• We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
In fact, instead of trying to cling to justifications for what we allowed to happen to Goodes a few years ago, how about we take heed of Joel Thompson’s words, and think about whether we want a similar thing to happen to 22 year old Mitchell?
Despite some messy contract negotiations (big deal) his worst sin apparently is allowing himself to be filmed by NRL draped in the Aboriginal flag.
One of the things that pisses me off about the Goodes saga is the parallel that you can draw to DCE's contract drama. I will never forget Storm fans booing him after he one the best on ground on ANZAC day, Queensland fans booing him whenever he touched the ball or the total BS he got from the Queensland media and the criticism for every rep game during over that time (and probably even today). As Manly fans, this is a perfect example of the sort of herd mentality that people but into for an excuse to stick the boot into people and at levels that simply didn't happen in the past. I don't think that the majority of people who booed Goodes were racist but I do think they were acting like cattle and not really considering the reasoning or impacts of their actions.
 
Why even bother defending the Goodes booing, it's done and dusted?
It was only mentioned by Sea Eagle player Joel Thompson in context of his concern that Latrell Michell is being set up for a similar hate campaign.

Muzz called Woodsie out on his stated 'reason' for booing, alleged bullying of a girl, it didn't happen and Woodsie has wisely left the building. Your 'reason' is just as lame! As for those NRL blokes, yes Reynolds is known by fans as a grub (its actually his nickname) and Soward copped ridicule (especially for being trampled famously by GI) but neither of them ever copped a sustained booing campaign. Also, they're good players but nowhere near the standing in their game that Goodes was in AFL, namely:
This article below debunks some common Goodes booing myths:

It's one of the most shameful chapters in Australian sporting history.
And tonight, the whole of Australia can relive it when Network 10 screens 'The Final Quarter' -- the documentary which chronicles the booing of champion AFL footballer Adam Goodes from 2013 to 2015, his final years in the game.

The AFL has since formally apologised for its failure to step in and take meaningful action on the booing -- an apology which its general manager of inclusion and social policy, Tanya Hosch, admits was four years overdue.

"Clearly the industry response from the clubs and the AFL, in particular, had been woefully inadequate," Hosch told 10 daily.

"This movie became a document with undeniable evidence of what went on."

So what did that evidence reveal? Why did people boo?

The Final Quarter' makes it clear that the majority of booing was racially motivated.

However, most booers always denied that, and still do. These are the three main falsehoods they believed in order to justify why they booed.

1. He 'staged' for free kicks.
Here’s a stat to put that into perspective. In 2015 when the booing peaked, Goodes finished equal 195th among all AFL players on the list of free kicks earned.

Over the course of the season, he earned just 14 free kicks. The leaders were awarded 64.

So if he was staging for free kicks, then it was the first thing in his glittering, dual Brownlow Medal, dual Premiership-winning career that Adam Goodes did really badly!

And at least 194 other players should have been booed much more than him.

2. He picked on a girl

Against Collingwood in 2013, Goodes famously pointed towards a crowd member who called him an ape. This is the moment that started the booing.

There were tens of thousands of people in that MCG crowd that day. Goodes pointed to the area from which the insult had emanated, and the person who slurred him turned out to be a 13 year-old-girl.

People claimed Goodes bullied her.

No.

Watch the doco tonight. It features large chunks of the Goodes press conference the following day. In it, he expresses sympathy for the girl on no fewer than 28 occasions. Yes, 28.

If he was a bully, then he was even worse at that than he was at staging for free kicks.

Some of the things Goodes said at the press conference the morning after included:

"It’s not her fault"

and;

"I don’t put any blame on her"

and;

"The person who needs the most support right now is the little girl"

and;

"It’s not a witch hunt. I don’t want people to go after this young girl"

and;

"I just hope that she gets some support"

and;

"People need to cut this girl some slack"

and;

"She’s a young kid. Kids are innocent and I’ve got no doubt in my mind she had no idea what she was calling me last night. We need to help educate her and educate society that things like this are hurtful."

He said a lot more besides all that too in defence of the girl. Pick on her? He did the opposite.

3. He disrespected Australia in his Australian-of-the-Year acceptance speech.

Many have claimed this. They're wrong. Watch the speech below. Goodes offered only words encouraging conciliation and love of country.

In part he said:

"I’m not here to tell you what to think, or how to act to raise your children. All I’m here to do is tell you about my experiences and hope you choose to be aware of your actions and interactions so that together we can eliminate racism.

and;

"I’m so grateful for this award and this honour, however, the real reward is when everyone is talking to their mates, to their families and their children, having those conversations and educating others about racism."

and;

"The ultimate reward is when all Australians see each other as equals and treat each other as equals. To me, everything is about people and the choices we make. I believe it’s the people and the interactions between us that makes this country so special. Thank you so much and have a great Australia Day."

These were words to bring a nation together, not tear it apart.

It's worth noting that a month after that speech, Goodes had quite a visceral reaction to a documentary about Indigenous Australians called 'Utopia', after which he penned a column, in which he said:

“Imagine watching a film that tells the truth about the terrible injustices committed over 225 years against your people, a film that reveals how Europeans, and the governments that have run our country, have raped, killed and stolen from your people for their own benefit."

People have often claimed he said those words in his Australian-of-the-Year speech. He didn't. End of story.


Well put - I will wait for the acknowledgment re Goodes and staging being incorrect
 
I
Muzz called Woodsie out on his stated 'reason' for booing, alleged bullying of a girl, it didn't happen and Woodsie has wisely left the building.

It appears to be a characteristic of the old lefties to make assumptions and tell other people what they really meant ......

Reinventing history is also a strong point ....

So let me repeat ..... Goodes is a major twat ....
 
I


It appears to be a characteristic of the old lefties to make assumptions and tell other people what they really meant ......

Reinventing history is also a strong point ....

So let me repeat ..... Goodes is a major twat ....
Why? Where is your evidence?
Or explain again how you came to this conclusion if you think I or anyone else missed your point.
I'm not telling you how you should think, I am questioning your reasoning. If you can provide me with reasoning that makes senses and isn't fallacious then I will accept that your position is a valid one to have.
This was your argument for how you came to your conclusion:

"but for continuing to abuse a girl after be realised she was only 13 years old .... it was a dog act and he had ample opportunity to pull back and be the better person ... to forgive and educate ... to show her how wrong and stupid her actions were ...... he did neither .... he failed miserably"

When and how did this happen? If it did then it should be easy to present the evidence.
 
Why? Where is your evidence?
Or explain again how you came to this conclusion if you think I or anyone else missed your point.
I'm not telling you how you should think, I am questioning your reasoning. If you can provide me with reasoning that makes senses and isn't fallacious then I will accept that your position is a valid one to have.

My evidence that old lefties like to make assumptions and tell other people what they really mean ..... I submit the last 3 pages of this thread you honour

And, I do not need your acceptance or validation to hold an opinion .... nor are you the arbitor of what reasoning makes sense and what is or isn't fallacious ....
 
My evidence that old lefties like to make assumptions and tell other people what they really mean ..... I submit the last 3 pages of this thread you honour

And, I do not need your acceptance or validation to hold an opinion .... nor are you the arbitor of what reasoning makes sense and what is or isn't fallacious ....
No mate, you're doing a Kev.
I asked you a question about your claims, not your opinion. I'm not assuming anything I'm asking for clarification.
How did Goodes continue "to abuse a girl after he released she was only 13 years old"? This is what you claimed to base your opinion on and I maintain the fact that this never happened. Please show me how it did.
 
No mate, you're doing a Kev.
I asked you a question about your claims, not your opinion. I'm not assuming anything I'm asking for clarification.
How did Goodes continue "to abuse a girl after he released she was only 13 years old"? This is what you claimed to base your opinion on and I maintain the fact that this never happened. Please show me how it did.

Muzz .... dearie .... please don't be falacious, you do make some very broad assumptions ... you said very clearly that my opinion must have been given to me by Bolt .... and again later my opinion must have been given to me by some mysterious "others ...."

You have been rude and dismissive .... that's fine .... go for it .... but please don't try to take any intellectual or moral high ground ..... you have let your petticoat show on several occassions ...

My evidence .... is as I stated in my first reply ..... I watched the footage and that is the impression I got .. (and obviously the impression many others got) ...
 
Muzz .... dearie .... please don't be falacious, you do make some very broad assumptions ... you said very clearly that my opinion must have been given to me by Bolt .... and again later my opinion must have been given to me by some mysterious "others ...."

You have been rude and dismissive .... that's fine .... go for it .... but please don't try to take any intellectual or moral high ground ..... you have let your petticoat show on several occassions ...

My evidence .... is as I stated in my first reply ..... I watched the footage and that is the impression I got .. (and obviously the impression many others got) ...
No I clearly said that I wanted evidence and not opinion (specifically Bolt's). I am doing my best to not be rude and I'm sorry if that is the opinion that you are getting. I'm not trying to put words into your mouth or tell you that you are wrong. I simply want to understand your position and for you to show the the things that you claimed happened. I maintain that the event you are refering to simply did not happen, not that you had the wrong interpretation - that it did not happen. Please explain to me how you think that it did. This is all I'm asking for.
I will attempt to make it easy for you :
You can watch from the 39 minute mark here:
Or feel free to find a youtube video that you think shows the incident you are talking about.

How did Goodes continue "to abuse a girl after he released she was only 13 years old"?

If that was your impression at the time then fine (I would ask what your opinion/understanding was before watching the 20 seconds of actual footage). But do you maintain that that event actually happened? If so, then please explain.
 
Last edited:
  • 👍
Reactions: lsz
I'll go a step further @Woodsie
Here is an image of the event that you are referring to and, more importantly (part of), why people have ideas about what transpired.
1583800942599.png

If I presented people with this photo, along with the headline: Goodes abuses 13 year old fan, what opinion would a lot of people reach? If you come to the image with an opinion already formed then it may appear obvious that he is indeed abusing someone. There are plenty of reasons as to why this occurs:
But try to remove your bias and go back and watch the footage again. Does Goodes actually abuse anyone or does he just point them out to security (albeit in an emotional state)? Could we ever really know the answer to what really transpired unless we were actually there or there was adequate sound recorded at the ground? And if we can't know, then is it wise to form opinions on what did happen?

I don't blame anyone for forming judgements on others like this and I don't think they are racist because of the opinion that forms as a result of it. We are all imperfect and are all susceptible to biased thinking. But it is flawed thinking and if you are unwilling to consider that idea then you are just as guilty as the religious nutters and left wing loonies that you claim do the exact same thing. Do you think you are above making the same mistakes? I don't, I do it all the time. But I am willing to discuss why I might have a difference of opinion, which is what I'm asking from you. I'm not telling you that you are wrong but that I think your version of events is different from what we can observe. If you still hold this view and think it to be valid then by all means let's discuss - but to hide behind the thought of "that's just my opinion/interpretation/belief" and it's just as valid as yours, is just the same as what the righteous religious nutters do. Is that how you see yourself?
 
@MuzztheEagle .... just as a coincidence I watched the movie 42 last night ... the story of Jackie Robinson and the racial intergation of American sports .....

Now those people really did have a fight against social and institutional racism ....
Have you watched the Jesse Owens one? Fighting racism in his homeland, then he takes on Hitler and the Nazis at the Olympics. It doesn’t get much harder than that.
(can you imagine being in the car with Hitler when he left early....FMD!).
 
Last edited:
Team P W L PD Pts
6 5 1 59 12
6 5 1 20 12
6 4 2 53 10
6 4 2 30 10
7 4 2 25 9
7 4 3 40 8
7 4 3 24 8
7 4 3 -8 8
7 4 3 -18 8
7 3 3 20 7
7 3 4 31 6
7 3 4 17 6
6 2 4 -31 6
7 3 4 -41 6
7 2 5 -29 4
6 1 5 -102 4
6 0 6 -90 2
Back
Top Bottom