Willie Rioli "on leave" from Port Adelaide after social media post

[Duckimus Prime]

**** me this is deplorable pearl clutching from you.

So why did you decide to go with "mud" in describing Rioli? You just couldn't help yourself could you?

 

[Sentinel]

Without any confirmation of what was said this back and forth is hilariously pointless

 

[Leeda]

Stand by your conviction

 

[TruRoo]

So why did you decide to go with "mud" in describing Rioli? You just couldn't help yourself could you?

Mudguts has never been a term with racial connotations, Mrs Lovejoy

 

[Teal Leviathan]

Without any confirmation of what was said this back and forth is hilariously pointless

Nah. Right off the bat Chris Davies introduced the idea that was received by Rioli didn't necessarily match up with the understanding or intent of those speaking to him. Right there is a prima facie acknowledgement that whatever was said to Rioli was not obviously racist. That's clearly the perspective that Beveridge is reflecting with his comments. Chris Davies also went on to say that Rioli's broader experiences informed how he received those words and others over his playing career, and that leads into PAFC's broader push for education about issues that indigenous players face in the game and how we speak about those issues.

Beveridge is entitled to defend his players by speaking to their language and intent. What he can't speak to is Rioli's experience. I don't know what Koch said to arouse Beveridge's ire, but to describe PAFC's advocacy for Rioli on the subjects of cultural awareness and respectful communication as "excuse making", on the eve of Sir Doug Nicholls round, in an era when the wheels of the AFL are visibly wobbling on the subject of indigenous inclusion, is tone deaf to say the least.

TL;DR: words said ≠ words received.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

This thread is quite an eye opener into the cult mentality at Port. Is it David Koch or David Koresh?

You've missed the mark more than Port kicking for gaols here.

Most Port people are well and truly fed up with Koch and want him gone.

But even a stopped clock is right every now and then.

Supporting an indigenous player who feels others have been racially insensitive is a good thing.

 

[Sentinel]

Nah. Right off the bat Chris Davies introduced the idea that was received by Rioli didn't necessarily match up with the understanding or intent of those speaking to him. Right there is a prima facie acknowledgement that whatever was said to Rioli was not obviously racist. That's clearly the perspective that Beveridge is reflecting with his comments. Chris Davies also went on to say that Rioli's broader experiences informed how he received those words and others over his playing career, and that leads into PAFC's broader push for education about issues that indigenous players face in the game and how we speak about those issues.

Beveridge is entitled to defend his players by speaking to their language and intent. What he can't speak to is Rioli's experience. I don't know what Koch said to arouse Beveridge's ire, but to describe PAFC's advocacy for Rioli on the subjects of cultural awareness and respectful communication as "excuse making", on the eve of Sir Doug Nicholls round, in an era when the wheels of the AFL are visibly wobbling on the subject of indigenous inclusion, is tone deaf to say the least.

TL;DR: words said ≠ words received.

I understand all of that, including that certain things said may not necessarily always have a racial element in isolation but depending on the situation may be perceived as so (eg Rioli's weight). I fully appreciate that Willie has likely been subjected to that, along with more direct examples, across his career and beyond.

My point is that we still don't know exactly what was even said during the game in Ballarat. Even with the above in mind, without that confirmation for all we know Bailey Dale might have simply called Rioli a shit footballer, or he might have gone down the other route.

I'm not suggesting I have a clue one way or another and it's essentially Bevo's word against Koch's as it stands.

 

[Stumpy Pete]

So why did you decide to go with "mud" in describing Rioli? You just couldn't help yourself could you?

It would take you 10 seconds to search the term “mudguts” and see that it can refer to someone who is a bit chubby.

Serious question - what led you to associate the term “mud” with racial connotations?

Regards

S. Pete

 

[Teal Leviathan]

I understand all of that, including that certain things said may not necessarily always have a racial element in isolation but depending on the situation may be perceived as so (eg Rioli's weight). I fully appreciate that Willie has likely been subjected to that, along with more direct examples, across his career and beyond.

My point is that we still don't know exactly what was even said during the game in Ballarat. Even with the above in mind, without that confirmation for all we know Bailey Dale might have simply called Rioli a shit footballer, or he might have gone down the other route.

I'm not suggesting I have a clue one way or another and it's essentially Bevo's word against Koch's as it stands.

I don't see that knowing the exact words that were said to him that night as contributing to our understanding. From Chris Davies' early comments on the subject, it seems unlikely that the words directed at Rioli were obviously racist or otherwise clearly "over the line", and if they weren't then, were we to know them, we would still be left to interpret them, and Rioli's subsequent behaviour, without appreciating the context that Rioli brought to the table in how he understood them.

From my perspective, this is much more of a Rioli issue than it is a Rioli-Dogs issue. It's about Rioli's experiences growing up and in the AFL system to date, his perspectives on his father and Cyril Rioli, his personal headspace and lack of discipline and judgement he has shown in these recent incidents, how best to support him going forward, and how the AFL and media should engage with and talk about indigenous players across a range of issues. The Dogs and what specifically was said that night are largely peripheral to all that. Clearly Beveridge wants to support his players against allegations or insinuations of racist or otherwise unacceptable behaviour, and it sounds like that's where Koch's recent comments were going, or at least how they were received. More broadly, though, I haven't read much to suggest that there's any real heat on the Dogs on that score. There's the "Rioli should be fired into the sun" crowd and the "Rioli's behaviour was unacceptable, but we should also try to understand the broader context" crowd, but I haven't seen a "Rioli's behaviour was justified because Bailey Dale and the Dogs are total ****wits" crowd.

 

[Humblebob]

I don't see that knowing the exact words that were said to him that night as contributing to our understanding. From Chris Davies' early comments on the subject, it seems unlikely that the words directed at Rioli were obviously racist or otherwise clearly "over the line", and if they weren't then, were we to know them, we would still be left to interpret them, and Rioli's subsequent behaviour, without appreciating the context that Rioli brought to the table in how he understood them.

From my perspective, this is much more of a Rioli issue than it is a Rioli-Dogs issue. It's about Rioli's experiences growing up and in the AFL system to date, his perspectives on his father and Cyril Rioli, his personal headspace and lack of discipline and judgement he has shown in these recent incidents, how best to support him going forward, and how the AFL and media should engage with and talk about indigenous players across a range of issues. The Dogs and what specifically was said that night are largely peripheral to all that. Clearly Beveridge wants to support his players against allegations or insinuations of racist or otherwise unacceptable behaviour, and it sounds like that's where Koch's recent comments were going, or at least how they were received. More broadly, though, I haven't read much to suggest that there's any real heat on the Dogs on that score. There's the "Rioli should be fired into the sun" crowd and the "Rioli's behaviour was unacceptable, but we should also try to understand the broader context" crowd, but I haven't seen a "Rioli's behaviour was justified because Bailey Dale and the Dogs are total ****wits" crowd.

Isn't that sort of some peoples take on it though? If this wasn't an isolated incident where Willie has seen it necessary to take it off the field and message a player threating them, then
1. Why was it allowed to develop after the first time? surely people knew about this either they be players, staff or coaches.
2. Why had they not brought this to AFL attention earlier? If he is at a point where this was an acceptable outcome then it seems like neglect on the part of Club
3. Why is Koch speaking about this in the media, does that help the player in anyway? Does it help the club in any way? No
4. Why is Willies word on this the final one? As an indigenous man he has every right to set the terms on what is offensive and what is not, no white man truly knows what it is like to come from a marginalised community. The shit he would have had to deal with from the ignorant to racists would be abhorrent.
That doesn't make him exempt from skewing a situation (or multiple) to lessen his personal responsibility as an adult. None of his teammates were up in arms when it happened, if I ever felt one of my tem mates were racially vilified you can bet your ass I and others in proximity would have reacted to it.

The way it has been handled from the outside looking in, given the clubs reaction and the AFL's, basically absolves Willie of personal responsibility and lays blame at everyone else, this serves no purpose at all.

The whole thing stinks to high heaven mate, a player with known professionalism issues, who isn't afraid to give a bit of lip back and puff his chest out a little, is given the easy way out by his club. There are plenty of proud indigenous MEN who would have handled this the right way.
Lack of leadership for mine, nothing learnt, all remains the same.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

It would take you 10 seconds to search the term “mudguts” and see that it can refer to someone who is a bit chubby.

Serious question - what led you to associate the term “mud” with racial connotations?

Regards

S. Pete

Cool story bro. Wanna try one that matches with reality?



Or maybe urban dictionary

Urban Dictionary: mud guts

mud gut: The state of ones [gut] after a night (or morning) of prolonged beer consumption. The term is closely related to the typical [consistency] of

www.urbandictionary.com

The state of ones gut after a night (or morning) of prolonged beer consumption. The term is closely related to the typical consistency of "beer shit."

Nope.

 

[Humblebob]

Cool story bro. Wanna try one that matches with reality?\

View attachment 2319091

Or maybe urban dictionary

Urban Dictionary: mud guts

mud gut: The state of ones [gut] after a night (or morning) of prolonged beer consumption. The term is closely related to the typical [consistency] of

www.urbandictionary.com

Nope.

So they were friendly to him?

 

[Sentinel]

I don't see that knowing the exact words that were said to him that night as contributing to our understanding. From Chris Davies' early comments on the subject, it seems unlikely that the words directed at Rioli were obviously racist or otherwise clearly "over the line", and if they weren't then, were we to know them, we would still be left to interpret them, and Rioli's subsequent behaviour, without appreciating the context that Rioli brought to the table in how he understood them.

From my perspective, this is much more of a Rioli issue than it is a Rioli-Dogs issue. It's about Rioli's experiences growing up and in the AFL system to date, his perspectives on his father and Cyril Rioli, his personal headspace and lack of discipline and judgement he has shown in these recent incidents, how best to support him going forward, and how the AFL and media should engage with and talk about indigenous players across a range of issues. The Dogs and what specifically was said that night are largely peripheral to all that. Clearly Beveridge wants to support his players against allegations or insinuations of racist or otherwise unacceptable behaviour, and it sounds like that's where Koch's recent comments were going, or at least how they were received. More broadly, though, I haven't read much to suggest that there's any real heat on the Dogs on that score. There's the "Rioli should be fired into the sun" crowd and the "Rioli's behaviour was unacceptable, but we should also try to understand the broader context" crowd, but I haven't seen a "Rioli's behaviour was justified because Bailey Dale and the Dogs are total ****wits" crowd.

I agree with all of that. My only thought regarding the exact words said is in relation to the minor 'war of words' re what Koch and Bevo have publically said. I take your point that regardless of what was said, almost anything could be potentially seen as insensitive depending on the receiver.

I certainly have no interest in minimising Rioli's experiences.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

So they were friendly to him?

Yeah totally, which is why they didn't bring that up but went for another story.

 

[Teal Leviathan]

Isn't that sort of some peoples take on it though? If this wasn't an isolated incident where Willie has seen it necessary to take it off the field and message a player threating them, then
1. Why was it allowed to develop after the first time? surely people knew about this either they be players, staff or coaches.
2. Why had they not brought this to AFL attention earlier? If he is at a point where this was an acceptable outcome then it seems like neglect on the part of Club

So far as I am aware, there has been no suggestion that Rioli has previously made off-field threats. There were two previous on-field incidents, one of which was known to Geelong and Port Adelaide (but not the AFL), and one that was known only to Essendon. Reportedly, the Geelong issue was not escalated as the affected player did not wish to do so, while in the Essendon case it was apparently not taken remotely seriously until re-contextualised by this latest incident.

The AFL was reportedly displeased that it had not previously been notified of these prior incidents and subsequently issued a direction to all clubs that all such incidents should be reported to the AFL in future. Caroline Wilson reported on Agenda Setters that several club bosses and coaches reportedly "openly scoffed" at this direction.

PAFC had been in contact with the AFL regarding Willie Rioli before this latest incident. Chris Davies had sent a letter to the AFL on April 20th calling for improvements to league management of indigenous issues and education to be provided to the media to improve their coverage of these issues.

At no point was Rioli's behaviour deemed acceptable. PAFC publicly rapped Rioli over the knuckles regarding his post on Instagram about Hawthorn, and they immediately and repeatedly expressed their anger and disappointment towards him over this latest incident. And then they kept talking, which is what a lot of folks seem to have a problem with. One can't help but form the impression that, for a lot of those critical of PAFC's approach to this matter, the right time to talk about the issues that face indigenous players in this game is "never".

3. Why is Koch speaking about this in the media, does that help the player in anyway? Does it help the club in any way? No
4. Why is Willies word on this the final one? As an indigenous man he has every rite to set the terms on what is offensive and what is not, no white man truly knows what it is like to come from a marginalised community. That doesn't make him exempt from skewing a situation (or multiple) to lessen his personal responsibility as an adult.

Rioli is the final authority on his personal experience. That doesn't make his word on the matters contributing to that personal experience the final one. But in a world where vanishingly few of us are equipped to share and understand the experiences that have shaped Rioli's perspective, as non-indigenous persons we should rightfully be wary of telling an indigenous man exactly what he is and isn't allowed to be offended by as it pertains to comments that relate even obliquely to indigenous culture, and exactly how unhappy he is allowed to feel about those comments. Now, if you were to assemble a panel of Adam Goodes, Nicky Winmar, Eddie Betts, Gavin Wanganeen, Cyril Rioli, Chad Wingard and Sean Burgoyne to comment on the matter, that would probably be quite an enlightening discussion.

The whole thing stinks to high heaven mate, a player with known professionalism issues, who isn't afraid to give a bit of lip back and puff his chest out a little, is given the easy way out by his club. There are plenty of proud indigenous MEN who would have handled this the right way.
Lack of leadership for mine, nothing learnt, all remains the same.

I think the AFL should've formally sanctioned Rioli from the outset. Condemn the behaviour, support the person. But whatever else you might say about how this issue has been handled, I don't think you could remotely argue that it has been "easy" for Rioli, who has been subjected to more intense personal scrutiny and criticism (to say nothing of outright racist abuse) these last few weeks than most of us will receive in a lifetime.

 

[Stumpy Pete]

Cool story bro. Wanna try one that matches with reality?

View attachment 2319091

Or maybe urban dictionary

Urban Dictionary: mud guts

mud gut: The state of ones [gut] after a night (or morning) of prolonged beer consumption. The term is closely related to the typical [consistency] of

www.urbandictionary.com

Nope.

Try scrolling further down.

mudguts Meaning | Goong.com - New Generation Dictionary

And you still haven’t answered my question about why you drew links between the word mud and racial connotations. Bro.

Regards

S. Pete

 

[Duckimus Prime]

And you still haven’t answered my question about why you drew links between the word mud and racial connotations. Bro.

Yes, I wonder why I would question the use of mud in a perjorative term when describing a person with brown coloured skin...

You might as well be asking why 'black campaigner' could have racial connotations. After all black is just a colour and anyone can be described as a campaigner.

And yeah, the word filter is in effect there.

And I guess scrolling down means going through multiple pages. I like how you skipped out on the actual entry you used for google search. Something that's not even picked up as part of an AI Overview response that its that obscure.

 

[TruRoo]

Yes, I wonder why I would question the use of mud in a perjorative term when describing a person with brown coloured skin...

I’m not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or from the David Koch school of “everything is racist if it’s against my guy”


Really the only evidence we have is that Willie Rioli is a low intelligence, quick to anger grub who dishes out cheap shots and social media threats but needs dear chairman Koch to step in.

 

[Bont the Lord]

I’m not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or from the David Koch school of “everything is racist if it’s against my guy”


Really the only evidence we have is that Willie Rioli is a low intelligence, quick to anger grub who dishes out cheap shots and social media threats but needs dear chairman Koch to step in.

It's a big call from Koch. The dogs players he is to referring to should have a crack at him for defamation.

 

[Stumpy Pete]

Yes, I wonder why I would question the use of mud in a perjorative term when describing a person with brown coloured skin...

You might as well be asking why 'black campaigner' could have racial connotations. After all black is just a colour and anyone can be described as a campaigner.

And yeah, the word filter is in effect there.

And I guess scrolling down means going through multiple pages. I like how you skipped out on the actual entry you used for google search. Something that's not even picked up as part of an AI Overview response that its that obscure.

My search term was “ Mudguts as an insult” - try it and my link is the 4th or 5th link down.

Even without googling I knew what this insult meant. I’ve heard it before - hell it’s been used at me (I’m not called stumpy for nothing).

Your comparison of mudguts to black campaigner is an absolute stretch. One states a colour, the other does not.

Be honest with yourself. You took an insult that has nothing to do with race, inferred the motive of another poster and then brought those things together in an attempt to win a point in a discussion.

You’d be better off simply apologising or even admitting you went a bit far.

Regards

S. Pete

 

[Iamspock]

David Koch didn't decide this. He spoke to the Indigenous man and has been informed of these culturally insensitive sledges.

That was in reference to the massive flop from Bailey Dale after a love tap.

But I mean seriously, this thread is full of people claiming the guy who took a giant flop is one with integrity.

If the Bulldogs actually had integrity they'd hand back the 2016 Premiership.

Yeah well there were a lot of people that agreed with booing Adam Goodes as well.

Oh my...

 

[Bont the Lord]

Yes, I wonder why I would question the use of mud in a perjorative term when describing a person with brown coloured skin...

You might as well be asking why 'black campaigner' could have racial connotations. After all black is just a colour and anyone can be described as a campaigner.

And yeah, the word filter is in effect there.

And I guess scrolling down means going through multiple pages. I like how you skipped out on the actual entry you used for google search. Something that's not even picked up as part of an AI Overview response that its that obscure.

Jesus mate you're clutching at straws here. Let me guess you never win at pool as you won't hit the black ball?

 

[Freomaniac]

View attachment 2283807

sounds like a plan

 

[HTPunter]

Then if this happens there should be zero complaints when the waves of anger come back in return. Outside of people breaking the law by making threats of course.

Rioli opened himself up to this. He gets what he deserves.

Showboating & some comments on social media? Presume you’ll be running to Ginnivans insta to racially abuse him tonight then

 

[HairyO]

Showboating & some comments on social media? Presume you’ll be running to Ginnivans insta to racially abuse him tonight then

How much $$$ did you have on the Dogs?