluelagoon]

Yeah, no issue with that

But know, 3 out of 4 Indigenous Australians live and work in urban areas. The image of a black guy standing on one leg with a spear in the desert is long gone

yea well i have one indigenous member of my family and at social gatherings he stands around on one leg. You can take the boy out of bush but you can't take the bush out of the boy! the world has lost the plot when you can't even make a positive generalisation about a group for fear of being called racist. The world will be a better place when we stop being racist yes, but the pathway to acceptance is to celebrate difference not denouncing it.

for whatever reason indigenous players are statically over represented at AFL level and i think that should be celebrated.

 

[Malifice]

the world has lost the plot when you can't even make a positive generalisation about a group for fear of being called racist.

It's a topic for the SRP boards, but I wholly disagree.

Generalisations about people due to biological race are always to be avoided. A positive comment about a race ('all green people are really smart') infers by logical extension that people (of other color) are not.

Or simply consider the following postive generalisation about a group of people due to race: 'White people are superior [smarter/ faster/ stronger/ less violent] to other races.'

Can you see why we should avoid racial stereotyping? It's generally best to avoid it, because even when you dont mean any harm, you're often causing it anyway.

Again, topic for SRP, not here. Happy to discuss it there with you if you want.

for whatever reason indigenous players are statically over represented at AFL level and i think that should be celebrated.

So do I, but surely we can do that without resorting to racial stereotypes, and references to biological race being the factor? It downplays a lot of the hard work those guys put in.

Also, and for the record, its mainly the Noongar people (the native inhabitants of SW WA, Perth to Albany) that are overrepresented in AFL.

https://www.smh.com.au/interactive/2016/the-noongar-warriors/

Fully 1/3 of all ATSI players in the AFL come from that one single ethnic group. Including our own Garlett and Pickett (and Jeff Garlet and Chris Yarran before them).

Not bad for an ethnic group comprising only 30,000 members. They alone contribute around 2-3 percent of all listed AFL players.

The above article is a really good read.

 

[thebluelagoon]

It's a topic for the SRP boards, but I wholly disagree.

Generalisations about people due to biological race are always to be avoided. A positive comment about a race ('all green people are really smart') infers by logical extension that people (of other color) are not.

Or simply consider the following postive generalisation about a group of people due to race: 'White people are superior [smarter/ faster/ stronger/ less violent] to other races.'

Can you see why we should avoid racial stereotyping? It's generally best to avoid it, because even when you dont mean any harm, you're often causing it anyway.

Again, topic for SRP, not here. Happy to discuss it there with you if you want.



So do I, but surely we can do that without resorting to racial stereotypes, and references to biological race being the factor? It downplays a lot of the hard work those guys put in.

Also, and for the record, its mainly the Noongar people (the native inhabitants of SW WA, Perth to Albany) that are overrepresented in AFL.

https://www.smh.com.au/interactive/2016/the-noongar-warriors/

Fully 1/3 of all ATSI players in the AFL come from that one single ethnic group. Including our own Garlett and Pickett (and Jeff Garlet and Chris Yarran before them).

Not bad for an ethnic group comprising only 30,000 members. They alone contribute around 2-3 percent of all listed AFL players.

The above article is a really good read.

I agree entirely, this is not the place for a racism discussion.

but right here you are having your cake and eating it too.

...i do like your positive comment about the Noongar people.

 

[HARKER]

It's a topic for the SRP boards, but I wholly disagree.

Generalisations about people due to biological race are always to be avoided. A positive comment about a race ('all green people are really smart') infers by logical extension that people (of other color) are not.

Or simply consider the following postive generalisation about a group of people due to race: 'White people are superior [smarter/ faster/ stronger/ less violent] to other races.'

Can you see why we should avoid racial stereotyping? It's generally best to avoid it, because even when you dont mean any harm, you're often causing it anyway.

Again, topic for SRP, not here. Happy to discuss it there with you if you want.



So do I, but surely we can do that without resorting to racial stereotypes, and references to biological race being the factor? It downplays a lot of the hard work those guys put in.

Also, and for the record, its mainly the Noongar people (the native inhabitants of SW WA, Perth to Albany) that are overrepresented in AFL.

https://www.smh.com.au/interactive/2016/the-noongar-warriors/

Fully 1/3 of all ATSI players in the AFL come from that one single ethnic group. Including our own Garlett and Pickett (and Jeff Garlet and Chris Yarran before them).

Not bad for an ethnic group comprising only 30,000 members. They alone contribute around 2-3 percent of all listed AFL players.

The above article is a really good read.

They should be as much as sex, religion etc , but they're mostly not because we just can't help ourselves.
Those that push one side against another, no matter whether it be from some perceived good will or the puffing out of the chest wanting to be seen as a good human being supporting a minority, are driving the same wedge between the two sides (whatever those sides may be) i.e Whites ate better than blacks, men are better than women, christianity is better than other faiths...and vice versa. The vice versa is important here.

I agree with you. Can the profiling but f you have to have it you can't have it one way. It doesn't work like that or at least it's insincere for it to do so.

 

[Bluey24]

It's a topic for the SRP boards, but I wholly disagree.

Generalisations about people due to biological race are always to be avoided. A positive comment about a race ('all green people are really smart') infers by logical extension that people (of other color) are not.

Or simply consider the following postive generalisation about a group of people due to race: 'White people are superior [smarter/ faster/ stronger/ less violent] to other races.'

Can you see why we should avoid racial stereotyping? It's generally best to avoid it, because even when you dont mean any harm, you're often causing it anyway.

Again, topic for SRP, not here. Happy to discuss it there with you if you want.



So do I, but surely we can do that without resorting to racial stereotypes, and references to biological race being the factor? It downplays a lot of the hard work those guys put in.

Also, and for the record, its mainly the Noongar people (the native inhabitants of SW WA, Perth to Albany) that are overrepresented in AFL.

https://www.smh.com.au/interactive/2016/the-noongar-warriors/

Fully 1/3 of all ATSI players in the AFL come from that one single ethnic group. Including our own Garlett and Pickett (and Jeff Garlet and Chris Yarran before them).

Not bad for an ethnic group comprising only 30,000 members. They alone contribute around 2-3 percent of all listed AFL players.

The above article is a really good read.

Beautifully put

 

[BlueGum]

It's a topic for the SRP boards, but I wholly disagree.

Generalisations about people due to biological race are always to be avoided. A positive comment about a race ('all green people are really smart') infers by logical extension that people (of other color) are not.

Or simply consider the following postive generalisation about a group of people due to race: 'White people are superior [smarter/ faster/ stronger/ less violent] to other races.'

Can you see why we should avoid racial stereotyping? It's generally best to avoid it, because even when you dont mean any harm, you're often causing it anyway.

Again, topic for SRP, not here. Happy to discuss it there with you if you want.



So do I, but surely we can do that without resorting to racial stereotypes, and references to biological race being the factor? It downplays a lot of the hard work those guys put in.

Also, and for the record, its mainly the Noongar people (the native inhabitants of SW WA, Perth to Albany) that are overrepresented in AFL.

https://www.smh.com.au/interactive/2016/the-noongar-warriors/

Fully 1/3 of all ATSI players in the AFL come from that one single ethnic group. Including our own Garlett and Pickett (and Jeff Garlet and Chris Yarran before them).

Not bad for an ethnic group comprising only 30,000 members. They alone contribute around 2-3 percent of all listed AFL players.

The above article is a really good read.

Thanks Mal. Article is very good. Nice photos too.

 

[teagueyubeauty]

Just a little whinge on merchandise.
I have been waiting for the club to release the Nike training singlets for this year, as of last friday they were still not available.

Come monday morning they are now available but have now sold out sizes S-XL. Disappointing if they only put a small order in.

Go and ask for an away jumper for this season....there are none for sale
Was on the young fellas birthday Wishlist that contained a whole heap of s**t that costs a bomb and not going to happen for this birthday (Santa on the other hand is going to be broke, stooped iPads.....).
Was a get out jail free card and they’re not selling them....couldn’t believe it


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Arr0w]

It's a topic for the SRP boards, but I wholly disagree.

Generalisations about people due to biological race are always to be avoided. A positive comment about a race ('all green people are really smart') infers by logical extension that people (of other color) are not.

Or simply consider the following postive generalisation about a group of people due to race: 'White people are superior [smarter/ faster/ stronger/ less violent] to other races.'

Can you see why we should avoid racial stereotyping? It's generally best to avoid it, because even when you dont mean any harm, you're often causing it anyway.

Again, topic for SRP, not here. Happy to discuss it there with you if you want.



So do I, but surely we can do that without resorting to racial stereotypes, and references to biological race being the factor? It downplays a lot of the hard work those guys put in.

Also, and for the record, its mainly the Noongar people (the native inhabitants of SW WA, Perth to Albany) that are overrepresented in AFL.

https://www.smh.com.au/interactive/2016/the-noongar-warriors/

Fully 1/3 of all ATSI players in the AFL come from that one single ethnic group. Including our own Garlett and Pickett (and Jeff Garlet and Chris Yarran before them).

Not bad for an ethnic group comprising only 30,000 members. They alone contribute around 2-3 percent of all listed AFL players.

The above article is a really good read.

Happy to discuss this in the SRP in the future Mal, but many of the points you raise teeter on the fine line of perception

Is it a generalisation, stereo-typing, or fact, if I stated that most of the best sprinters over the last 3 decades were non Anglo Saxons? Or what about if i said the best swimmers over that same time-frame were Anglo Saxons? Perhaps it could be viewed as all 3 categories? No matter how we all view it, it is fact.

Then you have many Africans that are amazing long distance runners, with many suggesting this is due to to living at high altitude, perhaps habitat/environment plays a strong role?

If I stated that most indigenous boys, playing AFL, were "generally" built for speed and agility, rather than endurance, why would that not just be viewed as fact, rather than any racial tone or being stereo-typical?

You highlighted that a 1/3 of all indigenous AFL players were noongar people. I see this as fact, yet it could be construed as being a genralisation

And lastly racism, IMHO, racism is only present when their is hatred, rather than stating a "fact"

All of this is based around perception, let's not be to precious when the facts are clear

 

[thylacine60]

I find the term 'precious' rarely benefits these discussions from any outlook.........

 

[Arr0w]

Perhaps a lack of fence sitting would be more appropriate

 

[Love the Drake]

You may be right, but I dont think you can conclude this for sure. The lack of structure last year due to injuries and inexperienced and frankly unskilled standin players, meant that Jones was caught out of position multiple times. But was that due to the failures of the standins or was it his judgement? I want to see how he goes this year, and in particular , next year, once Doc is back and playing the General role down back. His athleticism is amazing- i think it was the first time he played on Tom Lynch v gold coast and he really gave Lynch a bath due to his athleticism . He has good disposal when composed. He just need to operate in a back line that is functioning correctly.

Jones was like a dog with two tennis balls last year - didn't know which one to pick up. And when he picked one up, he'd soon drop it and chase the other ball.

I was horrified during matches when Jones would stand 10 metres in front of his man, only to see the ball kicked over his head countless times, with Jones frantically running with the flight of the ball only to watch his opponent take an uncontested chest mark. He must have been playing to instructions because it happened way too often.

 

[Malifice]

Happy to discuss this in the SRP in the future Mal, but many of the points you raise teeter on the fine line of perception

Is it a generalisation, stereo-typing, or fact, if I stated that most of the best sprinters over the last 3 decades were non Anglo Saxons? Or what about if i said the best swimmers over that same time-frame were Anglo Saxons? Perhaps it could be viewed as all 3 categories? No matter how we all view it, it is fact.

Then you have many Africans that are amazing long distance runners, with many suggesting this is due to to living at high altitude, perhaps habitat/environment plays a strong role?

If I stated that most indigenous boys, playing AFL, were "generally" built for speed and agility, rather than endurance, why would that not just be viewed as fact, rather than any racial tone or being stereo-typical?

You highlighted that a 1/3 of all indigenous AFL players were noongar people. I see this as fact, yet it could be construed as being a genralisation

And lastly racism, IMHO, racism is only present when their is hatred, rather than stating a "fact"

All of this is based around perception, let's not be to precious when the facts are clear

I presume it's a fact (re sprinters).

However it's not down to biological race. I can cite tons of studies that have found no link.

Whatever it is that makes someone a good sprinter (or to be more correct all the things that contribute to it) probably arose in small clusters in a town or village somewhere in greater numbers than in other places (due to the hereditary nature of biology etc, when the combination arises, it's likely going to be passed on to relatives).

Its likely (based on anecdotal evidence and observation) that a village or town in West Africa got that particular combination.

But that's not to say 'all dark skinned people are good sprinters'. Its also not to say 'all Africans are good sprinters' or even 'all West Africans are good sprinters'. None of those statements is true.

It might be true to say that if you're West African (or descended from people in that area) youre marginally more likely to have come from that village and thus have that particular combination of factors that make you a good sprinter. That marginal difference makes all the difference in a sport dominated by fractions of seconds and likely accounts for the phenomena we see (in addition to environmental factors of course).

It's not a 'racial trait' of 'West Africans' (presuming that's even a race) to be fast though.

For what it's worth, I also have the feeling you're using 'race' in a simple way. As in 'biological race'. The science is clear that biological races (discrete race groups) dont exist, and 'race' is an entirely social construct. There are no lines of demarcation that separate human beings into different races. We just kind of invent races via social agreement, not via biology.

I urge you to have a quick read of the topic on Wikipedia (the article on human 'races'). Itll open your eyes. A lot of people have some very outdated or naive views on race that aren't backed up by any science, and are (usually innocently) extremely racist.

A topic for SRP though. PM me if you want or start a thread there and I can link you some articles?

 

[Opine]

It's a topic for the SRP boards, but I wholly disagree.

Generalisations about people due to biological race are always to be avoided. A positive comment about a race ('all green people are really smart') infers by logical extension that people (of other color) are not.

Or simply consider the following postive generalisation about a group of people due to race: 'White people are superior [smarter/ faster/ stronger/ less violent] to other races.'

Can you see why we should avoid racial stereotyping? It's generally best to avoid it, because even when you dont mean any harm, you're often causing it anyway.

Again, topic for SRP, not here. Happy to discuss it there with you if you want.



So do I, but surely we can do that without resorting to racial stereotypes, and references to biological race being the factor? It downplays a lot of the hard work those guys put in.

Also, and for the record, its mainly the Noongar people (the native inhabitants of SW WA, Perth to Albany) that are overrepresented in AFL.

https://www.smh.com.au/interactive/2016/the-noongar-warriors/

Fully 1/3 of all ATSI players in the AFL come from that one single ethnic group. Including our own Garlett and Pickett (and Jeff Garlet and Chris Yarran before them).

Not bad for an ethnic group comprising only 30,000 members. They alone contribute around 2-3 percent of all listed AFL players.

The above article is a really good read.

Well outlined post.

 

[Opine]

Happy to discuss this in the SRP in the future Mal, but many of the points you raise teeter on the fine line of perception

Is it a generalisation, stereo-typing, or fact, if I stated that most of the best sprinters over the last 3 decades were non Anglo Saxons? Or what about if i said the best swimmers over that same time-frame were Anglo Saxons? Perhaps it could be viewed as all 3 categories? No matter how we all view it, it is fact.

Then you have many Africans that are amazing long distance runners, with many suggesting this is due to to living at high altitude, perhaps habitat/environment plays a strong role?

If I stated that most indigenous boys, playing AFL, were "generally" built for speed and agility, rather than endurance, why would that not just be viewed as fact, rather than any racial tone or being stereo-typical?

You highlighted that a 1/3 of all indigenous AFL players were noongar people. I see this as fact, yet it could be construed as being a genralisation

And lastly racism, IMHO, racism is only present when their is hatred, rather than stating a "fact"

All of this is based around perception, let's not be to precious when the facts are clear

Arrow, if I'm not mistaken, I think your saying that identifying objective difference in a non discriminatory way should not be regarded as discriminatory. Your essentially correct. The IERD has explained that if there exists an objective and reasonable difference in regard to a person, or a group of persons, then it is not discriminatory to highlight or to treat differently. In-fact it observes that the "application of the principle of non-discrimination requires that the characteristics of groups be taken into consideration;" In other words its important to positively acknowledge objective difference. However, as Malifice has rightfully pointed out in his examples, the question is whether the difference is in-fact objectively real.

If your interested in reading, its here ---> http://docstore.ohchr.org/SelfServices/FilesHandler.ashx?enc=6QkG1d/PPRiCAqhKb7yhssyNNtgI51ma08CMa6o7BgkLJJRh2CxOufHBTnFhzjrhnWoLY2sEfd6leTpIf4ZDiyrcc/rHMuxT4jdZqSeCxBnAj+yFgxonXMTDHUMoQywn

 

[TooBlue14]

There you go, missed that point again I think.

You don't know if Ed is already capable of clocking upwards of 17km in a game. As it stands, he plays a run with role in the midfield, so his job is to stick to a bloke who is doing 13-15km, and match them stride for stride. Scully is the bloke on the outside, running a less athletic opponent ragged by covering 30% more ground than they could ever hope to cover.

No doubt that Russell can help Ed improve further, but using the distance covered in-game to compare two players who fill markedly different roles is flawed.

But it’s a measure. You’re just trying to explain it away with an opinion. As most have been doing to the data I post. Yes it’s an opinion based forum but I try to back mine up with data regularly. I can say Scully is a stronger endurance player than Ed at this stage. Everything else is guessing.

I understand Ed tags but it might have an impact on Ed not being able to reach 17 km+ a game. But it also might not. Opinion.

 

[HARKER]

And lastly racism, IMHO, racism is only present when there is hatred, rather than stating a "fact"

This is where some have stretched out the meaning of the term racist - 'Belief that a particular race is superior to another'

Racist now seems to suggest that anyone that may something negative against a race is a racist. Saying something positive though, is very welcome.
I can't see exactly how that works when applying common sense and logic, but that's where we are.

The sooner we don't have to raise race at all (positive or negative), the better. Unfortunately that won't come about any time soon.

 

[HARKER]

I presume it's a fact (re sprinters).

However it's not down to biological race. I can cite tons of studies that have found no link.

Whatever it is that makes someone a good sprinter (or to be more correct all the things that contribute to it) probably arose in small clusters in a town or village somewhere in greater numbers than in other places (due to the hereditary nature of biology etc, when the combination arises, it's likely going to be passed on to relatives).

Its likely (based on anecdotal evidence and observation) that a village or town in West Africa got that particular combination.

But that's not to say 'all dark skinned people are good sprinters'. Its also not to say 'all Africans are good sprinters' or even 'all West Africans are good sprinters'. None of those statements is true.

It might be true to say that if you're West African (or descended from people in that area) youre marginally more likely to have come from that village and thus have that particular combination of factors that make you a good sprinter. That marginal difference makes all the difference in a sport dominated by fractions of seconds and likely accounts for the phenomena we see (in addition to environmental factors of course).

It's not a 'racial trait' of 'West Africans' (presuming that's even a race) to be fast though.

For what it's worth, I also have the feeling you're using 'race' in a simple way. As in 'biological race'. The science is clear that biological races (discrete race groups) dont exist, and 'race' is an entirely social construct. There are no lines of demarcation that separate human beings into different races. We just kind of invent races via social agreement, not via biology.

I urge you to have a quick read of the topic on Wikipedia (the article on human 'races'). Itll open your eyes. A lot of people have some very outdated or naive views on race that aren't backed up by any science, and are (usually innocently) extremely racist.

A topic for SRP though. PM me if you want or start a thread there and I can link you some articles?

What does that matter though as recent facts show some races do better at one discipline than others, for one reason or another.
We're back to the same point and into the same issue.

 

[FRUMPY]

To me Liam Jones is a player who will never make it as a good reliable footballer. Save for half a year when he was an awesome backman (I reckon clubs worked out how to play him the next year), he has constantly been a very average footballer. He is 27 and into his 10th or 11th year on an AFL list and we still don't know if he is good or bad.

I think he is signed till the end of 2019 and this is a big year for him. Fail again and id ship him off, especially if our other talls come on as hoped.

 

[gbatman]

Jones is an athlete with decent skills but has very little footy brain. The art of playing defence is knowing when to attack and defend, when to play off your opponent and when to man them up and being able to transition from doing one to the other. It can be taught but it helps if you're naturally instinctive which he is not.

Definitely a big year for Jones, we should hopefully have some younger tall defenders coming on who are hopefully upgrades.

 

[BJuddy]

But it’s a measure. You’re just trying to explain it away with an opinion. As most have been doing to the data I post. Yes it’s an opinion based forum but I try to back mine up with data regularly. I can say Scully is a stronger endurance player than Ed at this stage. Everything else is guessing.

I understand Ed tags but it might have an impact on Ed not being able to reach 17 km+ a game. But it also might not. Opinion.

To me the only way we would really know is if they went head to head all game.

As has been pointed out, Ed consistently outruns his opponents whilst having to be close to them, as opposed to Scully, whose job it is to run away from his opponent.

That would just be amazing to see from a sheer numbers point of view.

IMO both players would be top 5 in the league for endurance. Scully may well win but only way to find out would be to have a direct head to head.

Both players have the polar opposite instructions on game style. Scully= run away from your man dont let him get near you. Ed= stay in your mans back pocket and don't let him get the ball you get it and give it straight away. (Can't remember ed having a run down the ground with multiple bounces)

 

[ShanDog]

Jones is an athlete with decent skills but has very little footy brain. The art of playing defence is knowing when to attack and defend, when to play off your opponent and when to man them up and being able to transition from doing one to the other. It can be taught but it helps if you're naturally instinctive which he is not.

Definitely a big year for Jones, we should hopefully have some younger tall defenders coming on who are hopefully upgrades.

The way he had immediate success as a Backman could suggest he does have the instinctive ability. Some would argue he only plays on instinct and not smarts lol. But of course you could just as easily argue that his athletic ability meant that the "see ball; get ball" way he was playing worked until teams changed the way they brought the ball forward to negate it.

If he has a poor year, I'd say the position shift hasn't worked out. But there's the possibility that the additional time and coaching pays off and he's back to what we saw at the start. Let's hope so.

 

[ShanDog]

To me the only way we would really know is if they went head to head all game.

As has been pointed out, Ed consistently outruns his opponents whilst having to be close to them, as opposed to Scully, whose job it is to run away from his opponent.

That would just be amazing to see from a sheer numbers point of view.

IMO both players would be top 5 in the league for endurance. Scully may well win but only way to find out would be to have a direct head to head.

Both players have the polar opposite instructions on game style. Scully= run away from your man dont let him get near you. Ed= stay in your mans back pocket and don't let him get the ball you get it and give it straight away. (Can't remember ed having a run down the ground with multiple bounces)

I'd bet that if Ed were to tag Scully for a whole match, he would cover the same ground as him. They are in the same ball park for endurance and Ed would do the job. But, Scully is a lighter frame, more agile and quicker at speed. So while he might cover the same distance, Ed would always be "playing behind" so to speak. Kind of like two two equally matched fighter jets following each other. The second can keep up, but it's always reacting to the first and slightly behind it.

 

[BJuddy]

Jones is an athlete with decent skills but has very little footy brain. The art of playing defence is knowing when to attack and defend, when to play off your opponent and when to man them up and being able to transition from doing one to the other. It can be taught but it helps if you're naturally instinctive which he is not.

Definitely a big year for Jones, we should hopefully have some younger tall defenders coming on who are hopefully upgrades.

Jones is a bit hard done by on here by a few IMO. Still somewhat of a whipping boy. The position he played last year was intercept defender, when people we crying out for him to be a lockdown defender. You can't blame the guy for following instructions. This made him look 10 times worse than he actually was. Consistently out of position, but from my eye this was from the lack of midfield pressure and flooding.

100% agree that football instinct is not his forte. Every player has limitations and this one can be a big on. But if we can get Doc back then Jones could skyrocket again. Hopefully this year Weits grows in confidence and becomes the backline leader he was always going to be. If He can help Jones out with positioning and when to go Jones could very well be back to his best. (Which IMO was AA level under Docs leadership.)

 

[BJuddy]

I'd bet that if Ed were to tag Scully for a whole match, he would cover the same ground as him. They are in the same ball park for endurance and Ed would do the job. But, Scully is a lighter frame, more agile and quicker at speed. So while he might cover the same distance, Ed would always be "playing behind" so to speak. Kind of like two two equally matched fighter jets following each other. The second can keep up, but it's always reacting to the first and slightly behind it.

Well put