Poorly written article, misdirected criticism - but there is an underlying truth and subtext....
We stood on the precipice of greatness. The eyes of the world were turned our way (and i am afraid to say, that leads to marketing $$$ - which we BADLY need). And in our moment of triumph - we ballsed it up.
We could/should be the 'club of choice' for any supporter or player grappling with their sexuality and looking for a safe space.
instead - we fumbled it, and did more harm than good.
Roll on the PRIDE jersey next year - and this time, stand firm. Let players opt out if they so choose again. Give them 6 months warning..... and then let them explain themselves.
The Club? 'Brave'....but also clueless. You're right,
@Harmless27 - It was fumbled - and it did do more harm than good.
There are times to take a leadership stance on contentious issues, and there are times not to. And to be smart enough to know the difference. Particularly - to be smart enough to know that the issue at hand was, and still is, contentious.
Contentious? We all have different ideas of what we want our 'ideal' world to look like. These seem to be multiplying on this forum, and I see no need to add to them - at least not today.
Just to clarify: - I'm calling the issue as (a lack of good) communication and (therefore not reaching) consensus - a club governance issue.
Not 'homophobia', 'double-standards', 'intolerance', or even dress-sense. Or 'teamwork', or 'unity'. Some issues are just easier to implement, and I'm suggesting that the club could have been a little more pragmatic, and thought this through without preconceptions.
Perhaps my time in the commercial world has made me a tad cynical; however I'm seeing a mass proliferation of social justice agendas from all kinds of organisations, and it's getting easier to believe that it's being done to try and gain a 'competitive advantage' in some way. Yes - the 'agenda' is not always as altruistic as is being portrayed, IMHO.
Why didn't the NRL 'lead' on this? Any stand of this nature should have come from the head of that organisation, and then ratified by the clubs. Why did one 'brave' (but ultimately naive) club have to do the 'Charge of the Stupid Brigade' on this issue? Why my club?
Probably because the NRL and all the other clubs knew it was a minefield - the aftermath pretty well confirmed it was a minefield.