Josh Aloiai re-signs until 2025

[Seagles68]

Strictly hypothetical, or at least I hope so.

Peeps are so upset at this guy for sticking up for his beliefs. And some seem to be saying that we wouldn't sign him again given those beliefs regardless of his playing abilities.

If you were a player of some religious background would you go to Manly? Or would you pick a different team which doesn't make stupid marketing decisions?

Ideally the matter needs to die out and quickly. If the NRL want to make a big deal out of inclusivity then make all clubs participate, and stop shooting ourselves in the foot.

Goodo. I thought I missed something.

I can't say I'm a fan and I'm am conflicted on the "issue" but doing something like that would be absurd.

 

[eagleron]

I reckon I need one when I'm on the forklift at work, on the corrugated dirt tracks

I'll send you Kramers number,lol

 

[Seagles68]

Strictly hypothetical, or at least I hope so.

Peeps are so upset at this guy for sticking up for his beliefs. And some seem to be saying that we wouldn't sign him again given those beliefs regardless of his playing abilities.

If you were a player of some religious background would you go to Manly? Or would you pick a different team which doesn't make stupid marketing decisions?

Ideally the matter needs to die out and quickly. If the NRL want to make a big deal out of inclusivity then make all clubs participate, and stop shooting ourselves in the foot.

Maybe I could start a thread on euthanasia. Nooooooooooooooooooo!!!

 

[Ron E. Gibbs]

If it's being considered that Manly do not sign players of faith (to the degree that they refuse to wear a certain jersey), then you might consider that you probably take away a third of players (based upon 10 players refusing to play out of the squad of 30). If we were playing unders for players then maybe...

And with current conditions, Polynesians are probably not coming here, or at least we are going to pay overs to get/keep them.

Definitely agree to the no dickhead policy though e.g no Bronson Xerri, Curtis Scott, or other Fwits.

I think it's a fallacy that all Polynesian "players of faith" would have taken the same action as our players did. Plenty of Polynesian players at other clubs - who also identified as deeply religious - said they would have had no issue wearing the jersey that was put forward. Turns out you can be Polynesian, religious, and tolerant and accepting of others. Who knew?

But then, I've admitted before that I am shallow: I would prefer our players to want to win games of footy instead of wanting to win a culture war.

That said, I still think it would be borderline crazy for the club to push ahead and try this again without the full backing of the NRL. The NRL needs to make it clear that inclusivity and tolerance are values of the NRL, not just the values of one club. Go all in, have an inclusivity round - rainbows for everyone! And then, if players do band together and refuse to participate, the NRL can deal with it.

 

[Seagles68]

I think it's a fallacy that all Polynesian "players of faith" would have taken the same action as our players did. Plenty of Polynesian players at other clubs - who also identified as deeply religious - said they would have had no issue wearing the jersey that was put forward. Turns out you can be Polynesian, religious, and tolerant and accepting of others. Who knew?

But then, I've admitted before that I am shallow: I would prefer our players to want to win games of footy instead of wanting to win a culture war.

That said, I still think it would be borderline crazy for the club to push ahead and try this again without the full backing of the NRL. The NRL needs to make it clear that inclusivity and tolerance are values of the NRL, not just the values of one club. Go all in, have an inclusivity round - rainbows for everyone! And then, if players do band together and refuse to participate, the NRL can deal with it.

It does seem to have been a very odd thing to go it alone on any theme really. So I'm with you on one in all in.

 

[eagleron]

Strictly hypothetical, or at least I hope so.

Peeps are so upset at this guy for sticking up for his beliefs. And some seem to be saying that we wouldn't sign him again given those beliefs regardless of his playing abilities.

If you were a player of some religious background would you go to Manly? Or would you pick a different team which doesn't make stupid marketing decisions?

Ideally the matter needs to die out and quickly. If the NRL want to make a big deal out of inclusivity then make all clubs participate, and stop shooting ourselves in the foot.

I think the club needs to leave the organising of such promotions to the league, all this results in is destroying morale and ruining our season, we just can't afford a repeat of what happened last year and it shouldn't be the responsibility of the players to be forced into showing support for either side of the promotion, they're paid to be footballers not social commentators

 

[Seagles68]

I think the club needs to leave the organising of such promotions to the league, all this results in is destroying morale and ruining our season, we just can't afford a repeat of what happened last year and it shouldn't be the responsibility of the players to be forced into showing support for either side of the promotion, they're paid to be footballers not social commentators

And I can't afford to lose any more hair.

 

[Woodsie]

I think it's a fallacy that all Polynesian "players of faith" would have taken the same action as our players did. Plenty of Polynesian players at other clubs - who also identified as deeply religious - said they would have had no issue wearing the jersey that was put forward. Turns out you can be Polynesian, religious, and tolerant and accepting of others. Who knew?

But then, I've admitted before that I am shallow: I would prefer our players to want to win games of footy instead of wanting to win a culture war.

That said, I still think it would be borderline crazy for the club to push ahead and try this again without the full backing of the NRL. The NRL needs to make it clear that inclusivity and tolerance are values of the NRL, not just the values of one club. Go all in, have an inclusivity round - rainbows for everyone! And then, if players do band together and refuse to participate, the NRL can deal with it.

The NRL can do whatever it likes ... as long as it doesn't discriminate against a person due to their religion or religious beliefs ... the head of Bryson's Law firm has come out and simply said you cannot force an employee to wear a Rainbow pride jersey against their wishes.

Again, and I'm guessing ... I don't believe there will be a problem if the club or NRL come up with a real "inclusive" jersey ... one that actually includes women, handicapped, indigenous, suicide awareness and all people ...

 

[sheridanstand78]

It's your right to think it could be contradictory as your opinion. Just as it's his to love and care for someone yet not want to promote or endorse it.

Doesn't matter if it's a choice or not, his belief are his beliefs. He has not at any time said anything hateful or personal, he has said he accepts people live the lives they live. He just wouldn't wear the jersey to promote or be seen endorsing it.

Accepting and promoting are two very different bows

He chooses to be devout and I respect that, just wish he didn't say that who I am is a choice!! That is what is really hurtful!

 

[sheridanstand78]

The NRL can do whatever it likes ... as long as it doesn't discriminate against a person due to their religion or religious beliefs ... the head of Bryson's Law firm has come out and simply said you cannot force an employee to wear a Rainbow pride jersey against their wishes.

Again, and I'm guessing ... I don't believe there will be a problem if the club or NRL come up with a real "inclusive" jersey ... one that actually includes women, handicapped, indigenous, suicide awareness and all people ...

Fair enough, does this include what Josh Aloia said that people like me choose to be gay, that is discrimination!

 

[Under the Sticks]

The NRL can do whatever it likes ... as long as it doesn't discriminate against a person due to their religion or religious beliefs ... the head of Bryson's Law firm has come out and simply said you cannot force an employee to wear a Rainbow pride jersey against their wishes.

Again, and I'm guessing ... I don't believe there will be a problem if the club or NRL come up with a real "inclusive" jersey ... one that actually includes women, handicapped, indigenous, suicide awareness and all people ...

Finally I have got it.....

Lets have one of those NZ Canterbury brand ugly jerseys from the 1990s that is made up of the 25 different jersey styles Manly wore for each round this year of which each represents a minority issue/group that is looking for recognition or inclusion. Simples!

Can you just give me back my Home and Away jerseys please? Two choices should also avoid all opposition colour clashes.

 

[Woodsie]

Fair enough, does this include what Josh Aloia said that people like me choose to be gay, that is discrimination!

No, you said yourself that it was ignorant ... and wrong ... but hardly discrimination ...

And I would think that after his sister points out to him his error, and poor wording .. he would probably agree I think.

But if a poor choice of words by a football prop forward, is the new benchmark for a crime against humanity ... then we are truly stuffed .

 

[sheridanstand78]

No, you said yourself that it was ignorant ... and wrong ... but hardly discrimination ...

And I would think that after his sister points out to him his error, and poor wording .. he would probably agree I think.

But if a poor choice of words by a football prop forward, is the new benchmark for a crime against humanity ... then we are truly stuffed .

He said what he said and didn't retract it! Ignorance is bliss! You have no idea what those words mean to people like me!

 

[Woodsie]

He said what he said and didn't retract it! Ignorance is bliss! You have no idea what those words mean to people like me!

Mate, I know you are hurting ... but many people, better educated and more eloquent than Aloaai make the same uniformed or careless comment ... could have been nerves being interviewed on camera ... the narrative and awareness has changed remarkedly over the past decade, and I think it will continue to improve.

I just don't think there was any malice or agenda involved .. just a "God" fearing footy player put into a situation ... out of his depth.

 

[sheridanstand78]

Mate, I know you are hurting ... but many people, better educated and more eloquent than Aloaai make the same uniformed or careless comment ... could have been nerves being interviewed on camera ... the narrative and awareness has changed remarkedly over the past decade, and I think it will continue to improve.

I just don't think there was any malice or agenda involved .. just a "God" fearing footy player put into a situation ... out of his depth.

He chose those words!

 

[rj90]

Mate, I know you are hurting ... but many people, better educated and more eloquent than Aloaai make the same uniformed or careless comment ... could have been nerves being interviewed on camera ... the narrative and awareness has changed remarkedly over the past decade, and I think it will continue to improve.

I just don't think there was any malice or agenda involved .. just a "God" fearing footy player put into a situation ... out of his depth.

Excusing Josh’s behaviour because ‘others do it’ doesn’t really cut it. He knows what he is doing. He knows his words can and are upsetting others, but he chooses to double down. The reality is, he simply doesn’t give a fuk.

 

[Red Pill]

Excusing Josh’s behaviour because ‘others do it’ doesn’t really cut it. He knows what he is doing. He knows his words can and are upsetting others, but he chooses to double down. The reality is, he simply doesn’t give a fuk.

Josh is entitled to his view and is not breaking any laws…I also think he is not likely in breach of his contract… just because you and others don’t like it doesn’t give anyone any right for force their morals upon others.
Personally if I was a footy player I would not have a problem wearing the jersey. People are entitled to their beliefs as long as it is within the law.
I don’t think we should be making the likes of Josh responsible for head space of young gay kids. Society does not have the right the bestow that responsibility upon young men or women playing professional sport. It’s completely naive.

As a society we need to learn to become more resilient and tolerant of people who have different morals. In 20 years also China will likely be the most powerful country in the world. The world will become a very different place….

 

[rj90]

I don’t think we should be making the likes of Josh responsible for head space of young gay kids. Society does not have the right the bestow that responsibility upon young men or women playing professional sport. It’s completely naive.

Profession athletes = role models. Same goes for anyone in the public eye. Don’t like it, become a nobody like the rest of us and spew your archaic views behind closed doors (or supporters forums).

 

[Red Pill]

Profession athletes = role models. Same goes for anyone in the public eye. Don’t like it, become a nobody like the rest of us and spew your archaic views behind closed doors (or supporters forums).

Role models for who? Christians , Pacific Islander kids, the LGBTQIA’s community. What is the scope of this? Would love to see this expressed in a contract. You, me or others do not get to define what a role model exactly is

Anthony Mundine isn’t a no body but I would be surprised if you define him as a role model but he is still not a nobody. You do not decide

 

[ManEagle]

I guess this is where we disagree

By not wearing the jersey he has an impact on gay people - but really there is not much point arguing over this as everyone has expressed their opinions over and over with no real new ground broken

I definitely agree, but it is those that have taken offence to Josh's action that keep bringing it up.

One thing I find funny is the same posters that were screaming, demanding the mag 7 front the media to explain their actions, despite others asking what good would come of it, are now screaming they should shut and leave it alone. Damned if you do damned if you don't... hear that Josh, and everyone else

We're damned, we're damned I tells ya!!!

But I agree it's just chasing tails.