To take this to a logical conclusion.
If any players at RFC don't agree withe stance taken by the AFL, does that mean they should walk away, as that is not the place for them to work?
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Talking Politics
- Thread starter Legends of 2017
- Start date
If any players at RFC don't agree withe stance taken by the AFL, does that mean they should walk away, as that is not the place for them to work?
That one is a no-brainer. Richmond will support the voice and if you as an individual don't then how could you sit in the sheds with your indigenous team mates and prepare to go into battle with them? How could you participate in a ceremony at Dreamtime at the G? Or wear the Indigenous jumper?
In some ways it is similar to Liam Jones and the vaccinations. Feel free to believe whatever nonsense makes you feel good but if it isn't in step with your club and your team mates then best you find somewhere else to play.
Got what you are saying BR.
It is possible that there would be some that don't agree with the Voice within the club.
So those players should resign and walk away.
Is that right?
The staff of the company I worked for had various views on a number of themes, including their political views.
I'm sure the management had their own views as well, but all of that did not cause any frictions or pressure by anyone to adhere to their beliefs.
All worked away in a civilized way.
Even it was say Dusty, Cotch, Nank, Shai or any of the young guys?
Just surmising.
Look, I have not made up my mind yet on the Voice, and will do so closer to the voting time.
It may be good, it may be divisive, I just have not made up my mind.
All I saying is the that everyone should be free to make up their own minds and not be brainwashed by any organization.
Doesn't matter who it is. When Richmond come out and declare our unambiguous support for the voice, as we inevitably will, why would you want to run out and represent the club if you didn't share the values?
Why would someone want to be a member of a club that said this is what we stand for if you stood for something else?
Doesn't make any sense to me.
I'm sorry TBR, I've got to call that bollocks. Not all indigenous people are in favour of "The Voice".
If there are indigenous players at the RFC who are not in favour on the voice, they should not feel compelled to leave the club. You could end up with 2 or 3 indigenous players, plus some teammates leave the club, a nonsensical proposition.
Not sure anyone should be compelled to leave an org if they a declare a public view different to yours. It comes down to how strongly you feel about the topic and whether the stance will impact your performance, enjoyment or well being at the club. Or you may decide to lobby internally why you think the stance is a wrong one.
I haven't agreed with all the policies and practices of the companies I have worked for over the decades, but I didn't feel that strongly about any of them that it made me decide to quit.
I haven't agreed with all the policies and practices of the companies I have worked for over the decades, but I didn't feel that strongly about any of them that it made me decide to quit.
Well said Baloo and Tigerman.
You both make more sense than I did.
Tried my best but you two have summed it up beautifully.
Many moons ago when I was young lad growing up in Sunshine Victoria being of Catholic faith on Sunday up in the pulpit Father O'Reilly (fictious) lambasted the Methodists & others of non Catholic faith as evil etc etc etc & all should perish in hell. Come footy cricket training Tuesday & Thursday ,game day Saturday one would be happily playing with these heathens. . Maybe I should repent & apologize for my past deeds.
Absolutely nothing to do with politics Tigaman but when o was a young lad I had a similar experience except I was a Prodo. I met a young Italian Catholic girl who I fancied at the time and we went out for 3-4 months never once entering each others homes or meeting families. We met in secret. I once asked her if anyone else knew apart from her friends who I had met and she said the priest ! She was confessing her sin of dating a Protestant regularly.
So I am now not connected to the Richmond Football Club & The AFl because I have Nay leanings. Lovely aint it after nearly seventy years of dedication to the Australian rules football fraternity along comes Gil & he says vote Yea or disconnect. To big for his boots & this is supposed to be a country of free speech. Got the local footy CEO preaching out side of his portfolio yet no one says he is out of order. Country these days has the spine of a jelly fish.
BS !!.Absolutely nothing to do with politics Tigaman but when o was a young lad I had a similar experience except I was a Prodo. I met a young Italian Catholic girl who I fancied at the time and we went out for 3-4 months never once entering each others homes or meeting families. We met in secret. I once asked her if anyone else knew apart from her friends who I had met and she said the priest ! She was confessing her sin of dating a Protestant regularly.
I think the AFL are hypocrites. They support The Voice. That’s all well and good. But then do everything they can to sweep the Hawthorn saga under the carpet. Letting Clarkson and Fagan quietly return to work suggests they already have a predetermined outcome.
As for the claim that Gil is staying on until the Hawthorn saga is completed… Bull *smile* 5hit!!! He is staying on until the Hobart stadium gets its funding. Then like Demetriou, his legacy (ego) is secured.
As for the claim that Gil is staying on until the Hawthorn saga is completed… Bull *smile* 5hit!!! He is staying on until the Hobart stadium gets its funding. Then like Demetriou, his legacy (ego) is secured.
I assume you cut ties with any organisation which expresses any view on any topic which you don't wholeheartedly agree with?
Do you buy products from any company which expresses any view on any topic which you do not fully agree with?
Give me a break, the organisation can express a view on an issue, that does not mean that every person associated with the organisation agrees with the view, it means the organisation does. It really is not a difficult distinction.
DS
