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

[Lavender Bushranger]

No idea, I’ve just heard different versions. None from Winmar personally. Happy for Newman et al to be taken to court and for the truth to be established.

Who have you heard from?

Seems really odd to state that don't think Winmar or Ludbey would want the truth to come out.

We know what Ludbey has stated, we know what Winmar has said.

To infer they're both lying must mean you have heard something else from a very, very good source!

 

[Back One Out]

Does this look like the face of a racist? View attachment 901679

Let’s not let let the truth get in the way of what a few good ol’ boys felt at the time. Feels is better than reals, bruh.

If the glove fits, you must not acquit...

 

[bresker]

This is an iconic photo of Jack Dyer, the man who supposedly broke 64 collarbones in his playing career. It's useful to know that it shows Dyer winning a ruck contest and Tom Meehan pivoting to follow the direction of the ball, and not Dyer cutting another hapless opponent down with a fearsome blow.

Same principle applies with the Winmar photo. I don't know the truth of it, but suspect those threatening legal action won't really want it explored.

If someone had said that Jack Dyer was whacking someone, and he denied it, then the other person kept insisting he did, that would make this slightly like the current situation

 

[Ron The Bear]

Seems really odd to state that don't think Winmar or Ludbey would want the truth to come out.

We know what Ludbey has stated, we know what Winmar has said.

Reckon they’re hoping Newman is silenced by a public backlash. Can understand why the photographer might feel his shot at immortality is threatened. Just suspect that the podcast may not have gone in as half-cocked as it appears.

 

[HolyWars]

What are they actually bringing an action for?

There’s very little chance defamation would succeed. You’d think it’s all just talk.

Not if they knew what the gesture was about and are purposely twisting it another way, and it's common knowledge that it was about racism. Given Newman's reputation on these matters, he appears to be trying to change the narrative. Nicky and the AFL have spoken about that moment many times over the past 27 years regarding its meaning so he (they) can't claim they didn't know. Those three have purposely labelled it as having nothing to do with racism knowing full well that it does. Essentially, they're saying Nicky has been lying about the meaning of that moment.

Monetarily it doesn't amount to much, however defamation can be based purely on attacking or damaging someones reputation knowing that it's factually incorrect.

Newman and friends will lose this one if it goes to court.

 

[Ron The Bear]

If someone had said that Jack Dyer was whacking someone, and he denied it, then the other person kept insisting he did, that would make this slightly like the current situation

Dyer extracted some mileage from it. It hasn't harmed his legacy that the photo was later revealed to be an illusion.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Not if they knew what the gesture was about and are purposely twisting it another way, and it's common knowledge that it was about racism. Given Newman's reputation on these matters, he appears to be trying to change the narrative. Nicky and the AFL have spoken about that moment many times over the past 27 years regarding its meaning so he (they) can't claim they didn't know. Those three have purposely labelled it as having nothing to do with racism knowing full well that it does. Essentially, they're saying Nicky has been lying about the meaning of that moment.

Monetarily it doesn't amount to much, however defamation can be based purely on attacking or damaging someones reputation knowing that it's factually incorrect.

Newman and friends will lose this one if it goes to court.

I think you're forgetting that they were around at the time and are not allowing for the possibility that at least one of them might know more than he's letting on.

 

[HolyWars]

I think you're forgetting that they were around at the time and are not allowing for the possibility that at least one of them might know more than he's letting on.

As Sam and Mike have both been heavily involved in the media, that one won't stand up imo.

 

[Chief]

That’s the entire history of this story in a nutshell.
Winmar made no comment about his actions that day to anyone. He told no club officials, he told no teammates. No one at St Kilda knew it had happened. No one at the ground knew what had happened.

No one apart from the people who were there and heard him, who heard the racist slurs. Apart from them.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Surely people are within their rights to question historical events and the challenge the accepted version without being sued?

Particularly people who were there and remember things differently.

I'm assuming the podcast was partly addressing the Black Lives Matter activism and Newman's recent sacking from Channel 9 because he's had a gutful of the left-wing biased editorialising from media and them ramming their "systemic racism" agenda down everyone's throats.

This seems to a real hobby horse of his. It's also why he gets branded as "racist" by his haters whenever he publicly pushes back

So maybe if this was the context and then the 3 of them started to question the Winmar incident, perhaps there is some weight to the defamation lawsuit. I dunno... Like I said, I'm no QC. But doesn't this open the door for everyone to get sued if they have their own version or interpetation of history?

I think he’s definitely fed up with the left agenda. Nothing wrong with him labelling George Floyd a piece of shit given what he’s been guilty of in the past. Now that doesn’t mean a policeman should have killed him, seperate matter entirely.

 

[Chief]

I think you're forgetting that they were around at the time and are not allowing for the possibility that at least one of them might know more than he's letting on.

Why didn’t this mystery person say what he knew?

 

[Back One Out]

No one apart from the people who were there and heard him, who heard the racist slurs. Apart from them.

No, you missed Occidental's point

Bresker said about the podcast: it's a white dude speaking on behalf of an Indigenous man & telling us what he thinks. Shabby.

Occidental made the ironic observation: That’s the story in a nutshell. Winmar didn't talk to the media or club officials. 28,000 people were at the ground and millions have seen the photo, but nobody actually heard him apart from one "white guy" who had run over to take a pic.

If it wasn't for the white dude speaking on behalf an indigenous man & telling us what he thinks, then this entire iconic moment could've easily been whitewashed as a St Kilda player using sign language to say "gutsy effort" (which was the angle taken by one of the Melbourne newspapers)

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Reckon they’re hoping Newman is silenced by a public backlash. Can understand why the photographer might feel his shot at immortality is threatened. Just suspect that the podcast may not have gone in as half-cocked as it appears.

So you do think they're lying, and have been decepting people for personal gain?


You have explained why you think this though.

Have you expressed this opinion prior?

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Winmar didn't talk to the media or club officials.

I thought the club told him to keep quiet when it was raised.

 

[Chief]

Winmar didn't talk to the media or club officials.

He didn’t? How do you know?

 

[Ron The Bear]

Why didn’t this mystery person say what he knew?

Maybe they were fishing for something tasty and pulled up an eel instead.

 

[Chief]

Maybe they were fishing for something tasty and pulled up an eel instead.

 

[Ron The Bear]

So you do think they're lying, and have been decepting people for personal gain?

You have explained why you think this though.

Have you expressed this opinion prior?

I don’t know who is fibbing/fudging the truth. Maybe everyone actually believes what they’re currently saying?

Can’t recall everything I’ve posted, but I doubt I’ve called many people liars.

I find your relentless questioning odd (but not unusual for an aggrieved lefty on this site).

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

I don’t know who is fibbing/fudging the truth.

Can’t recall everything I’ve posted, but I doubt I’ve called many people liars.

I find your relentless questioning odd (but not unusual for an aggrieved lefty on this site).

I'm just trying to understand your position.

It seems to vary from disinterest in the subject, to accusations of deceptive and dishonest conduct, to vague suggestions of some known conspiracy that no one wants to talk about, then back to feigned ignorance.

Regardless of someone's political leanings, I'd think it fair to seek some sort of clarification on the shit you're posting.

 

[Occidental]

He didn’t? How do you know?

Because it is on the public record. 1993 wasn’t a century ago. Read the newspapers of the time, check TV records of the time or even get minutes of StKilda committee meetings.
Winmar in fact walked out on St Kilda 3 days after that very game. He walked out refusing to play unless given a new contract.
No interviews about the photo/gesture were ever immediately given. They couldn’t be as he walked out on his club for 5 weeks and made no comments about anything.
It’s really odd & messy. But Winmar only communicated through his manger Peter Jess following that very game. And it was all about money.
Look who’s on the Panel, Sam Newman. He no doubt recalls all this happening at the time. No mention of anti racism anywhere at the time.
No wonder Sam Newman thinks what he thinks.

 

[Ron The Bear]

I'm just trying to understand your position.

It seems to vary from disinterest in the subject, to accusations of deceptive and dishonest conduct, to vague suggestions of some known conspiracy that no one wants to talk about, then back to feigned ignorance.

Regardless of someone's political leanings, I'd think it fair to seek some sort of clarification on the sh*t you're posting.

I’m not very interested TBH. Haven’t listened to the podcast. But it might get interesting if it did proceed to court. Courts tend to deal in facts.

 

[WillHayward]

One of the most iconic moments in AFL history. Not sure about legal action against what are essentially opinions about its meaning, but I can’t argue against an attempt to defend its legacy.

How can they have 'opinions' about its meaning?

Only Nicky knows that and he had told us the meaning.

Are you saying Nicky is lying about his own story???

 

[WillHayward]

Because it is on the public record. 1993 wasn’t a century ago. Read the newspapers of the time, check TV records of the time or even get minutes of StKilda committee meetings.
Winmar in fact walked out on St Kilda 3 days after that very game. He walked out refusing to play unless given a new contract.
No interviews about the photo/gesture were ever immediately given. They couldn’t be as he walked out on his club for 5 weeks and made no comments about anything.
It’s really odd & messy. But Winmar only communicated through his manger Peter Jess following that very game. And it was all about money.
Look who’s on the Panel, Sam Newman. He no doubt recalls all this happening at the time. No mention of anti racism anywhere at the time.
No wonder Sam Newman thinks what he thinks.

The animosity and patriarchal attitude in this interview is disgusting.
Newman is saying how dare the black fella ask for anything!
Brown calls him 'boy'.

The racism is palpable.

Disgusting.

 

[WillHayward]

He has more money than anyone on Bigfooty and probably doesn't give a stuff about what keyboard warriors think!

That's the whole point.
There is money and reward in this country for being a racist campaigner.
Because the moron majority of Issues are racist campaigners.
Brings in the advertising revenue I guess.

Absolute disgrace

 

[WillHayward]

Surely Sam can't be that racist given how glowingly he has talked many times over the years about his relationship with Polly Farmer.

Oh come on.

I'm not racist because....

.. I used to think an Aboriginal bloke was ok 50 years ago....

So now I can say and do anything racist I like.


This is sam's bullshit rationale.
he has a licence to be a be prick because he said a nice thing about one bloke he knew half a century ago.