Support for BLM | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • 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.

Support for BLM

Do you support Richmond players taking a knee before tonight's match?

  • Yes

    Votes: 62 66.0%
  • No

    Votes: 32 34.0%

  • Total voters
    94
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
From another perspective, the players' ages ranged from 19-31, which is not representative of the club's stakeholders.

The club has seen a lot in 135 years without becoming political. It's not much for supporters to ask that it abstains from entering into controversy. It isn't a smart move when the budget's been squeezed and some are making financial sacrifices re memberships.

Who are the stakeholders? Peggy and Benny would be supportive. As for as fans, we don't care. A lot of teeth gnashing when we were one of the first blacklist some media Corp over sexism (can't remember who), one of the first to Don warm-up jumpers with Goodes' number, we encouraged Stack to join the pregame war dance, a clear show of support for Goodes.

Our club is a leader in these social issues and I love them for it. The more they *smile* off Sam Newman, the better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Who are the stakeholders? Peggy and Benny would be supportive. As for as fans, we don't care. A lot of teeth gnashing when we were one of the first blacklist some media Corp over sexism (can't remember who), one of the first to Don warm-up jumpers with Goodes' number, we encouraged Stack to join the pregame war dance, a clear show of support for Goodes.

Our club is a leader in these social issues and I love them for it. The more they *smile* off Sam Newman, the better.

It's obvious from the tone of comments in various newspapers that there are plenty of rank-and-file footy fans who feel more strongly about this than I do.

There was no disapproval of Edwards' #67 idea. There were murmurings over the Goodes #37 thing. I didn't like Stack getting in the opposition's face any more than I liked him high-fiving an opponent while we were getting our pants pulled down. If it had been announced beforehand I would've said it's a bad idea. But he's an exuberant kid and I'm prepared to look the other way; the club's credo is to be who you are.

These issues are domestic; BLM is imported and vastly more complex. I'm not sure the players even spend much time thinking about politics.

Please don't complain if the Jack Dyer statue is vandalised as a result of unselfconscious remarks in his autobiography.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
If you haven't been listening to the players, the local BLM movement is distinctly indigenous focused, not African American.

There might be plenty that don't like it, but I'd say the majority support the players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Sure, it's not a scientific poll. You would still expect to see some variation in a sample >= 20.

From another perspective, the players' ages ranged from 19-31, which is not representative of the club's stakeholders.

The club has seen a lot in 135 years without becoming political. It's not much for supporters to ask that it abstains from entering into controversy. It isn't a smart move when the budget's been squeezed and some are making financial sacrifices re memberships.
Think that Football a clubs were taking political stances during the past when they did or didn't favour Catholics. To say that football clubs operate in some vacuum untouched by the society in which we live is just ludicrous.

The Institute at Punt Rd is a political stance.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Just said at a get together to watch two games that each generation has a different Perspective on the world. Rex Hunt on AW right now representing the post war boomers (" to impersonate Nicky Winmar you need to put nugget on your face") Dave Astbury represents his.
 
Think that Football a clubs were taking political stances during the past when they did or didn't favour Catholics. To say that football clubs operate in some vacuum untouched by the society in which we live is just ludicrous.

Not sure religious affiliations are political as such, certainly not in historical terms. Everyone supported players enlisting during the world wars. If they did it today it would cause a hell of a ruckus.
to impersonate Nicky Winmar you need to put nugget on your face

In 1999, to impersonate Nicky Winmar in Australia, that's what you did.

ABC comedy from the 90's.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Think that Football a clubs were taking political stances during the past when they did or didn't favour Catholics. To say that football clubs operate in some vacuum untouched by the society in which we live is just ludicrous.

The Institute at Punt Rd is a political stance.
The institute is a signal that we respect indigenous culture and that indigenous players snd people are welcome at Richmond. Same as Bachar's institute has shown Muslims to be welcome. The institute helps people get educated, builds pride in our players, making them feel more valued and connected.
Richmond was a Catholic club, they opposed conscription in WW1 i believe, and continued to play football.
We support a club that makes us proud by its actions.
We atteact more members and sponsors and are seen as a trusted institution that can deliver programs, sponsored by state and federal governments.
This allows us to sustain our players and deliver players a career beyond football.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
At the end of the day, it was a move that was driven by the players, not mandated by the club or AFL. Well done on them for taking the stance and putting it further into the minds and conversations of the public. Acts like these open up dialogue, and hopefully people are mature enough to actually listen to dialogue and ideas that might clash with their own and be open minded when doing it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Definition of Kneeling is to be in " prayer or submissive ". Assume our players were praying to their God for Victory & not to be submissive in times when it requires them to be brave against the enemy ".
 
Selling the players short indeed, and also highly inaccurate in that they were pressured.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Definition of Kneeling is to be in " prayer or submissive ". Assume our players were praying to their God for Victory & not to be submissive in times when it requires them to be brave against the enemy ".
A lot (all?) American football teams pray pre match then go onto the field and try to maim their opponents. two ways to look at that : either that's not very Christian or to alleviate your fears Tigaman that praying doesn't diminish their desire for Victory.
 
what is dog whistling?

when someone has a clear standpoint on a divisive, often hateful issue, and they pose a seemingly innocuous question while avoiding offering their standpoint truthfully

The intent is that the pitch will attract the 'dogs' to promote their POV or agenda without them really saying or doing anything.

thats dog whistling.

Now I think a few things

1. This thread is an example of dog whistling.

2. It hasn't really worked here, because modern Richmond Supporters buy into our clubs inclusive ethos that brings sport, culture, education and social reform together in a force for good, and we aren't like Collingwood, and

3. dog whistling on PRE should be an allowable rhetorical technique. However, in this instance I believe it belongs on the racial intolerance thread and not on Dyer'er.

Our mods steer a pretty calm ship these days.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
Not sure religious affiliations are political as such, certainly not in historical terms. Everyone supported players enlisting during the world wars. If they did it today it would cause a hell of a ruckus.


In 1999, to impersonate Nicky Winmar in Australia, that's what you did.

ABC comedy from the 90's.

Religion has always been political. As Irish Catholics, many Richmond men refused to go to fight for Britain in WW1 while she was violently occupying their homeland, and who could blame them.

I've been thinking about the Rob Sitch impressions. As opposed to most blackface stuff, they were funny and affectionate parodies of their targets, but they're no doubt problematic viewed through a modern lens. I have no doubt Sitch had no ill-intent, and Newman has been more than effusive in expressing his love and reverence for Polly Farmer. I think it comes down to consideration, and listening. If someone you mean no ill towards says, "please stop doing that, it hurts my feelings/offends me", why would you keep doing it? Sitch wouldn't do it now. Newman might, if he thought he could get away with it.

One I wonder about is the 80s movie 'Soul Man', in which a white guy dons blackface to get a college scholarship, but then learns the hard way (apart from getting violently arrested, lynched or shot) what it's like to walk a mile.
 
Religion has always been political. As Irish Catholics, many Richmond men refused to go to fight for Britain in WW1 while she was violently occupying their homeland, and who could blame them.

That would be an individual political stance, then. The club supported the war effort and donated gate takings through this period towards it while resisting considerable public pressure to shut down.

As for "dog whistling"... the poll question wasn't loaded, and no explanations of opinions were canvassed. Some chose to explain their position and it was done without anyone getting overheated. The poll result - 66/34, or 2 for/1 against - is consistent with a poll on another forum. I consider it a useful exercise and depending on developments, it might be interesting to conduct another poll down the track.
 
Last edited:
That would be an individual political stance, then. The club supported the war effort and donated gate takings through this period towards it while resisting considerable public pressure to shut down.

As for "dog whistling"... no explanations of opinions were canvassed. Some chose to explain their position and it was done without anyone getting overheated. The poll result - 66/34, or 2 for/1 against - is consistent with a poll on another forum. I consider it a useful exercise and depending on developments, it might be interesting to conduct another poll down the track.
It's always useful to find out where people stand.
 
I like Freo....bloke tweets if the players take the knee I cancel my membership. Freo Tweet back we have your number we will call you Momday to organise the refund.
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Haha
Reactions: 6 users
I like Freo....bloke tweets if the players take the knee I cancel my membership. Freo Tweet back we have your number we will call you Momday to organise the refund.
After that a Richmond supporter posted commending freo and purchased two freo memberships to cover the ones the guy was cancelling.
 
  • Love
Reactions: 1 user
Status
Not open for further replies.