Uncomfortable with the war comparisons?

[DrEvil_]

This is directed at no one in particular but more and more in recent years I have been getting uncomfortable with the war comparisons in the AFL, describing AFL players as soldiers or warriors for instance makes me not only cringe but also just generally makes me feel uncomfortable as while I admire AFL players a lot, they are not soldiers, they are not going off to fight in a war, they are not doing anything that will sacrifice their lives for our country.

There is a massive difference between putting your head over the ball and potentially being knocked out and running into a hail of bullets to try and stop the enemy. One will likely end your life, the other will not and there is no comparison with the level of bravery.

When a player is injured players say "one soldier out, one soldier in" and I am thinking, no they aren't. That "soldier" is not dead, he is injured, he is actually fine, and will be back in a few weeks.

I sometimes feel that the commentators and even the players are trying to elevate themselves to something above elite sportsmen, something beyond that. They want to be seen as the bravest in society, or almost like an army, and want their accomplishments elevated beyond just being entertainers for the masses. Now I am definitely apart of that entertainment, I love AFL, but I am always aware that AFL players are entertainers first and foremost. They are there to entertain people, not to fight for the freedom or the lives of people and in no way can an act on the football field ever be compared to an actual war.

Does anyone else agree or are the war analogies less annoying to other people?

Completely agree. Especially ANZAC day, the comparisons are pretty disrespectful IMO.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

I don't like it, but i don't believe it's really a major problem. AFL footballers are more often called fighters or battlers or so on, which has a less direct link to actual soldiers.

 

[Jugada]

FMD its not literal. No problems with it at all, metaphors are supposed to be exaggerated for effect

 

[javaguice]

Think we need to chill out and take the commentary less seriously. I know I do.

 

[Kickin_Goals]

When journos talk about having so and so in the trenches with you and loving it it is incredibly cringe worthy but that's about it.

 

[javaguice]

When journos talk about having so and so in the trenches with you and loving it it is incredibly cringe worthy but that's about it.

Bruce wants Cyril in the trenches

 

[Kickin_Goals]

Bruce wants Cyril in the trenches

don't ask don't tell

 

[The Brabazone]

War war what is it good for?

"One wonders if War and Peace would have been as highly acclaimed as it was, had it been published under its original title War, What Is It Good For."

 

[ChampRevesby]

They are simply analogies to take them any further than that is ridiculous.

 

[momentbymoment]

100% agree with the bold. I'd be glad when we stop celebrating ANZAC day. War is a fact of life but it should not be celebrated in any shape or form. It's just a job.

I would go further and say war is a business. A very ugly business.

 

[Helen Wheels]

When journos talk about having so and so in the trenches with you and loving it it is incredibly cringe worthy but that's about it.

Brewth said in some Swans match: "It's like trench warfare in there."
Get a grip, Brewth.

 

[PicaBoo]

Why should we have a problem with figures of speech or analogies concerning war. It is part of history .
Traces of it can be found everywhere in our culture and in language. "Someone goes over the top". I don't expect that person to climb the parapet and charge in no mans land with fixed bayonet. Or close to our code. "Backline general rallying his troops in their 50. "
Back in the 70's the Dutch soccer coach went even further and declared that "Soccer is war". Nobody batted an eye lid then. Why should we now.

 

[SBYM]

Bruce wants Cyril in his trenches

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I'm more uncomfortable with the ongoing glorification of war, to be honest. If we stopped treating them like heroes, maybe less would be willing to go off and fight somewhere for no good reason.

 

[Power Raid]

Why should we have a problem with figures of speech or analogies concerning war. It is part of history .
Traces of it can be found everywhere in our culture and in language. "Someone goes over the top". I don't expect that person to climb the parapet and charge in no mans land with fixed bayonet. Or close to our code. "Backline general rallying his troops in their 50. "
Back in the 70's the Dutch soccer coach went even further and declared that "Soccer is war". Nobody batted an eye lid then. Why should we now.

it normalises the concept of soldiers and war, it celebrates the notion of war etc in the psyche of society and children.

FTR I am not a leftie and served in the services

 

[PicaBoo]

it normalises the concept of soldiers and war, it celebrates the notion of war etc in the psyche of society and children.

FTR I am not a leftie and served in the services

Your FTR shows already how polarized the discussion has become. Don't care what your background is nor trying to label you. Any valid point is welcome.

Back on topic. Somebody gets a broadside. It is a minefield. You cope some flak.There are so many examples. Camo pants are an fashion accessory. People haven't become warmongers over it.
If you remove every single hint of warfare out of life to be PC you will not achieve much and by far missing the big picture. Cinematic and gaming industry have a far bigger role to play.
With regards to children, caution there but I rather expose & educate instead of hiding and covering up.

And to take it up a notch. Goodes wardance, the haka. Spearing someone( or threatening to ) is more explicit than anything I have mentioned.
Where does that leaves us?

 

[Power Raid]

Your FTR shows already how polarized the discussion has become. Don't care what your background is nor trying to label you. Any valid point is welcome.

Back on topic. Somebody gets a broadside. It is a minefield. You cope some flak.There are so many examples. Camo pants are an fashion accessory. People haven't become warmongers over it.
If you remove every single hint of warfare out of life to be PC you will not achieve much and by far missing the big picture. Cinematic and gaming industry have a far bigger role to play.
With regards to children, caution there but I rather expose & educate instead of hiding and covering up.

And to take it up a notch. Goodes wardance, the haka. Spearing someone( or threatening to ) is more explicit than anything I have mentioned.
Where does that leaves us?

thoroughly agree. for me its not about not talking about it, rather not presenting it for something that it isn't or glorifying it.

It should simply be known as a logistics business where people may have to kill others in order to achieve an objective. The boredom and poor management systems are more likely to kill you than the enemy.


Presenting soldiers or their bravery as something to be proud of is my issue (even by association of footballers). It's just a job, perhaps an important job, but the nature of the job (killing) requires a calm measured mindset not some hill billy seeking recognition (wanna be recruits).

 

[SpudsLoveChild]

I'm not a fan but it's just a metaphor.
I lump it in with the other commentator nonsense that slightly annoys me on game day.

Using ANZAC day as a marketing tool grinds my gears.

 

[Power Raid]

I'm not a fan but it's just a metaphor.
I lump it in with the other commentator nonsense that slightly annoys me on game day.

Using ANZAC day as a marketing tool grinds my gears.

The DVA should seek to tighten up their legislation or repeal their association with the AFL
http://www.dva.gov.au/commemorations-memorials-and-war-graves/protecting-word-anzac

 

[SpudsLoveChild]

The DVA should seek to tighten up their legislation or repeal their association with the AFL
http://www.dva.gov.au/commemorations-memorials-and-war-graves/protecting-word-anzac

I'd say the AFL has permission to use it.

When you've got a key body like the RSL more interested in gambling revenue than representing ex-servicemen...

 

[Seeds]

This is directed at no one in particular but more and more in recent years I have been getting uncomfortable with the war comparisons in the AFL, describing AFL players as soldiers or warriors for instance makes me not only cringe but also just generally makes me feel uncomfortable as while I admire AFL players a lot, they are not soldiers, they are not going off to fight in a war, they are not doing anything that will sacrifice their lives for our country.

There is a massive difference between putting your head over the ball and potentially being knocked out and running into a hail of bullets to try and stop the enemy. One will likely end your life, the other will not and there is no comparison with the level of bravery.

When a player is injured players say "one soldier out, one soldier in" and I am thinking, no they aren't. That "soldier" is not dead, he is injured, he is actually fine, and will be back in a few weeks.

I sometimes feel that the commentators and even the players are trying to elevate themselves to something above elite sportsmen, something beyond that. They want to be seen as the bravest in society, or almost like an army, and want their accomplishments elevated beyond just being entertainers for the masses. Now I am definitely apart of that entertainment, I love AFL, but I am always aware that AFL players are entertainers first and foremost. They are there to entertain people, not to fight for the freedom or the lives of people and in no way can an act on the football field ever be compared to an actual war.

Does anyone else agree or are the war analogies less annoying to other people?

As long as we are talking about sport using war references then it means there must be no major wars going on and we are using sport as proxy. Much prefer it this way than the alternative.

 

[PatrickBateman]

I would go further and say war is a business. A very ugly business.

Spot on there. Many other nations don't remember and celebrate participation in wars at all, the opposite in fact. Let alone draw comparisons with athletes. The realities of war are very, very forgettable, disgusting in fact. And I stress the word 'reality', not the BS the media feeds everyone. War is big busine$$..

ANZAC day never used to be the farce it is today either, it used to be a low key gathering for the veterans. A day for them to gather and support / help each other out, primarily. Many veterans (I know a few) have no interest at all in ANZAC day any more, due to the patriotic tripe it's become. It should be purely about veteran support and acknowledgement of their post war hardships, not this idiotic idea that we're all safe and free due to what they gave up for us. That's simply BS.

 

[Probitas_]

I don't go out of my way looking for things to be offended about so no, this doesn't bother me.

 

[JoondalupJ]

This is directed at no one in particular but more and more in recent years I have been getting uncomfortable with the war comparisons in the AFL, describing AFL players as soldiers or warriors for instance makes me not only cringe but also just generally makes me feel uncomfortable as while I admire AFL players a lot, they are not soldiers, they are not going off to fight in a war, they are not doing anything that will sacrifice their lives for our country.

There is a massive difference between putting your head over the ball and potentially being knocked out and running into a hail of bullets to try and stop the enemy. One will likely end your life, the other will not and there is no comparison with the level of bravery.

When a player is injured players say "one soldier out, one soldier in" and I am thinking, no they aren't. That "soldier" is not dead, he is injured, he is actually fine, and will be back in a few weeks.

I sometimes feel that the commentators and even the players are trying to elevate themselves to something above elite sportsmen, something beyond that. They want to be seen as the bravest in society, or almost like an army, and want their accomplishments elevated beyond just being entertainers for the masses. Now I am definitely apart of that entertainment, I love AFL, but I am always aware that AFL players are entertainers first and foremost. They are there to entertain people, not to fight for the freedom or the lives of people and in no way can an act on the football field ever be compared to an actual war.

Does anyone else agree or are the war analogies less annoying to other people?

I think it gets a bit over the top. But behind the scenes in a footy club it may raise the players up a bit.
There is a line to be drawn though, players are not ANZACS, they are footballers.

 

[chiwigi]

This is directed at no one in particular but more and more in recent years I have been getting uncomfortable with the war comparisons in the AFL, describing AFL players as soldiers or warriors for instance makes me not only cringe but also just generally makes me feel uncomfortable as while I admire AFL players a lot, they are not soldiers, they are not going off to fight in a war, they are not doing anything that will sacrifice their lives for our country.

There is a massive difference between putting your head over the ball and potentially being knocked out and running into a hail of bullets to try and stop the enemy. One will likely end your life, the other will not and there is no comparison with the level of bravery.

When a player is injured players say "one soldier out, one soldier in" and I am thinking, no they aren't. That "soldier" is not dead, he is injured, he is actually fine, and will be back in a few weeks.

I sometimes feel that the commentators and even the players are trying to elevate themselves to something above elite sportsmen, something beyond that. They want to be seen as the bravest in society, or almost like an army, and want their accomplishments elevated beyond just being entertainers for the masses. Now I am definitely apart of that entertainment, I love AFL, but I am always aware that AFL players are entertainers first and foremost. They are there to entertain people, not to fight for the freedom or the lives of people and in no way can an act on the football field ever be compared to an actual war.

Does anyone else agree or are the war analogies less annoying to other people?

As a ten year veteran (4 reserve, 6 reg) who went to sandy places and cold places I have to say it doesn't bother me in the slightest.

An analogy is just that and it is a complimentary one. Not all soldiers are heroes, for most it's just a job and a lot safer than being a professional footballer.

The ANZAC stuff does go ott though. Ironically they seem to have realised this and toned it down to levels lower than the normal rounds.