Are There Too Many Risks Associated with Drafting Indigenous Footballers?

[lamb22]

I'm assuming you are talking "tongue in cheek" but because I can't keep my mouth shut (I did warn everyone) simply by implying that there even exists different races or cultures you are by definition racist as well! :cutelaugh

Well no Agincourt. Acknowledging different races exist is merely stating a fact. Discriminating on the basis of one's race is racism.

Back to topic, why do you discount every example of past poor behaviour by non indigenous people recited above as not relevant considerations in drafting 'whites' and then trot out indiscretions by past indigenous kids as relevant considerations in drafting "blacks".

 

[hopper]

Wow - interesting thread.

I work daily with Indigenous young people and families in Darwin. It's such a rewarding vocation. I'm truly blessed, as an Australian, to be able to absorb some of the culture and special qualities of the original owners of the country I am so fortunate to live in. I've met some incredible people who have risen above disadvantage most of us can only ponder.

I do wonder how many posters here have any tangible knowledge or experience of Aboriginal issues, particularly as they apply to young people? I don't wnat to come across all "Well, you southeners dunno what you're going on about!" but just sometimes you need to take some facts into account before we adopt our hardline right wing or left wing views. Otherwise we argue to soothe our emotions and not for effect. It can be a little like having a plumbing debate because we've all been to the toilet - there's more to plumbing than that feeling!

Anyway, let's not get all wound up as though we are the experts on this issue, and maybe we can remember that those most affected by this debate are our country's precious Indigenous people. I'm all for constructive debate but we should stop for a moment and question if we can honestly define racism ourselves before we make comments that can offend.

Such a sensitive and complex topic I know.

 

[Total Tiger]

I'm sorry, but I still have a massive problem with this thread. Changing the word from aboriginal to indigenous does not change the tone of the question or the thread. It is the use of the word "worth" alongside "aboriginal" or "indigenous" that I am most offended by. I also agree with Hopper that most here, myself included, would be completely uneducated about the issues involved in even debating this, and don't think putting city-centric opinions based on stereotype and media hype on here makes PRE look good.

I have an opinion that PRE is a bit more adult than sites such as Big Footy and am bitterly disappointed that this thread has been allowed to continue.

 

[Tigermad2005]

I am all for free speech.

But you can not be white and say anything against anybody without been called racist end of story.
The world has gone to far.
Yes we did and still do treat indigenous people badly but an i racist for calling them black?
I which we could all just treat people the same, what every colour they are.

The topic is not racist, it is just asking a question be it a silly one.

Hey hey was not racist, the KFC ad was not racist.

And as for the topic yes we should draft players player from indigenous.

 

[lamb22]

The issue of white/indigenous relations and indigenous advancement is indeed complex.

The various reports recently in relation to conditions on remote communities and the concerns of women and children on those communities as well as what we hear from different indigenous voices make it clear a left/right or other ideological dichotomy is to simplistic a prism to view the situation.

From Hopper's previous postings I was of the impression that he possesed some first hand knowledge of issues in question particularly as he didn't subscribe to simplistic solutions or doctrines.

The real world informs us and the more aware we are the better.

The point that I would make however is that if you are considering recruiting Troy Taylor consider Troy Taylor and not Andy Krakour or Micheal Long.

Similarly when thoughts went to recruiting JON and Richie, their partcular circumstances and attributes were relevant not any indigenous predecessors.

When we recruited Schulz, I dont think we needed to consider Phil Carman's behavious because he was also from SA or Carl Ditterich's behaviour because he was of germanic ancestry.

 

[lamb22]

i would say im as least politically correct as you can get on here. its a relevant question and there is nothing racist about it.

you people should all get a grip.
the only way you are not allowed to talk race is if what you say is likely to incite violence.
you are certainly entitled to your opinion right or wrong.and the last time i looked you were entitled to voice your opinion.

simply put there is a negative side to recruiting blacks. just like there is a positive. yet some on here would have us never talking about the negative side at all.
that gets my back up and imo is a blight on my freedom of speech.
also i say blacks because i consider myself an indiginous australian, someone born here.
and a white aboriginal, native of australia.
the way the dogooders are going its them and us when we should be pushing for oneness.

i did a post on the taylor thread that got deleted because some politiically correct fool complained. imo there was nothing wrong with that post im tempted to post what i said there but i think it would put my head in a noose.
i think i may take rosmertas offer up and leave at least for awhile. its a real shame when you cant give a contrary opinion anymore or dare say what you think is correct. ya know we are supposed to be an enlightened country yet we are so immature that we cant speak about race for fear of being branded.

Oh the poor put upon Claw.

I dont think you've ever had a problem putting your opinion.

Others have opinions as well though Claw. It seems that's your main problem!

Oh and I do like your downgrading of 40,000 years of history from indigenous to 'blacks and your assuming their title'.
I take it you'd consider that an australian newly born child of islamic afghan refugees is as dinki di indigenous as you are then!

 

[agincourt]

Well no Agincourt. Acknowledging different races exist is merely stating a fact. Discriminating on the basis of one's race is racism.

Back to topic, why do you discount every example of past poor behaviour by non indigenous people recited above as not relevant considerations in drafting 'whites' and then trot out indiscretions by past indigenous kids as relevant considerations in drafting "blacks".

Acknowledging different races means that you also acknowledge there are differences between races. Whether those differences are positive or negative are a "glass half full/half empty" type argument.

You acknowledge the differences and then decide that the innate football/athletic talent that Aborigines possess is worthy of consideration when deciding their recruitability but deny that this is racist??? Why? Because you are discriminating in their favour? But if someone asks if we should also consider the negatives in the situation then that is wrong????

Bascally, you want to have your cake and eat it too!

As to your question regarding indiscretions by non indigenous players..... it is my belief (and I stand to be corrected by anyone with firm statistical evidence) that, on average you will have more problems with indigenous players (and not purely in terms of indiscretions per se but with absenteeism, laziness, inconsistency and "adjustment" complications) than you would from your non indigenous players.

I also believe that the individual characteristics are the most important things we should be looking at when recruiting and not the racial background of a player.

 

[mld]

I have no problem with people throwing the question around. Even if it is racist, I believe that sort of thing should be exposed to the sulight rather than censored and left to fester underground. In the end though, I'd suggest the best strategy for the club is to judge individuals on their individual merits, and balance the risk of an individual's past behaviour against the potential benefit that individual can offer - rather than apply a blanket rule based on skin colour or background. But then, that's just me.

 

[agincourt]

Oh and I do like your downgrading of 40,000 years of history from indigenous to 'blacks and your assuming their title'.
I take it you'd consider that an australian newly born child of islamic afghan refugees is as dinki di indigenous as you are then!

Why not?

If a person is born here, regardless of there parents heritage, why shouldn't they consider themselves indigenous?


Wow, talk about an Aryan perspective! Because my dad was born overseas my blood isn't pure enough for you?
My love for this country somehow isn't equal to someone elses?

That is probably the most vile racist thing anyone has sprouted on this post so far!

 

[the claw]

will delete the recent post didnt realise my other post went thru and this is basically a rehash.

 

[lamb22]

As to your question regarding indiscretions by non indigenous players..... it is my belief (and I stand to be corrected by anyone with firm statistical evidence) that, on average you will have more problems with indigenous players (and not purely in terms of indiscretions per se but with absenteeism, laziness, inconsistency and "adjustment" complications) than you would from your non indigenous players.

Sums it up in a nut shell. You state a belief not backed up by any evidence. Self fullfiling prophecy.

Core business of a football club is getting quality footballers and winning. Recruiters are of the opinion that indigenous players are more likely to become quality footballers than non indigenous. Indigenous players have thrown up 20% of Norm Smith medallist despite comprising 8% of lists and 3% of the population.

Clearly when you move from one environment to a different envirinment there will be adjustment issues. The greater the difference the more likeley to be greater adjustment issues.

Wiinning flags and having players who play well in grand finals is important. I would have thought investment in talented indigenous players would be a good idea

 

[Rosy]

i did a post on the taylor thread that got deleted because some politiically correct fool complained. imo there was nothing wrong with that post im tempted to post what i said there but i think it would put my head in a noose.

Why do you post such crap? That is utter rubbish. Your post wasn't removed because someone complained at all. Your post was removed because it was unacceptable and againt the posting guidelines...as is the name calling you've resorted to yet again on this thread. As you were advised you take up more moderator time than any other poster and yet you continue to ignore requests and warnings. Seems you need help to take the break you obviously know you need.

 

[agincourt]

Sums it up in a nut shell. You state a belief not backed up by any evidence. Self fullfiling prophecy.

Core business of a football club is getting quality footballers and winning. Recruiters are of the opinion that indigenous players are more likely to become quality footballers than non indigenous. Indigenous players have thrown up 20% of Norm Smith medallist despite comprising 8% of lists and 3% of the population.

Clearly when you move from one environment to a different envirinment there will be adjustment issues. The greater the difference the more likeley to be greater adjustment issues.

Wiinning flags and having players who play well in grand finals is important. I would have thought investment in talented indigenous players would be a good idea

At the end of the day, until someone produces hard statistical facts (such as your Norm Smith %'s) then we are all just voicing an opinion which is at best made based on anecdotal evidence or perception.

That is all the post is asking us to do isn't it?

We are weighing up the pros and cons (as we see it) of recruiting indigenous players.

 

[Disco08]

Acknowledging different races means that you also acknowledge there are differences between races. Whether those differences are positive or negative are a "glass half full/half empty" type argument.

You acknowledge the differences and then decide that the innate football/athletic talent that Aborigines possess is worthy of consideration when deciding their recruitability but deny that this is racist??? Why? Because you are discriminating in their favour? But if someone asks if we should also consider the negatives in the situation then that is wrong????

Here's the crux of the argument IMO.

Defining races is not racist. It's no different to differentiating between a labrador and a poodle. It's pure biology - nothing more, nothing less.

Giving a positive blanket statement about indigenous players is not racist either. Something can only be racist if it's offensive or derogatory.

Giving a negative blanket statement about indigenous players (or any other group of people) is certainly racist. The simple fact of the matter is that the slurs being cast do not even come close to applying to the entire indigenous AFL contingent. Considering the negatives on an individual basis is the only way to go, as mld says.

Perhaps a more measured way to look at this is to ask whether drafting kids from underprivileged circumstances is worthwhile. It is after all a clear statistical fact that children who grow up in poverty and/or in abusive environments are far less likely to be able to function in society than those more fortunate. Do AFL clubs (and more importantly society in general) turn their back on these kids because of these facts or do they try and do something positive?

 

[lamb22]

Why not?

If a person is born here, regardless of there parents heritage, why shouldn't they consider themselves indigenous?


Wow, talk about an Aryan perspective! Because my dad was born overseas my blood isn't pure enough for you?
My love for this country somehow isn't equal to someone elses?

That is probably the most vile racist thing anyone has sprouted on this post so far!

My question was a rhetorical one for Claw's benefit.

If we are going literal on aborigine or indigenous we might as well airbrush over identity and history completely.

You know as you get older you experience new things. I'd never thought 'Ayran' and 'vile racist' would be on my resume.

Wow.......really wow....I am alternating between bemused and amused.

Just as well your dad was born overseas and I dont have to take you seriously! :stir [add irony emoticon]

 

[mld]

We are weighing up the pros and cons (as we see it) of recruiting indigenous players.

This is a flawed position. We should be weighing up each potential player on their individual merits and risks.

 

[agincourt]

Here's the crux of the argument IMO.

Defining races is not racist. It's no different to differentiating between a labrador and a poodle. It's pure biology - nothing more, nothing less.

Giving a positive blanket statement about indigenous players is not racist either. Something can only be racist if it's offensive or derogatory.

Giving a negative blanket statement about indigenous players (or any other group of people) is certainly racist. The simple fact of the matter is that the slurs being cast do not even come close to applying to the entire indigenous AFL contingent. Considering the negatives on an individual basis is the only way to go, as mld says.

Perhaps a more measured way to look at this is to ask whether drafting kids from underprivileged circumstances is worthwhile. It is after all a clear statistical fact that children who grow up in poverty and/or in abusive environments are far less likely to be able to function in society than those more fortunate. Do AFL clubs (and more importantly society in general) turn their back on these kids because of these facts or do they try and do something positive?

You are correct in the sense that society's definition of "racist" is offensive or derogatory.

Unfortunately most people believe that anything said about another race which isn't complimentary is offensive and must therefore be racist regardless of whether it is factual or not...

When "White Men Can't Jump" was released was there uproar and disgust at this blatant racism? No. Because white people laughed and basically said "you're not wrong there". We weren't offended.
But when KFC release an ad showing West Indians enjoying KFC (which they do) it was decried as being racist.

Both are generalisations based on truth. Why is one OK but not the other?

If I said that blacks are better basketballers than whites no-one would argue, but if I said they can't swim for sh%t I would be abused and pilloried as a racist.

Both statements are true though....

I believe that any true observation of a race is therefore by definition racist.

I will try not to make broad sweeping generalisations of various races without those statements being true if others will refrain from calling me a racist when those truths are not to their liking!

 

[lamb22]

This is a flawed position. We should be weighing up each potential player on their individual merits and risks.

Agreed but the proponents of the alternative argument just dont see it. Apparently indigenous players are not individuals but come with a pre determined set of characterics. Also apparently that's not a racist position !

 

[Djevv]

Of course they are! (dumb question) Honestly, my favorite thing about AFL these days (given where Richmond are on the ladder) is watching these boys play.

If this concerns the Troy Taylor then all he is is an urban kid with a poor attitude - he needs a kick up the backside and firm pressure applied to keep him in line. As long as RFC are aware of this hopefully he will stay on track once he gets back into training. In the off season he should be improving his education as well as doing pre-season training - this probably applies to ALL footballers mind you.

It has been said that a whitefella is just a badly behaved blackfella and visa versa. The cultures are different so misunderstandings arise. AFL clubs need to have done some research on what makes indigenous people tick, respect that and treat them accordingly. This doesn't condone illegal behaviour of course, but if, for cultural reasons, a player needs time off then, that needs to be respected and accommodated.

 

[agincourt]

Agreed but the proponents of the alternative argument just dont see it. Apparently indigenous players are not individuals but come with a pre determined set of characterics. Also apparently that's not a racist position !

Ummmm, you're the one not seeing it.

If believing that an indigenous player is more likely to have skills/talents that will make him a better player than an anglo player is not a racially motivated decision then what is?

The players race is a consideration. Because you consider his race a positive you feel it is not racist. Because some feel his race MAY be a negative you feel it is racist.

You believe that " indigenous players are not individuals but come with a pre determined set of characterics" as well, namely a predisposition to become better players.

So the only difference is you feel you have the moral high ground.