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

[voicefromthehill]

But you can't use the pride symbol and say it is something else!
If you want to say that the jersey represents inclusivity, then surely you need to use or come up with its own symbol.

Heres a few quick ideas for the symbol. I wont charge for my design consultation either

 

[voicefromthehill]

In letters to the editor for the Australian - David Morrison of Springwood has created the solution to the issue. Everyone is happy now 😉

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

that's a great article with excellent insights - I encourage all who are posting on this thread to read it. It really does identify the issues at play.

Yes I do to. It's not a long article and might have some angles people haven't thought of, it did for me.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

hey never never never never said they wouldn't play ... they said they wouldn't wear a rainbow Pride jersey ..

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.

 

[ALinda]

"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."

https://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/manly-sea-eagles-players-plan-to-end-pride-jersey-boycott/news-story/68058678f5a7ab1a625fb1f556fc31fe

After all that's happened this week, I don't believe this for one second.

 

[eagleron]

To be fair to Penn, he didnt say they had backflipped. He said that they were open to discussing it. It was a politicians response that has been misquoted.

The small thing so many seem to miss here is that
1 - Manly called it the inclusivity jersey (not pride)
2 - Penn said in answer to the question from the worm about would Manly do the pride jersey again 'We are all about inclusivity" he should have corrected Weidler and said it is an inclusivity Jersey
3 - Media started calling it pride jersey
4 - The magnificent 7 (or one of them) told Weidler they had not agreed to wear a "Pride" jersey
5 - Weidler gets himself another incendiary headline

What a proxy grub that weirdler is, sh1t stirring bastard🤬

 

[47MVEagle]

It's a mess all round, from the club's lack of consultation with the players to the subtle reframing of the "Everyone In League" jersey to a "Gay Pride" jersey by the media to the 7 (10) players boycotting the game.

I took Penn's statement the same way @Karshy did - it was a politician's answer along the lines of "the 7 players have indicated they would be open to the idea of a pride jersey next year as long as they're consulted". My immediate thoughts were that there was no confirmation of commitment to actually wearing the jersey next year & that ANYTHING could happen in a year's time, including all 7 players moving on, so took it with a pinch of salt.

The thing that bothers me is that it's the media that made it about gay pride & the 7 players' reaction to it that made it about homophobia & therefore division, the exact opposite of the jersey's intention of "Everyone In League".

We can all try to guess the "agenda" by the marketing team but imagine if their original idea was "okay, its women in league round & we've got the Gotcha4Life cup to fit in somewhere plus we'd like to get the ball rolling on showing support for the LGBTQA+ demographic so why don't we lump it all together in the same round?

There will only be 6 rounds left of the season at that point & we've already had several different "round" jerseys so rather than make another 2 special jerseys out of it, let's combine the 3 causes?"

 

[Woodsie]

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!

No ... we can't .. Please produce one piece of evidence to prove your contention that they refused to play ... as opposed to my contention that they refused to wear a particular Jersey ... I believe it is the NRL and club that refused to let them play if they didn't ..

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.

And there is absolutely nothing intelligent about that dribbling nonsense ... Dishonest or otherwise ..

 

[47MVEagle]

No ... we can't .. Please produce one piece of evidence to prove your contention that they refused to play ... as opposed to my contention that they refused to wear a particular Jersey ... I believe it is the NRL and club that refused to let them play if they didn't ..



And there is absolutely nothing intelligent about that dribbling nonsense ... Dishonest or otherwise ..

Semantics.

 

[Woodsie]

Semantics.

No facts ... you have been all over this issue for days ... read everything posted prodigiously ...

... So you of all people must, (in the voice of Foghorn Leghorn) .. I say Boy! you of all people Must have some proof that these players said .. We refuse to play ... as opposed to ... we are not wearing a Rainbow Jersey ...

 

[Supreme Leader]

There are a lot of different people on this site, most have differing view points, and those views do create some angst and arguments.

But you know what - I love you all because you are about Manly

Guess I very inclusive.

 

[Brisbane Tragic]

An indication of how wrong the 7 are - Tom Burgess comments on them in today’s SMH and I completely agree with him. I’ve never agreed with a burgess before.

His points: letting your team mates down, making marginalised people feel more marginalised, and why take a 2000 year old book literally, and if you do why do you choose to follow some parts and not others.

Oh so so true... as I have said... oh the total hypocrisy!

 

[Brisbane Tragic]

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.

bahahah yes - not a war just a special operation lol lol. So they never said they wouldn't play... Des just left them out of the side in case they were upset? lol

 

[Ron E. Gibbs]

Mate ... they never never never never said they wouldn't play ... they said they wouldn't wear a rainbow Pride jersey ... I am 100% certain had the NRL allowed them to wear their normal strip they would have all played ... in fact I am also almost certain they would have played in skins if allowed to ....

Sorry, Woodsie - can't go with you on this one. They said they wouldn't wear the jersey, the result being that they wouldn't play. I know you've said the club could have "backflipped" (it's a term that's becoming exclusive to rugby league, right?) and reverted to the usual jersey, but - if it wasn't apparent from the outset that the result of their decision would mean they wouldn't be able to play - once they realised, the players could have backflipped as well. No one compromised and everybody (except for the Roosters and their fans) lost.

As I've said before, to me, it's not a "rainbow Pride jersey", it's a Manly jersey. If there's a plug for Pointsbet on it, you wear it. If there's a plug for 4 Pines or Pepsi, you wear it. If there's an acknowledgement of indigenous players, you wear it. If it's signalling support for a social issue that's important to the club and/or the NRL, you wear it. It is not about you and your beliefs. It's about the team. The only way a jersey becomes an individual statement is if you refuse to wear it.

But I do agree that it would be nice if we never had to speak of it again🙂 And I wish Scott Penn knew when to keep his mouth shut as well.

 

[Shoe1]

No ... we can't .. Please produce one piece of evidence to prove your contention that they refused to play ... as opposed to my contention that they refused to wear a particular Jersey ... I believe it is the NRL and club that refused to let them play if they didn't ..



And there is absolutely nothing intelligent about that dribbling nonsense ... Dishonest or otherwise ..

Woodsie they didn’t play. Is that enough evidence?

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

No ... we can't .. Please produce one piece of evidence to prove your contention that they refused to play ... as opposed to my contention that they refused to wear a particular Jersey ... I believe it is the NRL and club that refused to let them play if they didn't ..



And there is absolutely nothing intelligent about that dribbling nonsense ... Dishonest or otherwise ..

It’s OK. Woodsie, we know for some this is particularly painful and confronting. But it’s OK. Des said it’s OK to refuse to play. There won’t be any punishment. And he is sorry for the way this was done.

So you don’t have to pretend it didn’t happen, everything is fine. You are in a safe place here. 🙂

 

[Will on the hill]

bahahah yes - not a war just a special operation lol lol. So they never said they wouldn't play... Des just left them out of the side in case they were upset? lol

I think you'll find this was exactly the case. The players were stood down so as to avoid forcing an ultimatum upon them, which would have made a bad situation worse.

 

[Woodsie]

It’s OK. Woodsie, we know for some this is particularly painful and confronting. But it’s OK. Des said it’s OK to refuse to play. There won’t be any punishment. And he is sorry for the way this was done.

So you don’t have to pretend it didn’t happen, everything is fine. You are in a safe place here. 🙂

Love your style ... First off you go all wise elder ... then propagandist ... then snide accuser ...

Are you suggesting that I am a homophobe ... is that always your fallback position when facts elude you .... brand the opposition ???

I am sorry I haven't given you cause to infer I'm racist today ... that's another good way to win an argument ...

 

[Eagle 1]

Next week the magnificent 7 return along with Keppie, maybe Ben Turbo and Weekes.

I'd suggest if Des doesnt pick all 7 they will bung on some more crap.

I think a few of them might need to earn their (white) stripes again, especially now as our season is all but over. I hope Fulton, Segyaro, Smalley and Weekes are in our 17 for the Eels. I also doubt Schuster can hold a spot in our top squad.

edit Bullemore in the 17 too.

As it stands imo, Keppie and Schusters bench spots are up for grabs.

 

[Brisbane Tragic]

I think you'll find this was exactly the case. The players were stood down so as to avoid forcing an ultimatum upon them, which would have made a bad situation worse.

Well that will do me that the players never refused to play and were happy to play in those jerseys. The accurate picture is that the players refused to play in those jersies... the NRL said that you could not wear another jersey... sooo given the NRL stated that the one jersey must be worn by all and the players refused to PLAY in that jersey... there was no other option than for the players not to play!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Whether that was the club standing them down or them outright refusing to play... The bottom line is THEY refused TO PLAY IN those JERSEYS. Oh now the weasel word semantics to go with the hypocrisy.