No Oppo Supporters Non Bulldog Footy Talk - Bulldogs only - Part 5

[Dog 36]

ABC article reported that the club booked the venue. Not sure if by "the club" they mean "the players", but the theme alone highlights someone other than younger players themselves, (senior players, GWS, AFL) should have pulled them up. But ultimately they're adults, so have responsibility as representatives of themselves, but also of the club and broader league, given they're interacting with paid staff, to act responsibly.

If they were at one of their houses, or a venue where no one else was involved, different story.

HS initially reported they also stepped outside the venue onto the street. Did they appear on the street only in (offensive) costumes, or also perform offensive acts?

And as I posted earlier, ALL AFL players are advised about this sort of stuff from the moment they're drafted. So does blame ultimately lie with the players, the club or the AFL. I'd suggest players carry most of it, but wouldn't exonerate the club completely either. I'm not sure what else the AFL (as much as I'm as critical as anyone of them) can do in this case. Surely the club would reiterate (again) in the lead up to these sort of events the responsibility involved in the circumstances it is held?

Difficult area GJ79.

Somehow the AFL has to find a mechanism where they are not the moral conscious and just concentrate on the game. (My opinion). They are digging themselves a whole by picking and choosing.

I think of the Cats 22 dress up where all the media applauded them for imagination and responding to their critics.

They dressed as elderly and played it out on the streets in the public and cameras soaked it in having players dressed as elderly falling over, getting out of cars with great difficulty, wheelchairs and the like etc etc etc

I know some elderly were offended because they have the daily struggles that come with age, they have fallen and have had their lives changed and what was shown some took as they were having it trivialised.

I am sure that none of the GWS players would condone any of the scenarios they acted out.

I better stop here hopefully my point comes across.

 

[MYOB]

Difficult area GJ79.

Somehow the AFL has to find a mechanism where they are not the moral conscious and just concentrate on the game. (My opinion). They are digging themselves a whole by picking and choosing.

I think of the Cats 22 dress up where all the media applauded them for imagination and responding to their critics.

They dressed as elderly and played it out on the streets in the public and cameras soaked it in having players dressed as elderly falling over, getting out of cars with great difficulty, wheelchairs and the like etc etc etc

I know some elderly were offended because they have the daily struggles that come with age, they have fallen and have had their lives changed and what was shown some took as they were having it trivialised.

I am sure that none of the GWS players would condone any of the scenarios they acted out.

I better stop here hopefully my point comes across.

I'm sorry, but if you can't see the difference between Geelong turning up as old people, after being told they were too old, and going on to win the premiership, to players turning up as alleged rapists and said player dressed up as alleged rapist performing a sex act, and therefore warranting a penalty, then I can't help you.

 

[Dog 36]

I'm sorry, but if you can't see the difference between Geelong turning up as old people, after being told they were too old, and going on to win the premiership, to players turning up as alleged rapists and said player dressed up as alleged rapist performing a sex act, and therefore warranting a penalty, then I can't help you.

There is a difference yes.

Some will be offended to a greater extent to others, some groups will be offended some groups wont.

I ask where does the AFL draw the line since they have taken on the task to do so.

How do they decide who gets suspended and who gets fined ?

 

[TiAn_]

I'm sorry, but if you can't see the difference between Geelong turning up as old people, after being told they were too old, and going on to win the premiership, to players turning up as alleged rapists and said player dressed up as alleged rapist performing a sex act, and therefore warranting a penalty, then I can't help you.

Bartel also went as the St Kilda schoolgirl one year. Very on the nose.

 

[MYOB]

There is a difference yes.

Some will be offended to a greater extent to others, some groups will be offended some groups wont.

I ask where does the AFL draw the line since they have taken on the task to do so.

How do they decide who gets suspended and who gets fined ?

That is their job, to decide who gets suspended and who doesn't. How they come to that decision, I don't know.

In this case, I believe they got it right.
In the Stengel case, I believe they got it wrong.

But after hearing the facts, I can't see how anyone would think they got this one wrong.

 

[Norm De Guerre]

Carrying on like a self absorbed and obnoxious arsehat is the entire point of being a 20+ year old.

Consideration for the thoughts and opinions of those not in on your hilarious hijinks, if it comes at all only comes with time.

Or in the case of the sanctioned GWS players after being bigfooted by the AFL.

As an aside. Ive been watching old episodes of Chappells Show over the last few weeks and cant imagine any of the skits he put to air 20 years ago, being aired today. As a further aside, I still find that show to be hilarious. Cocaine is indeed a hell of a drug. Modern Chappell stand up specials not so much.

 

[DiamondDogs8]

Surprised Culley has been let go by the Eagles.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

There is a difference yes.

Some will be offended to a greater extent to others, some groups will be offended some groups wont.

I ask where does the AFL draw the line since they have taken on the task to do so.

How do they decide who gets suspended and who gets fined ?

It's not a matter of offending groups of people. It's the idea that finding rape and rapists (even if alleged) funny, especially with a big focus currently on DV, is offensive to society broadly, which seems to have escaped them, even with the AFL's and clubs' emphasis on respect being drummed into them.

 

[Dog 36]

It's not a matter of offending groups of people. It's the idea that finding rape and rapists (even if alleged) funny, especially with a big focus currently on DV, is offensive to society broadly, which seems to have escaped them, even with the AFL's and clubs' emphasis on respect being drummed into them.

My point is lAFL HQ best to take such things on and deliberate sanctions on and choose what they punish and what they don’t.


Yes they campaign and focus on DV but at the same time quite happy to have alcohol company’s and betting companies monies when they are a factor in DV.

Concentrate on the game find a mechanism to deal with those moral issues if at all

They are sending mixed messages.

Here is another one when Falou had his issues with the famous instagram post the then CEO of the AFL said you should not judge someone on who they fall in love with. Love is Love everyone has the right to choose who they love.
This wasn’t afforded to an AFL executive who had relations with another adult at the workplace it was deemed inappropriate, Why? They were sacked because?

 

[maddog37]

Carrying on like a self absorbed and obnoxious arsehat is the entire point of being a 20+ year old.

Consideration for the thoughts and opinions of those not in on your hilarious hijinks, if it comes at all only comes with time.

Or in the case of the sanctioned GWS players after being bigfooted by the AFL.

As an aside. Ive been watching old episodes of Chappells Show over the last few weeks and cant imagine any of the skits he put to air 20 years ago, being aired today. As a further aside, I still find that show to be hilarious. Cocaine is indeed a hell of a drug. Modern Chappell stand up specials not so much.

What a great show.

Game blouses!!!!

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

My point is lAFL HQ best to take such things on and deliberate sanctions on and choose what they punish and what they don’t.


Yes they campaign and focus on DV but at the same time quite happy to have alcohol company’s and betting companies monies when they are a factor in DV.

Concentrate on the game find a mechanism to deal with those moral issues if at all

They are sending mixed messages.

Here is another one when Falou had his issues with the famous instagram post the then CEO of the AFL said you should not judge someone on who they fall in love with. Love is Love everyone has the right to choose who they love.
This wasn’t afforded to an AFL executive who had relations with another adult at the workplace it was deemed inappropriate, Why? They were sacked because?

I'm sorry but that is completely unrelated to what I said. I am referring to the chosen theme for the gathering in the first place.

When the AFL got to hear about it, they felt they had to be seen to do something, considering the chosen theme.

Whether the sanctions were too quick, inappropriate, knee-jerk, is another question. I tend to think the AFLPA should have been called in straightaway and consulted.

 

[Dog 36]

I'm sorry but that is completely unrelated to what I said. I am referring to the chosen theme for the gathering in the first place.

When the AFL got to hear about it, they felt they had to be seen to do something, considering the chosen theme.

Whether the sanctions were too quick, inappropriate, knee-jerk, is another question. I tend to think the AFLPA should have been called in straightaway and consulted.

I understand what you are saying. The point I was trying to make is that AFL HQ had to do something because they have commented and taken a stance on some things that in my opinion they should have not in the past.

 

[Next Waiting]

I feel I should be outraged about something but spoilt for choice and I've already reached the daily recommended outrage level

 

[maddog37]

I feel I should be outraged about something but spoilt for choice and I've already reached the daily recommended outrage level

Dig deep. You can do more outrage!!!!

 

[dogwatch]

I feel I should be outraged about something but spoilt for choice and I've already reached the daily recommended outrage level

There's always the AFL. They're a failsafe go-to when you have pent up rage you want to spend somewhere.

Also a great weather system is just passing over eastern Australia. Go outside and shake your fist at a few of those clouds.

 

[Next Waiting]

Dig deep. You can do more outrage!!!!

I find I have to manage my outrage as I get older. It's exhausting to be outraged by everything. I don't know how people manage it.

Selective outrage I've found works best for me. And you have to mix it up a bit. Trump one day, Sniff the next ... the price of beer.

Balance and outrage in moderation are the keys

 

[maddog37]

I find I have to manage my outrage as I get older. It's exhausting to be outraged by everything. I don't know how people manage it.

Selective outrage I've found works best for me. And you have to mix it up a bit. Trump one day, Sniff the next ... the price of beer.

Balance and outrage in moderation are the keys

Outrage is dead. Whimsical acceptance mixed with an acknowledgement of an inability to understand is king.

This is followed by a lack of desire to even try and understand.

 

[Next Waiting]

Outrage is dead. Whimsical acceptance mixed with an acknowledgement of an inability to understand is king.

This is followed by a lack of desire to even try and understand.

This is true. I'm trying to understand why you would write try and understand but I'm kind of meh about it.

Back in the day I would have raged against such an assault on the language

 

[maddog37]

I’m not even sure anymore

 

[dogwatch]

 

[hutchy31]

The theme for the GWS event was obviously monumentally stupid. There was always a chance that went off the rails. But given who their captain is I’m not surprised the leadership group failed completely.

That said, there probably wouldn’t have been much (if any) comeback if there weren’t “skits” - this is likely where it went way over the line.

Regardless of how stupid and immature young guys who play footy for a living might be, dressing up as the twin towers or a rapist/victim is mind-boggling. I did some stupid shit and said many things I’d like to take back when I was 20, but ffs these guys must have shit for brains.

 

[Scotch N Coke Monatore]

So, they engaged in bad taste humour. Big deal.

What should be bothering you all just so much more about this episode is the obvious fear, to the brown pants level, that the AFL has of being cancelled.

 

[CarnTheScray]

So, they engaged in bad taste humour. Big deal.

What should be bothering you all just so much more about this episode is the obvious fear, to the brown pants level, that the AFL has of being cancelled.

They were simulating rape, big boy.

If not wanting to be cancelled = wanting to be a decent person that holds a level of respect for others then I wouldn’t want to be canceled either.

I doubt you have the emotional intelligence or empathy to comprehend how this would affect women at the club and partners of the players involved.

 

[Dogs Rule]

Bartel also went as the St Kilda schoolgirl one year. Very on the nose.

And Hawkins this year came as that French pole vaulter with the bar though his er, um, yeah.

You would just hope this is the final nail in the coffin for all post season dress ups. They're all childish/offensive and most are just downright stupid at the best of times.

 

[Libbaaaa]

And Hawkins this year came as that French pole vaulter with the bar though his er, um, yeah.

You would just hope this is the final nail in the coffin for all post season dress ups. They're all childish/offensive and most are just downright stupid at the best of times.

Wouldn’t mind any sort of dress up theme banned in society, seriously the best way to ruin a party is make it a bloody theme.