The Seven Have Agreed to Wear Pride Jersey Next Year (maybe?)

[Brisbane Tragic]

I st

I still don't understand why the offer for these blokes to wear the standard strip wasn't made, or was it?

My understanding and just my understanding is that the NRL said no to some wearing a standard strip and Manly wanted to wear the rainbow jerseys. Again part of the stuff up all round.

 

[voicefromthehill]

My understanding and just my understanding is that the NRL said no to some wearing a standard strip and Manly wanted to wear the rainbow jerseys. Again part of the stuff up all round.

Correct - can only have 1 jersey

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

ooo I hit a nerve and drew all the lefties out yet again. I have not seen one address the mention of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the anti discrimination act this week. Inconvenient facts I guess?

I have absolutely no idea what you are referring to.

But seeing you bring it up - how about Article 1…

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

So why was it so hard exactly for your heroic 10 to wear an everyone in League jersey?? Is it possible their beliefs mean they do NOT consider everyone equal in dignity and rights? And are UNABLE to bring themselves to act towards LGBTi folks in a spirit of brotherhood?

Sheesh. Can't wait for your next argument, it feels like you won't look at other people's points but are just flailing about to find any way to justify one position.

 

[2830 Eagle]

All special rounds should be cancelled. The NRL could not organise a root in a brothel.
Look at Cronulla tonight, no special jersey and yet souths are wearing pink.

 

[Will on the hill]

Thanks - appreciate your input. The club handled it badly... I agree, However the players detonated a huge bomb and they can never be forgiven for that. Again I will reiterate - I fully support long held religious views and where the holder is consistent in their application of the tenets around their scripture and beliefs. We all sin I get that - even religious people and religious people will of course make a mistake like we all will. But where supposed religious people cherry pick what they follow today and what they wont and where they clearly turn a blind eye to some long standing very important principles yet hold a firm line on others and where people demand respect for their beliefs but refuse to accept that other law abiding citizens can go about their lives in their way...essentially showing discrimination to those group of people that to me is where their claims of religious objection is a total fraud. Cherry picking with your beliefs though isn't making an honest mistake and an innocent "sin" that is a purposeful decision to forgo beliefs around gambling/alchol etc. Anyway - to me this matter is over but the Boycott 10 certainly wont ever be seen as Manly champions that is for damn sure. I will also say again... I am pretty sure there is a leader here whether that be a player or player Manager and I will bet that a few of the Boycott 10 are regretting their stance right now.

I get that the hypocrisy can be frustrating, I've experienced this frustration 1st hand. Thank the proverbial gods that they do cherry pick because the alternative is billions of hardcore believers in the old testament rules. The other way of looking at it is the hypocrisy is the slow process of religious people giving up their anachronistic views. If you want to help the process it's not a good idea to use ad hominem arguments, they only make people dig their heels in. You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar.

 

[Will on the hill]

All special rounds should be cancelled. The NRL could not organise a root in a brothel.
Look at Cronulla tonight, no special jersey and yet souths are wearing pink.

Maybe we could do a Mormoon and white jersey as a trade off for the Everyone jersey.

 

[Technical Coach]

I have absolutely no idea what you are referring to.

But seeing you bring it up - how about Article 1…

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

So why was it so hard exactly for your heroic 10 to wear an everyone in League jersey?? Is it possible their beliefs mean they do NOT consider everyone equal in dignity and rights? And are UNABLE to bring themselves to act towards LGBTi folks in a spirit of brotherhood?

Sheesh. Can't wait for your next argument, it feels like you won't look at other people's points but are just flailing about to find any way to justify one position.

How is it a “Everyone in League Jersey” when the colours are known as gay pride throughout the world. Not sure but was inclusivity even used as the promo before all this fuss came to the surface or just a convenient change to make the seven look bad and to lighten the impact of the clubs mishandling of the promotion.

I would not have a problem wearing a specific inclusivity jersey that was inclusive of gays and all other discriminated minorities or types of people, as long as the jersey is not “dominated by one category or type”

Businesses have to abide by laws that create an environment for inclusivity(which I full heartedly support), so why is it necessary to promote what already exists and that Manly have to abide by already.

My issue has zero to do with Gays even though I have no interest to get to know gay men, I would be taking up the same fight if a religion,politics or anything sexual was promoted on the shirt, it is forcing a collective and by doing so many feel they are supporting by association.

I’ve read here that the seven should just make a statement saying by wearing the jersey it is not showing support but that hands power to whatever is being promoted through associated numbers and is a dishonest reflection of support. Not everyone in the present or future will know who wore the jersey merely out of conforming but made a statement.

I have no issue working with or supporting any human in a time of need it doesn’t mean I have to associate with them, befriend them or promote their lifestyle, in the same way I have no interest in promoting or associating with drug takers, bullies, thieves etc etc.

Just treat all humans with a level of respect that enables a safe living environment for people to function and grow, that doesn’t mean you have to like everyone or support every cause to be considered “inclusive”

 

[Karshy]

I have absolutely no idea what you are referring to.

But seeing you bring it up - how about Article 1…

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

So why was it so hard exactly for your heroic 10 to wear an everyone in League jersey?? Is it possible their beliefs mean they do NOT consider everyone equal in dignity and rights? And are UNABLE to bring themselves to act towards LGBTi folks in a spirit of brotherhood?

Sheesh. Can't wait for your next argument, it feels like you won't look at other people's points but are just flailing about to find any way to justify one position.

So tell me exactly, what rights the the LGBQTIA+ community lose as a result of the 7 not wearing the jersey?

How about Article 18? "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance."

 

[Tareeeagle]

That first player you mention, should be dropped to Blacktown for everyone's benefit.

He had a great future, but his career was tragically cut short.

 

[highlandeagle]

Can we please call this particular line of argument out for what it is? Intellectual dishonesty!
Mate the game was to be played this week in a certain jersey and they most definitely said they wouldn't play. They said they would not play. They said they would not play. They refused to play. And they did not play!

It's like saying Russia didn't invade Ukraine because really all they said was we'll invade if you don't just give it to us, and you didn't.

Reality hit a touchy nerve? Well said Woodsie.

 

[EagleFromMay1967]

He had a great future, but his career was tragically cut short.

. . . with terrible injuries to his hands & feet ? Rumor.
Trouble is, there is no video, or indeed any evidence of any kind, that he got any playing minutes.

 

[XV-1]

Didn't take long for the haters here to start hating. Hang your pathetic heads in shame.

"Scott Penn said the players who refused to play in tonight’s match against the Roosters have agreed to wear a pride jersey next season, as long as they are consulted."

Nothing is firm and nothing has been agreed upon depending on the consultation next year.

How about we as supporters support ALL the players moving forward as one inclusive Manly to make the top 8.

As I predicted, the 7 have not agreed to wear a pride jersey next year.

So haters, are you going to take back all your BS retric and apologise to these young men?

You guys are worse than the so called gay haters and I am ashamed you even call yourselves Manly supporters, as you aren't.

Manly rainbow rebels slam 'totally untrue' claim

Pride mess takes another ugly twist

wwos.nine.com.au

https://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/manly-7-shut-down-reports-theyll-wear-a-pride-jersey-in-the-future/news-story/587107a7b9b0748b5254826cba0c0ee1

 

[highlandeagle]

I have absolutely no idea what you are referring to.

But seeing you bring it up - how about Article 1…

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

So why was it so hard exactly for your heroic 10 to wear an everyone in League jersey?? Is it possible their beliefs mean they do NOT consider everyone equal in dignity and rights? And are UNABLE to bring themselves to act towards LGBTi folks in a spirit of brotherhood?

Sheesh. Can't wait for your next argument, it feels like you won't look at other people's points but are just flailing about to find any way to justify one position.

Modern day Imperialism right there!
Condescending hubris!!!

 

[Tragic Eagle]

lol i cant believe this argument is still going on 5 days later... the reality is that there are 3 groups of people:
1. Those who dont care either way
2. Those who think that human rights includes the rights of an individual to express themselves, their sexuality and their religion. Those in this group understand that Australia is part of the United Nations and have signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They also understand that there is an anti discrimination act and an employer cannot discriminate against an employee for practicing their religion.
3. Those who think that human rights includes the rights of an individual to express themselves, their sexuality, but how dare they practice their religion. These people assume their position on their high horses and atop mount condescension without actually knowing a thing about laws and declarations. They promote "inclusivity" via the exclusion of the religious. I call them Peanut Brain Lefties.

 

[Scorpio]

I think the thread title may need to be changed... No news article I've seen actually states that the players ever agreed to wear the jersey next year. The quote in the first post of this thread doesn't match the linked article either.

It's only really been inferred that because the players may have said they were willing to have a discussion about it, that they'd be open to wearing it. Which evidently doesn't seem to be true.

 

[SeaEagle21]

As I predicted, the 7 have not agreed to wear a pride jersey next year.

So haters, are you going to take back all your BS retric and apologise to these young men?

You guys are worse than the so called gay haters and I am ashamed you even call yourselves Manly supporters, as you aren't.

Manly rainbow rebels slam 'totally untrue' claim

Pride mess takes another ugly twist

wwos.nine.com.au

https://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/manly-7-shut-down-reports-theyll-wear-a-pride-jersey-in-the-future/news-story/587107a7b9b0748b5254826cba0c0ee1

Geez some massive own goals kicked by our club, hopefully when the new CEO commences he can re-gain control as our owner seems to have put his foot in it.

Looking forward to getting the team back on the field and focusing on the Eels game

 

[eagleron]

I think the thread title may need to be changed... No news article I've seen actually states that the players ever agreed to wear the jersey next year. The quote in the first post of this thread doesn't match the linked article either.

It's only really been inferred that because the players may have said they were willing to have a discussion about it, that they'd be open to wearing it. Which evidently doesn't seem to be true.

It's all bs from what I've read, apparently the players or their managers contacted Weirdler and told him they were p1ssed that it was being put about that they had relented on their earlier decision so we're kinda back at square one

 

[Terry Zarsoff]

As I predicted, the 7 have not agreed to wear a pride jersey next year.

So haters, are you going to take back all your BS retric and apologise to these young men?

You guys are worse than the so called gay haters and I am ashamed you even call yourselves Manly supporters, as you aren't.

Manly rainbow rebels slam 'totally untrue' claim

Pride mess takes another ugly twist

wwos.nine.com.au

https://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/manly-7-shut-down-reports-theyll-wear-a-pride-jersey-in-the-future/news-story/587107a7b9b0748b5254826cba0c0ee1

Scotty Two Tongues - ‘Man who Speak with Forked Tongue.’

 

[davohan123]

Des Hasler is one of the few people at Manly to emerge with their reputation intact following the rainbow jersey fiasco, but he has been dealing with another big issue that could explode as a result of the split at the club.

Hasler has five games to save his career with the Sea Eagles, despite guiding them through the most trying of weeks. Under the terms of his contract, Manly have to finish in the top eight this year in order to trigger a new deal with the club.

It is a condition that Manly put into his contract, which was negotiated when Hasler was facing life in the coaching wilderness after his celebrated falling out with the Bulldogs in 2017. He had to agree to clauses that coaches in a stronger position would knock back.

There had been negotiations for months between former Manly chief executive Stephen Humphreys and Hasler’s agent, George Mimis, to restructure the deal. That all came to nothing when Humphreys made a sudden exit from the Sea Eagles in April.

Seven Sea Eagles players did not play in Thursday’s 20-10 loss to the Roosters after refusing to wear a jersey featuring rainbow colours that was designed to promote inclusivity. It would have taken a strong finish to the year to make the top eight, but the Roosters loss has left Manly 10th on the ladder and in danger of missing the finals.

Hasler has been left to coach with a cloud hanging over him, and, with new Manly boss Tony Mestrov starting on Monday, his future is sure to be a hot topic.

Hasler’s situation also raises another interesting issue about the jersey boycott. If Manly don’t finish inside the top eight to trigger a renewal for Hasler, the coach may have a case against the club.

Manly’s management has admitted the decision to wear the controversial jumper was not communicated to the coach, and we have seen the fallout since.

If Hasler’s deal is not renewed due to their finishing position, the role the “inclusivity” jersey played in their demise could be something Mimis seizes on. The obvious solution is to ditch the clause and allow Hasler to coach without the doubt surrounding his future.

It is remarkable that even a fourth place finish last year didn’t assure Hasler would keep his job beyond this season.

Why rainbow jersey could cost Hasler his job

The Sea Eagles coach has five games to save his career at the club, despite receiving praise for the way he responded to the jersey boycott controversy.

www.smh.com.au

 

[Dee Why Eagle]

Des Hasler is one of the few people at Manly to emerge with their reputation intact following the rainbow jersey fiasco, but he has been dealing with another big issue that could explode as a result of the split at the club.

Hasler has five games to save his career with the Sea Eagles, despite guiding them through the most trying of weeks. Under the terms of his contract, Manly have to finish in the top eight this year in order to trigger a new deal with the club.

It is a condition that Manly put into his contract, which was negotiated when Hasler was facing life in the coaching wilderness after his celebrated falling out with the Bulldogs in 2017. He had to agree to clauses that coaches in a stronger position would knock back.

There had been negotiations for months between former Manly chief executive Stephen Humphreys and Hasler’s agent, George Mimis, to restructure the deal. That all came to nothing when Humphreys made a sudden exit from the Sea Eagles in April.

Seven Sea Eagles players did not play in Thursday’s 20-10 loss to the Roosters after refusing to wear a jersey featuring rainbow colours that was designed to promote inclusivity. It would have taken a strong finish to the year to make the top eight, but the Roosters loss has left Manly 10th on the ladder and in danger of missing the finals.

Hasler has been left to coach with a cloud hanging over him, and, with new Manly boss Tony Mestrov starting on Monday, his future is sure to be a hot topic.

Hasler’s situation also raises another interesting issue about the jersey boycott. If Manly don’t finish inside the top eight to trigger a renewal for Hasler, the coach may have a case against the club.

Manly’s management has admitted the decision to wear the controversial jumper was not communicated to the coach, and we have seen the fallout since.

If Hasler’s deal is not renewed due to their finishing position, the role the “inclusivity” jersey played in their demise could be something Mimis seizes on. The obvious solution is to ditch the clause and allow Hasler to coach without the doubt surrounding his future.

It is remarkable that even a fourth place finish last year didn’t assure Hasler would keep his job beyond this season.

Why rainbow jersey could cost Hasler his job

The Sea Eagles coach has five games to save his career at the club, despite receiving praise for the way he responded to the jersey boycott controversy.

www.smh.com.au

I'm sure I previously read that the condition was Des had to make the eight either last year or this.
If so, then just another anti Manly BS story