No Oppo Supporters Non Bulldog Footy Talk - Bulldogs only - Part 4

[Foxman98]

I think if the AFL and its clubs did their due diligence properly a large proportion of boards, staff, players and supporters would fail the test. Oops not to forget advertisers! Don't forget to gamble responsibly.

I think you'll find most aren't PC for sure and would fail that part of it but most wouldn't be apart of groups that publicly condone hatred and violence to people for being who they are and when they have the chance to publicly distance themselves they decide not too

 

[Foxman98]

Not ALL of them shout ALL the time.

Correct they don't hence I and the rest of the world have no issues with them however the one's in Andrews position that compare abortion to the holocaust ect are the ones that get "cancelled"

 

[Fossie 32]

I think you'll find most aren't PC for sure and would fail that part of it but most wouldn't be apart of groups that publicly condone hatred and violence to people for being who they are and when they have the chance to publicly distance themselves they decide not too

"The board made clear that, despite these not being views that Andrew Thorburn has expressed personally and that were also made prior to him taking up his role as chairman, he couldn't continue to serve in his dual roles at the Essendon Football Club and as chairman of City on the Hill," Mr Barham said.

"I want to stress that neither the board nor Andrew was aware of the comments from the 2013 sermon until we read about them this morning."

 

[Foxman98]

"The board made clear that, despite these not being views that Andrew Thorburn has expressed personally and that were also made prior to him taking up his role as chairman, he couldn't continue to serve in his dual roles at the Essendon Football Club and as chairman of City on the Hill," Mr Barham said.

"I want to stress that neither the board nor Andrew was aware of the comments from the 2013 sermon until we read about them this morning."

Whats your point here? If they aren't his personal views why would he pick the church over the club? Could he not have just changed to a church that had the same views as his? Or are these actually his beliefs and the press release is just lawyer talk for Essendon not wanting a legal battle?

 

[Fossie 32]

They would be questions only he or the club could answer properly I guess. I suppose many people who are part of a religion do not agree with all the stances of those religions or utterances made by people associated with the churches. However, I imagine many would still not want to denounce their religion if given an ultimation between that and their place of employment.

My points were
1 He didn't say these things [yes I recognise his association with the church that said them]
2 They were said 9 years ago and I don't know that they are continuing to say things like that. Probably not or they would have come to light.

It seems an anomaly that it is illegal to ask about a person's religion during a job interview but fine to sack them [edit edit edit] get rid of them because of their religion once their religious status is revealed.
A large proportion of people in this country identify as being part of some religion and I think most of the religions have anti abortion and anti gay stances so many others in the AFL world [and even less righteous organisations!] could be taken to task over their associations with their religions.

I can see both sides of the issue .....

 

[Northernsoul74]

Interesting article around “value” of players.

As AFL clubs hunt for the next big thing, one rising star might be the most valuable player in the league

With the AFL trade period in full swing and clubs already looking towards the draft, Cody Atkinson and Sean Lawson look at which player is the most valuable commodity moving forward.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Golden_6]

Interesting article around “value” of players.

As AFL clubs hunt for the next big thing, one rising star might be the most valuable player in the league

With the AFL trade period in full swing and clubs already looking towards the draft, Cody Atkinson and Sean Lawson look at which player is the most valuable commodity moving forward.

www.abc.net.au

I appreciate the article trying to quantify the measue and it's an interesting read. That being said, it clearly is heavily weighted towards midfielders and those who have had good production early in their careers. Only Max King, Luke Jackson & Sean Darcy make the list as key position players, with none in the top 20.

No one would consider trading pick 1 or 2 for Gulden, Rowbottom or Sam Berry.

 

[Testekill]

I mean if someone is part of a church that says that gay people are immoral and should be against the law then they shouldn't be the president of a club in a competition that has a Pride round. Comparing abortion to the holocaust is also something that should never be acceptable.

 

[Freshwater]

Sheedy has leaked to Robbo at the Herald-Sun that it wasn’t ‘fully endorsed’ and that he didn’t vote for Thorburn to be CEO, he voted for James Hird.

 

[hutchy31]

They would be questions only he or the club could answer properly I guess. I suppose many people who are part of a religion do not agree with all the stances of those religions or utterances made by people associated with the churches. However, I imagine many would still not want to denounce their religion if given an ultimation between that and their place of employment.

My points were
1 He didn't say these things [yes I recognise his association with the church that said them]
2 They were said 9 years ago and I don't know that they are continuing to say things like that. Probably not or they would have come to light.

It seems an anomaly that it is illegal to ask about a person's religion during a job interview but fine to sack them once their religious status is revealed.
A large proportion of people in this country identify as being part of some religion and I think most of the religions have anti abortion and anti gay stances so many others in the AFL world [and even less righteous organisations!] could be taken to task over their associations with their religions.

I can see both sides of the issue .....

My guess is he wasn't asked to denounce his religion, merely that he didn't agree with those comments. If they were not current stances of his church (i.e. they've moved on since the comments 9 years ago) then a simple statement to that effect should have resolved it. "My religion is important to me but I don't agree with those comments, and they're not indicative of my or my church's position on those issues."

I have a fairly devout Catholic extended family, my mum is Catholic (I don't identify as any religion but was brought up similarly) and it's very important to her. However, she has no issues with saying that some of those views that are considered traditional Christian/Catholic are archaic and have no place in the modern world. Doesn't make her a bad Christian imo, although others would probably disagree if they were more hardline on those issues.

I'm far from an expert on any of this, but I feel like this might be where there's a difference between faith and organised religion. The former can often be beneficial to people, but the latter can occasionally be destructive - particularly at the fringes.

Re. the job interview example - someone can be Christian and not espouse those fringe/extreme beliefs (and they are pretty extreme in 2022). Again, my guess is that he's not being stood down because he's Christian, it's that he likely didn't want to distance himself from them and that made his position untenable as leader of an organisation like a modern footy club.

 

[maddog37]

Religion and politics should be in a seperate thread.

 

[dogwatch]

Religion and politics should be in a seperate thread.

Agree. My interest is in the failure, nay repeated failures, of proper process by the EFC. The Andrew Thorburn debacle is just the latest in a long series.

Ex-president Paul Little said as much today.

'A dangerous idea': Former Essendon chief executive doubles down on calls for religious tolerance

Andrew Thorburn resigned his position as Essendon chief executive on Tuesday, after revelations he was the chair of a church that had articles against abortion and homosexuality on its website.

www.abc.net.au

When he says failure to do “research” he is echoing exactly what we’ve been saying here about due diligence.

FWIW I feel that Thorburn might be trying to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds in saying that he doesn’t necessarily agree with everything the City on the Hill church says. Either that or he’s very naive (which I find hard to believe for an ex-CEO of a major bank).

If he’d been sensitive to the nature of his new job and new employer he could have (should have) declared the potential for negative PR from his association with his church where he holds a leadership position. I can’t accept that he was unaware of their stance and statements on homosexuality and abortion.

If he’d declared that to the selection panel up front they might have been able to pre-empt the furore that cost him his job (eg by acknowledging the association and disowning some of their less acceptable teachings). Or at least they could have spared themselves their mutual embarrassment by agreeing not to proceed.

That said, it’s still primarily on Essendon for not doing adequate “research “.

A cautionary tale for all clubs.

 

[X_box_X]

I'm not sure if this is a popular view, but it seems to me there is going to be an increasing gap next season between the best and worst teams. Geelong look to be improving their list once again. Richmond, Brisbane and Melbourne improving their lists.

Collingwood losing Grundy looks to be a big loss on paper, but they finished top four without him. They were actually in the bottom six on the ladder at the time they lost Grundy on ANCAZ Day and since then they went from strength to strength. They have a mixture of old and young, but I'm super impressed by their young players and I feel they can improve on their consistent 1-7 point victories and turn them into consistent 2-8 point victories next season.

Sydney have a well balanced list and apart from losing Kennedy (who didn't play in the tail end of the season), I don't think they're losing anyone. Whatever drop they may get from Franklin is likely to be balanced out by the continued improvement of Logan McDonald. So they'll be up there again.

Carlton missing finals this year brought a smile to all our faces, but let's be honest, they deserved it more than us. They had a horror run with injury. They're likely to improve on this season's performance.

Freo is likely to be a scary proposition if you throw in a fit Fyfe and maybe Luke Jackson

9

Luke Jackson

Age

22

Ht

199cm

Wt

102kg

Pos.

F/R

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.3

2star

K

3.3

1star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

3star

G

0.3

3star

D

8.3

2star

K

3.3

1star

HB

5.0

3star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

2star

G

0.3

3star

D

8.3

3star

K

3.3

2star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

3star

G

0.3

3star

. They're well coached and ready to make a September charge again. They'll miss Mundy, though. I don't think losing Lobb will hurt them in the slightest if they get Jackson. Even then, Jye Amiss was pretty impressive for a kid in the back half of the season.

Then we get to the junk teams.

North will be shit again. Basket case of a club.
Essendon seem to be in turmoil but who knows with them? Collingwood showed you can turn things around quickly.
We're not hearing much about West Coast, but I feel any improvement from them is going to come with a fit Nic Nat.
Sounds like Adelaide are relying on their youngsters continuing to improve. Hawthorn the same.
GWS are the ones who could really drop off. They're losing more stars and trying to potentially ship more off. Looking to the future perhaps?

It's hard to get a read on St Kilda, Port Adelaide and us. On paper all three are good enough to play finals, but I'm not sure how much they can be trusted to perform consistently as a contender.

Gold Coast are the real interesting one for me. I'd like to see them make finals for the first time, and they showed this year their best is good enough for finals, but they're too unreliable to have any confidence in them.

 

[Ant_]

They would be questions only he or the club could answer properly I guess. I suppose many people who are part of a religion do not agree with all the stances of those religions or utterances made by people associated with the churches. However, I imagine many would still not want to denounce their religion if given an ultimation between that and their place of employment.

My points were
1 He didn't say these things [yes I recognise his association with the church that said them]
2 They were said 9 years ago and I don't know that they are continuing to say things like that. Probably not or they would have come to light.

It seems an anomaly that it is illegal to ask about a person's religion during a job interview but fine to sack them once their religious status is revealed.
A large proportion of people in this country identify as being part of some religion and I think most of the religions have anti abortion and anti gay stances so many others in the AFL world [and even less righteous organisations!] could be taken to task over their associations with their religions.

I can see both sides of the issue .....

They didn't sack him, he resigned. He could have resigned as chair of City of a hill. Thornburn picked his church culture and beliefs over Essendon.

 

[Fossie 32]

They didn't sack him, he resigned. He could have resigned as chair of City of a hill. Thornburn picked his church culture and beliefs over Essendon.

OK but I imagine he was given an ultimatum so still they got rid of him because of his religion so ended up the same

 

[Ant_]

OK but I imagine he was given an ultimatum so still they got rid of him because of his religion so ended up the same

That's speculation, however anyone going into a leadership role be it a Football Club, Politics or religion needs to call out their conflicts of interest. Essendon could avoided all this if that was done up front. He didn't cause a problem because of Christianity, it was his rather extreme church that he is the chairman of, contradicts the values of the club.

Though considering he lead the review of the club then pretty much picked himself as CEO, doubled with his history in banking and the Royal Commission into that. I doubt he was too concerned with calling out conflicts of interest.

 

[bresker]

So Geelong can afford Jack Bowed $850,000 per annum salary under their cap? That cap must be getting pretty stretchy by now.

And Gold Coast throw in pick 7 to get him off the books. I reckon this stinks. Why should a top club benefit because another club is shit at list management?

I guess we got a decent deal for Treloar but if the Pies threw in a top ten draft pick we’d find it ridiculous.

 

[dogwatch]

So Geelong can afford Jack Bowed $850,000 per annum salary under their cap? That cap must be getting pretty stretchy by now.

And Gold Coast throw in pick 7 to get him off the books. I reckon this stinks. Why should a top club benefit because another club is s**t at list management?

I guess we got a decent deal for Treloar but if the Pies threw in a top ten draft pick we’d find it ridiculous.

I’m gobsmacked.

Dodo can lay down his cards.

Geelong are already the clear winners of trade week 2023 … and it’s only just begun. Two top 10 players into the club with nothing going back the other way.

All you need is unlimited cash. And a good business relationship with the Suns who can only be described as completely incompetent to have painted themselves into such a corner.

Geelong are avoiding the much anticipated cliff … with a big “up yours” to the rest of the comp.

Utterly gobsmacked.

 

[Mantis Toboggan]

I’m gobsmacked.

Dodo can lay down his cards.

Geelong are already the clear winners of trade week 2023 … and it’s only just begun. Two top 10 players into the club with nothing going back the other way.

All you need is unlimited cash. And a good business relationship with the Suns who can only be described as completely incompetent to have painted themselves into such a corner.

Geelong are avoiding the much anticipated cliff … with a big “up yours” to the rest of the comp.

Utterly gobsmacked.

Has there ever been calls to just make player salaries public? Or at least made available for an independent audit?

This just seems like total bullshit. There is no way Geelong are playing by the same rule book here.

 

[BEaston]

Salaries should be public, 100%

 

[dogwatch]

Transparency is kryptonite to the AFL’s mode of operation.

 

[bobs head soup]

Interesting 3 way trade being touted by a few outlets. Essentially:

North get pick 2 (effectively 3) from Eagles and a player from Port, lose JHF

Eagles lose pick 2 and Rioli, gain pick 8 and a future 1st.

Port gain JHF and Rioli, lose 8, a future 1st and an undisclosed player.

Can see merits but feel it's a little light on from the Eagles perspective.

 

[gangsta deluxe]

Salaries should be public, 100%

They are in other sectors, I dont see why here should be any different.

In the Uni sector you can tell how much people are paid by their titles (Dr, Snr Lecturer, A/Prof, Prof).

 

[gangsta deluxe]

Interesting 3 way trade being touted by a few outlets. Essentially:

North get pick 2 (effectively 3) from Eagles and a player from Port, lose JHF

Eagles lose pick 2 and Rioli, gain pick 8 and a future 1st.

Port gain JHF and Rioli, lose 8, a future 1st and an undisclosed player.

Can see merits but feel it's a little light on from the Eagles perspective.

Why would the Eagles even consider that? The future first from Port almost certainly isnt going to be top 5. 8 is probably the maximum theyd expect again - would you lose Rioli and Pick 2 for Pick 8 and Pick 8 (both of whcih will likely be pushed by F/S and academy picks)?

Theyd be fools to do it.

 

[BEaston]

They are in other sectors, I dont see why here should be any different.

In the Uni sector you can tell how much people are paid by their titles (Dr, Snr Lecturer, A/Prof, Prof).

Exactly, let alone sports people where the salary cap is basically the major equalising rule. There should be a minimal scope for corruption as possible. All US sports salaries are public.