Boys will be boys

[cressakel]

Originally posted by Tuesday
Yep, I think it's the culture surrounding men's sport. Swans included.

Narcissistic wankers is the most appropriate term I have heard that best describes them. They get everything they have ever desired handed to them on a plate. They think they're autonomous. They go hardcore after games and are unshackled by the constraints of a 'real job'. They have no concept of how to treat women. I could go on... but I will have to start another thread.

I realise there are exceptions, of course. I would like to meet them, because I am sceptical they exist at all.

Paul Kelly is the exception and a more honest hounourable gentleman you would not meet this side of the black stump. If you have not met the "King", do yourself a favour and do so. Trust me, you won't be dissapointed.

Besides, if AFL footballers want to act like tools outside of the footy field, that is there perogative and course they take in getting pow pow powed by some male (or female) from the general public who doesn't give a sh**e who they are....

FFS, the leader of the free world is the most narcissistic wanker you'll ever come accross, let alone worrying about what AFL footballers do outside the field of battle. All I care about is if the Swans players play to there natural abilities and win games of footy for the Sydney Swans FC, whereas I am more worried about Dubya's narcissistic tendencies on US policy and how it affects the rest of the world in turn.

AFL footballers with narcissistic tendencies only affect themselves in the short and long term - end of story....

[Tuesday]

Well, looks like 'meet Paul Kelly' is now on my list of things to do. Thanks for that.

And I do not disagree with your views on GWB. I would personally like to string him up and have some fun, pinata style. I did my bit on the ground in Washington DC during the 2000 elections, encouraging kids on campus to register to vote, handing out leaflets, going to rallies, making ourselves seen and I wasn't even able to vote myself. But if you have spent a bit of time in the US, you will have discovered most are as stupid as the president, or simply don't care. Most didn't know a word Bush mentioned in one of the debates ("strategery") was not even a word! Ugh!

The outcome of the voting card debacle in Florida (sorry, who's brother is Governor???) has changed the western world irrevocably. But I can say I did all I could to prevent it in the first place, though it was not enough. Now it's down to different tactics.

So yesterday, my rant was on footy players. And it's entirely valid. I understand there are bigger things we should be drawing our attention to off the field, though we should also acknowledge sport is also a means of escape. It's my here and now.

[Whitefox]

Originally posted by Tuesday


I realise there are exceptions, of course. I would like to meet them, because I am sceptical they exist at all.

It's the ones you're getting stuck into who are the exception

[Whitefox]

Originally posted by Tuesday
They have no concept of how to treat women.

Most treat their partners very well. Then again most players partners aren't ex football groupies who've spent an eternity hanging around change rooms trying to meet players so they'd have bragging rights or be able to satisfy some little fantasy.

It's a bit hard to respect a woman wanting to give a guy a blow job in the corner of a nightclub in front of 6 of his mates - wouldn't you say?

[Tuesday]

Originally posted by Whitefox
Most treat their partners very well. Then again most players partners aren't ex football groupies who've spent an eternity hanging around change rooms trying to meet players so they'd have bragging rights or be able to satisfy some little fantasy.

It's a bit hard to respect a woman wanting to give a guy a blow job in the corner of a nightclub in front of 6 of his mates - wouldn't you say?

Cut and pasted, my comment is out of context, though I understand what you're getting at.

I strongly suport the concept of deskankification. Thankfully, I have not seen what you described. It's girls like that who are after the trophy (perhaps even the football-player sized handbag?) who give us a bad name. People are always going to do as they please, and I am not intending to lecture them about it, but I am sick to death of being lumped into the 'groupie' category just because I wear a guernsey on game days and barrack for a team. Nothing about me says 'slurry', but women liking fotball??? Impossible. They must only be after the players.

[Whitefox]

Originally posted by Tuesday
It's girls like that who are after the trophy (perhaps even the football-player sized handbag?) who give us a bad name. People are always going to do as they please, and I am not intending to lecture them about it, but I am sick to death of being lumped into the 'groupie' category just because I wear a guernsey on game days and barrack for a team. Nothing about me says 'slurry', but women liking fotball??? Impossible. They must only be after the players.

You don't like being put into a certain category because you're really nothing like that. Ok - Fair enough. I can honestly understand you being sick of it because every decent living footballer - which is more than 3/4 of them don't like it or deserve the category they're lumped into either.

[Tuesday]

Originally posted by Whitefox
You don't like being put into a certain category because you're really nothing like that. Ok - Fair enough. I can honestly understand you being sick of it because every decent living footballer - which is more than 3/4 of them don't like it or deserve the category they're lumped into either.

Granted. Then, Whitefox (assuming you know because you are/were a player), I shall not lump you into the NW-category as you are clearly not, and shall endeavour to remember that NWs are the minority, not majority. I will give the boys the benefit of the doubt, unless proven otherwise. It will be hard, but I shall try very, very hard

That said, it should be recognised that not every female is out to bag herself a footy-player sized handbag or a trophy root, and should also be given the benefit of the doubt.

Oh, the end of the battle. The world makes sense once again!

[Wil]

How much does it cost to live in an ivory tower in Sydney these days?

Football is a business - they need to compete with movies, nightclubs, theatre, other sports so they need to pay to get the best people participating.

Frankly, due to the scrutiny placed upon sportspeople (just look at this and the other thread) they do not get paid nearly enough.

And, just like everything in the world, there is a cross section of the community participating in it. It reflects the true world. There are some that work hard, some that don't, others that prefer the glamorous side, others that do everything for game day or community events. Yeah its too bad for a team to end up with someone that is in it just for the money - but thats part of sport - personalities. Players are not machines. Its up to the coaching staff to make the right decisions in these instances. Sydney took a risk with Barry Hall which seems to have paid off...

[Tuesday]

Originally posted by Wil
How much does it cost to live in an ivory tower in Sydney these days?

I wouldn't know...

But how much can we pay these players and still keep the game afloat? I know that some are not on much at all, and that sucks to be them. But inflated salaries and loads of free time breeds the type of environment in which (some of) these boys thrive. I don't want to see sport becoming solely a business as it has in the US. I demand more. Sport is a dream, and in some respects, belongs to the fans.

[cressakel]

Originally posted by Tuesday
I wouldn't know...

But how much can we pay these players and still keep the game afloat? Big salaries, loads of free time breeds the narcissistic environment in which (some of) these boys thrive. We don't want to end up with sport becomming a business and purely a business as it has in the States. I demand more. Sport is for the fans.

Ahhh, unless you have been living in a time capsule, Australian Rules has become primilarly a business in Australia effectively since the Swans were shunted to Sydney in 1982 and loyalty was thrown out the door....

I don't know about the free time either, with a case in point being a friend of mine who recently retired from AFL being constantly busy with training, playing, travelling, meetings, commitments to sponsors, media & charity, sleeping eight hours a day and catching up with family and friends or relaxing (like any normal 9-5 worker) for anywhere between 1-4 hours a day. AFL players, by the AFL players association collective bargaining agreement, are allowed one (only one) day off a week, whereas us mere mortals have at least two days a week off in most cases.

My question to you then is thus, when is too much free time enough before an AFL player has narcissistic tendencies ??

This mentality has been bred into supporters by older folk who are still of the belief that AFL footballers train two days a week on Tuesday's and Thursday's from 5-7pm with no other commitments. Unless the big bang comes again and re-invents time to a 48 hour day, then AFL footballers will always be busy creatures unable to work another profession - don't believe all your elders speak.....

[Wil]

Originally posted by Tuesday

But how much can we pay these players and still keep the game afloat? I know that some are not on much at all, and that sucks to be them. But inflated salaries and loads of free time breeds the type of environment in which (some of) these boys thrive. I don't want to see sport becoming solely a business as it has in the US. I demand more. Sport is a dream, and in some respects, belongs to the fans.

Market forces dictate what they get paid. Though the salary cap protects teams somewhat. Look at actors - tens of millions of dollars for a couple of months work (if that) but they are justified in their salary due to the return on investment.

There is always going to be a problem with earning money and being young not matter what the industry - the thing is the sports people are under immense public scrutiny. And anyway these matters should be dealt with inhouse anyway.

Sport needs to be a business because they need to spend money to market themselves. If you truly oppose this, when was the last time you went and saw an amateur SAFL game?

[Tuesday]

Originally posted by Wil
Sport needs to be a business because they need to spend money to market themselves. If you truly oppose this, when was the last time you went and saw an amateur SAFL game?

Last year. Am going to the derby between UNSW-ES and the Mighty Saints on the weekend, though. Does that count?

You are a realist, Wil. I am an ideologue, fundamentally opposed to making sport a business. Though I am aware that by simply being a Swans member, I am contradicting myself. It's hard, damnit!

It has to be about more than just a few hours entertainment, right? Fundamentals, rituals, bonding, barracking... it's all about the origins, history (for me).

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by Tuesday

It has to be about more than just a few hours entertainment, right? Fundamentals, rituals, bonding, barracking... it's all about the origins, history (for me).

For all the pseudo-Focauldian crap in your sig I thought you'd come up wiith something a little more sophisticated than that. Birth of the Clinic could provide a handy theoretical framework in which to examine an AFL club, though Discipline and Punish remains my favourite. I assume you have read them both, or do you get your all your good ideas from Sports Illustrated.

[Tuesday]

Originally posted by ROK Lobster
For all the pseudo-Focauldian crap in your sig I thought you'd come up wiith something a little more sophisticated than that.

True, though it's more Wynnian, with a dash of Pacey and Foucault for good measure. Mostly unrelated.

So how do you see things, ROK? Where do you sit?

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by Tuesday
So how do you see things, ROK? Where do you sit?

I mainly see things through the bottom of a beer bottle, sitting on my arse. As for theorists, I hate them all the same, though have a soft spot for Jean Baudrillard (particularly For a Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign which I really should read in French as I think Charles Levin tends to rob that which he translates of some of its poetic, dare I say whimsical, characteristics). I count Derrida's Of Grammatology amongst the most inluential books of the French "post-structuralists" though found the man rather difficult to take. (You want an example of NWs, spend some time in the acad?mie ). Deleuze and Guattari make a few interesting observations but really I am an old fashioned thinker and would probably most align myself with the thinkers of the Frankfurt school - there is, of course, no poetry after Auschwitz.