Race in football

[Tar]

Hi All.

I'm sick of racial considerations coming into football. Why should Aboriginal's get more considerations than other races in AFL just because they do in real life?

I mean, they don't have racial mediations when Italians and Greeks get called "dumb wogs" or somthing. They also dont dedicate games to Italians or Greeks or Australians like they do with Aboriginals (recent game at Bribery Stadium)

Any Thoughts?

 

[Docker_Brat]

Originally posted by Tar
Any Thoughts?

First thing that came to mind was "you are an idiot".

 

[Captain Random]

Originally posted by Tar

Any Thoughts?

None that I can see any evidence of.

 

[Kenny_01]

The first thought that came to my mind is that you are a Collingwood supporter.

 

[tashibatts]

The first thought that came into my mind was..

This should be an interesting thread (when I saw your name next to hte post title..)


As I remembered back to that 'Trade McCartney" thread of yours




Go Roos

 

[Smokeyr67]

Tar,

I wont call you an Idiot,, because I think that you think that you've raised a valid point....I'll just try and give you a little education.

Fact... in 1702, Aboriginals made up 100% of the "Australian" population.

Fact... in 2002, Aboriginals make up 2% of the Australian population.

Fact... Europeans hunted and killed Aboriginals, enslaved Aboriginals, and seperated families to try and "Australianise" the children.


We are a European Nation, so we've accepted Greeks, Italians, Spaniards, hell, we even accept Poms, but as a Nation, we tend to shun those with darker skin and different facial features.


Here endeth the lesson...its time for you to do a little study for yourself.




Smokey

 

[Kenny_01]

Yeah sorry Tar, your point was valid and you deserved a proper response. I see where you are coming from. You think equality shouldn't take race, religion or any other social factors into account.

For example, if we call aboriginies black, then that is racist but on the other hand, if they call someone white, well no one thinks twice about it.

Well I somewhat agree with you but unfortunately, there is nothing we can do about that and it is something we have to accept because the world we live in won't change anytime soon, as to treat everyone equally.

Aboriginies will always be seen as inferior, and if they don't get extra considerations, it would bring more harm than good.

 

[Sinkers_9]

Originally posted by tashibatts

As I remembered back to that 'Trade McCartney" thread of yours

This guy knows how to party every Saturday night

 

[jim boy]

Originally posted by Kenny_01
For example, if we call aboriginies black, then that is racist but on the other hand, if they call someone white, well no one thinks twice about it.

Actually, calling aborigines black isn't racist on it's own. When Winmar lifted his guernsey, he was pointing at the colour of his skin, it's black. The term is widely accpeted worlwide. Where it can be involved in a racist statement is where it's being refreed to for no good reason. For example if a news show shows 3 different reports on criminals, and the only time that race is alluded to is when the article features an aboriginal criminal, then that might be concluded to be a racist article. In short if the person's race isn't an issue, it shouldn't be mentioned.

 

[Mead]

It is actually a pretty difficult issue.
Noone wants to go back to the bad old days of, eg, 'the bloodstained ******s' from Essendon, and frankly, there is probably nothing more unpleasant than racial abuse on field.
Question, is it more offensive to call an aborigine 'coon' than to call an Italian 'wog', or an English 'Pom', or, as is the case throughout Asia, an Australian a 'skip'? In theory- no. Racism is racism, and you can hardly categorise insults on a case by case basis- some Italian mates of mine happily refer to themselves as wogs, but that doesn't make it any less offensive when used as a a pejorative term. So, it gets a bit murky, and yes, I agree that all racist insults should be equal, in theory. However, the thing is, the AFL has more of a problem with racism directed towards aborigines, simply because there are more aborigines playing the game than probably any other ethnic minority (Resists strong urge to make Carlton joke), so they're going to bear the brunt of any racism within the league, and thus it makes sense to focus efforts on stamping out the most prevalent sort of racism within the league.
That isn't leftist dogma, that's just simple pragmatism- directing the resources to where the problem is most evident. Sure if someone called Camporeale a dumb wog, they should have the book thrown at them, and I hope that they would. But i think you'll find in practice, a 80-90% of racism incidents in the AFL have involved aborigines.

Having said all of that, Kenny has a very good point about 'black' and 'white'. I don't think calling someone black is in itself a racist insult, hell its just a statement of fact. I don't get offended when someone calls me white, and surely 'black bastard' and 'white bastard' are on even terms in the racism stakes.

 

[Joel]

Originally posted by Kenny_01
The first thought that came to my mind is that you are a Collingwood supporter.

My first thought when I read your post that you are a typical ********. Don't generalise, it is dumb.

 

[PAfolwr]

Originally posted by Mead
...simply because there are more aborigines playing the game than probably any other ethnic minority ....

That quote has a lot to do with the fact that after a generation or so names like Silvagni or Barassi etc don't get labelled as anything other than Australian. Yet names like Long and co. always get the "clarification" tag appended every time mentioned or written in the media.
Stupid really. No appendage required, a good player is a good player, and a dud is a dud.
The only time colour seems to make a difference is the colour midfielders dye their hair, wrt Brownlow votes.

 

[Mcchawk]

Originally posted by Smokeyr67
hell, we even accept Poms

Steady soldier

 

[Grave Danger]

Seems the ones who get special consideration are those lucky enough to have been sent to private schools...

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Tar
Hi All.

I'm sick of racial considerations coming into football. Why should Aboriginal's get more considerations than other races in AFL just because they do in real life?

I mean, they don't have racial mediations when Italians and Greeks get called "dumb wogs" or somthing. They also dont dedicate games to Italians or Greeks or Australians like they do with Aboriginals (recent game at Bribery Stadium)

Any Thoughts?

You have a valid point that if racism is about treating different races differently, then aborigines shouldn't get preferential treatment and hence should not be treated differently.

I think the AFL, like the Govt think there are a few bigger issues at stake:

1) At the time when Europeans arrived here, over the previous few centuries they had evolved (technology wise) a lot quicker that aborigines (this is neither a good thing or a bad thing, just plain fact). So the aborigines have had a relatively short 200 hundred odd years to adapt and catch up. Evidently, it hasn't been without its problems, especially since we were still killing them 40 or 50 years ago.

They are natives of this country, and the Govt has an onus to help them adapt to this new society. The AFL recognises this, along with their potential as footballers, and makes concessions accordingly.

2) The aboriginal community is a lot poorer than the white community. They have less access to money and education. Once again, the AFL is doing it's bit to bridge the gap.

3) As natives of this country, I'm sure they don't appreciate people coming along and taunting them about their race. Just as you would like someone coming into your home and abusing you.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Grave Danger
Seems the ones who get special consideration are those lucky enough to have been sent to private schools...

This has gone over my head.

Do you mean aboriginess who have been to private school, or people who have been to private schools in general? Even then, I'm having trouble understanding what you mean. Do you have specific examples?

 

[Kenny_01]

Originally posted by Joel


My first thought when I read your post that you are a typical ********. Don't generalise, it is dumb.

Just a joke, mate.

 

[CharlieG]

A few points Bunsen burner.

1) An aboriginal person today doesn't have to adjust from rock painting to computers. They start as a baby, and learn the same way anyone else learns. You're point appears to suggest that aboriginal people have some sort of communal brain.... Highly unlikely. Also, if you wish to accuse people of murder, back it up with evidence. Ever heard of innocent until proven guilty?

2) If an aboriginal person in the NT countryside can't get work, they need to do what a person in the Victorian countryside does, that is, go to the city for work. It's a hard fact of the Australian economy that the bush doesn't have enough opportunities to support the residents of rural areas. Urbanisation is a fact of Australian life. The only onus on the government is that they have to provide equal educational opportunities to people in ALL rural communities so they can get work if they decide to leave.

3) I'm born in Australia, so are my parents and my grandparents. So if I'm not a native Australian (I'm white Anglo-Saxon btw) I don't know what I am. Or are aboriginal people the only ones worthy of being of Australian nationality? If that is in fact the case, where do I register with the United Nations as a displaced person? I'm not British, I'm not French, Dutch, Greek, Italian, Singaporean or Papua New Guinean. I'm Australian.


I'm sick to death of equality being a swinging pendulum. It's either in the middle, and all Australians are the same, or it's racism. At the moment it's very much against Australians of Anglo-Saxon descent.

 

[Grave Danger]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
This has gone over my head.

Do you mean aboriginess who have been to private school, or people who have been to private schools in general? Even then, I'm having trouble understanding what you mean. Do you have specific examples?

No, Mr Toulouse-Lautrec, I don't mean aborigines who have been to private school (although that would doubtless improve their chances of being drafted).

No, what I was suggesting was that it seems that most of the people who get drafted by AFL clubs went to private schools. Perhaps those schools can afford dedicated coaches in comparison to state schools, perhaps the clubs think private schoolboys are more likely to be a 'quality person', but I'd say the proportion of draftees from private schools is far higher than their proportion of the overall school population. So if you're lucky enough to have affluent parents you stand a better chance of being drafted.

On the other hand, the Aboriginal boys (generally) make it to the AFL despite the disadvantages they face - through their undeniable ability to play football.

 

[CharlieG]

You got facts to back that up, GraveDanger?

It's true that schools like Assumption and Xavier Colleges have dedicated sports programs, much like American schools. But I wouldn't go as far as saying that these are more influential in the draft than the TAC Cup program, which is available equally to all players.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by CharlieG
A few points Bunsen burner.

1) An aboriginal person today doesn't have to adjust from rock painting to computers. They start as a baby, and learn the same way anyone else learns. You're point appears to suggest that aboriginal people have some sort of communal brain.... Highly unlikely. Also, if you wish to accuse people of murder, back it up with evidence. Ever heard of innocent until proven guilty?

2) If an aboriginal person in the NT countryside can't get work, they need to do what a person in the Victorian countryside does, that is, go to the city for work. It's a hard fact of the Australian economy that the bush doesn't have enough opportunities to support the residents of rural areas. Urbanisation is a fact of Australian life. The only onus on the government is that they have to provide equal educational opportunities to people in ALL rural communities so they can get work if they decide to leave.

3) I'm born in Australia, so are my parents and my grandparents. So if I'm not a native Australian (I'm white Anglo-Saxon btw) I don't know what I am. Or are aboriginal people the only ones worthy of being of Australian nationality? If that is in fact the case, where do I register with the United Nations as a displaced person? I'm not British, I'm not French, Dutch, Greek, Italian, Singaporean or Papua New Guinean. I'm Australian.


I'm sick to death of equality being a swinging pendulum. It's either in the middle, and all Australians are the same, or it's racism. At the moment it's very much against Australians of Anglo-Saxon descent.

I agree with all your points, and I'm not usually one to have sympathy for the poor (actually, I have absolutely no sympathy for poor people), but there is a gap between white and aborigine in this country and we have to try to close it. And that means us making concessions that we really shouldn't have to make.


The bit about the communual brain. Much closer than you think. As you said they are all born the same and have the same opportunities as everyone else. But the end result is different, so something goes wrong. What goes wrong is that they are taught (wrongly as you would agree) the wrong information by others in their community. They don't trust us and until we break that cycle and make consessions until they do trust us, their development will be hindered.

As I intimated before, this can't be done over night, and will never be perfect, but we have made some huge inroads over the last 40 years, and particularly the last 20 years. Unfortunately, it isn't about what is fair, it is about what aborigines percieve as fair.

I agree with everything you said, but i don't mind making a few concessions to help their cause.

 

[skilts]

I thought this was a thread about the foot race at the GF. Pity it wasn't.

This pandering to aborigines stems from the installation of the Communist Howard government. When will Australia ever learn?

 

[OldLion]

AFL is blessed as a showcase for Aboriginal talent - undoubtedly it's been the best thing that has happened to the game over the last decade. The crowd is pleasant - not like in the 80's when you'd be constantly offended by comments , even from your own supporters - the players go about their work and the skills are there for all to admire.

All credit to those involved - but it really came about when strong characters like Long and Winmar said ' I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more' and brought it to a head. The image of Winmar is one of the defining moments in Australian history. Brilliant stuff. It gives us all hope and it's fantastic that footy brought it about. The playing field is level at last.

I grew up watching Polly Farmer and I can't remember any racist comments directed his way from the crowd - in fact not much was ever made of Polly's 'race' probably out of a sense of politeness and anyway Polly wasn't an in-your-face player - but Syd Jackson used to get it all the time. Later it was Jimmy and Phil K. - Jimmy got it more. I think it was because these guys had a little more 'relish for the contest' - i.e. white line fever ( no JK jokes ! ) - and would beat the others at their own game. So aboriginal players were OK if they didn't stick it up their 'white' opponents who, OF COURSE, were constantly cranking it out - see Confessions of Tony Shaw. As soon as they showed a bit of attitude - I think it was called uppidyness in the Deep South - well, they were fair game. Imagine Byron Pickett playing in the 70's - he would have got heaps .. whereas now, not a mutter.

Concerns about the exactitudes of terminology takes me back to the Apartheid days - when guys like Howard would rabbit on about 'not our concern','no politics in sport' and all that convenient bourgeois rubbish. If people don't like it, don't do it to them unless you actually don't like them. If that's the case, then say that and then we'll all know where we stand.

 

[OldLion]

Originally posted by CharlieG
...it's very much against Australians of Anglo-Saxon descent.

This sounds like Poor White Trash talk that is at the core of the KKK. I suppose you think that the UN is a global conspiracy and the Nazis were just misunderstood.

It's bollocks.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Grave Danger

No, Mr Toulouse-Lautrec, I don't mean aborigines who have been to private school (although that would doubtless improve their chances of being drafted).

No, what I was suggesting was that it seems that most of the people who get drafted by AFL clubs went to private schools. Perhaps those schools can afford dedicated coaches in comparison to state schools, perhaps the clubs think private schoolboys are more likely to be a 'quality person', but I'd say the proportion of draftees from private schools is far higher than their proportion of the overall school population. So if you're lucky enough to have affluent parents you stand a better chance of being drafted.

On the other hand, the Aboriginal boys (generally) make it to the AFL despite the disadvantages they face - through their undeniable ability to play football.

I wasn't disagreeing, I just wanted you to be more clear about what your point was because I didn't understand it.

Private schools seem to have a better standard of competition. At the school I went to, sport was compulsory whereas it wasn't at public schools. A very large percentage of Mick Malthouse's early 90s premiership teams were taken from the PSA's (Private Schools Association) Alco(k Cup competition.

Whether or not this means people who go to private schools are lucky or deserving is up for debate.