Winmar 'sad' at continual AFL abuse

I don't care how he spins it I saw him sledge Hawkins with a homophobic slur

Was right there with you until your last line. My nephew is a 'retard' as you call it. It's not a joke, and it's never funny. Don't use that term. Ever.

Agree 100%, Harry O'Brien came across like an absolute hypocrite last week. This guy carries on like he is a world leader, yet he thinks he can be the judge on what is an acceptable insult & what is not. What about obese people who have disorders, some of whom have suffered from birth? No difference to being gay or another race. He should have been made to apologise & visit some eating disorder centres. You cant pick & choose what offends.

That becomes a discussion about the line bewteen banter and abuse. Without getting too heavy, the shifting of that line is a product of our social evolution. Right now, we as a society, say that red-head jokes are ok, racial slurs are not.

I agree Ryan The AFL has clamped down on racism and so they should, it is a four week penalty if a player racially abuses another player (I support this) Then you had the West Coast player tell a Melbourne player he was going to rape his mum - that was labelled disrespectful to woman and got a one week penalty (racism is worst than sexism apparently) Now the AFL have decided to clamp down on homophobia and there will be penalties for certain homophobic insults (not sure how these will be judged) In my opinion it shouldn't have to fall within a certain bracket or buzzword to cause outrage. We should equally outlaw all kinds of abuse. You can say that racism has 200+ years of history but try telling a kid who has been bullied all his life because of his size, shape or hair colour that their abuse is less important because it doesn’t have historical backing To summarise I support the initiatives that the AFL has but I want to eradicate all forms of abuse. If footballers are really unable to play without abusing each other then limit it to abuse only about someone's football ability

I understand your point and generally agree with you, but there are a few things worth considering. You are basing the level of acceptable abuse on the victim of the abuse, rather than the perpetrator. That is, it’s ok to call Cameron Ling ‘fanta pants’ because he is ok with it. But what if you used the same name for Julia Gillard, or some 18 y.o that has just been drafted and has spent his childhood changing schools due to bullying of this nature. Jimmy Krakour (quite rightly) would get upset with racial abuse but I know several dark skinned people who refer to themselves in terms that I never would. What if Jimmy was ‘ok with it’, would that make it acceptable? Again, I understand the point that it is highly likely that Indigenous Australians experience racism on a daily basis and therefore we need to do all we can to stamp it out of footy. But what about a 6”8 130kg footballer who has jokes made of them at an ‘all you can eat’ venue, who can’t shop in a normal store, who is intimidating others at the pub (or provoking) just by their very size, who can’t walk down the street without others visibly noticing, we have no way of telling how harmful or harmless a ‘fat oaf’ comment is going to be for them. Ultimately I have to agree about levels of moronic activity. Maybe some people are just retards… Ooops!

Fair points, and I guess this aspect is a matter of degrees within our own society and differs between social groups. I'd like to think that when I have yelled out at the footy (only AFL, never junior footy), it's for their play, poor decision making, or being a thug. Arguing over who is worse treated isn't helpful because the morons who do it don't care. They inevitably are cowards who will just move on to whoever they deem the next easy target. In response to your query about where you draw the line, clearly that has shifted over the years and shifts within the situation. I'd say it's 'not ok' to be personal and 'less ok' where the subject has less ability to withstand the abuse. Chris Judd can cop abuse from Pies supporters, knowing that he is fitter, smarter and richer than 99% of them, and now faces a lifetime of priviledge and good fortune. It's a sliding scale from there though. There is hopefully no place for personal abuse, however. There is still a place for barracking (and funny comments) in sport, especially retorts that make the original commentator look a fool. I have noticed how red heads get unfair abuse, and am astonished that people still get away with terms like Ranga, etc. Especially younger people, whose lives are blighted by that sort of bullying. As a Dad, I would struggle to deal with bullying like that in a fair and non violent way.

Worth asking and put rationally (as you have done). The difference is (usually) that players with glasses, curly hair, etc. is less likely to be vilified and treated badly for that aspect throughout their normal life. It is (usually) less hurtful to them also. We're talking levels of moronic activity here, by the perpetrator. The facts are, those perpetrators of racsim for instance, are far more likely to transgress in other aspects of our daily lives. Hence why they need to be stopped. ie. there is evidence that people who park in disabled spaces are 50% more likely to have some sort of criminal conviction. On a purely selfish level, racists are not harmless morons. Most times, they do not stop at racism and will commit other forms of socially unacceptable behaviour or crime (statistics show this is most commonly assault). I don't want these morons walking around committing these other acts against me. For instance, I cycle to work and get quite upset when a car nearly runs me over because the result is far more hurtful to me (than if I am driving and a car swerves into my lane - same action but far different result). As a car driver, I don't suffer the same level of hurt, and am otherwise treated respectfully in normal traffic during the day (no one tries to drive close to me, endangers my life, abuses me for just being on the road, blames me for the actions of other cyclists, etc.). It's far different when I am on my bike, and my reactions may seem volatile but when you have been hit 3 times by drivers ("Sorry, I didn't see you") and have to go through rehab, are out of pocket thousands of dollars, etc. you'd understand. After my ride though, I don't get treated differently in the pub, on the street, in the office, etc. whereas an indigenous person might. I have (only) a vague inkling of what it might be like for these indigenous players, and don't think it's the same for them as for myself to be abused. I just don't understand how or why a fan should be able to abuse anyone, just because they paid $ and think they should be able to.

SFF you have raised some great points that I happen to agree with. My point is that why is abuse tolerated at all in sport? We have now agreed that you cannot abuse someone on the grounds of race, religion, sexuality, disability etc. but is ageism accepted? Is abuse regarding someone’s height or weight ok? I understand that racism comes in all forms, and your examples really highlight how deep-seated racism can be. But what if you showed surprise at an obese person showing up for an interview, is that acceptable? No it’s not, but it’d be ok to call an opposition player a ‘fat bastard’. Likewise you couldn’t tell someone they are too old to perform a job in a normal workplace but fans regularly deride players for being ‘past it’. Where exactly do you draw the line? All of these insults are designed to do just that. The AFL has been *ok* at dealing with racism over the past few years, what about the rest of it?

Sorry Ryan, but you are missing the point. Publicising racism raises awareness that it is just plain wrong. If you have an idiot at the MCG who is yelling disgraceful racist things, then you get a security guard or call the number provided at the ground and get them ejected. They lose their membership and are hopefully publicly shamed. Hopefully that influences anyone else that this sort of behaviour is not on. There are many idiots out there and you won't change everyone but hey if you change one person then that is a start. On the field, sledging within limits takes place but if players overstep the mark then they are dealt with. As for athletes, yes they do get paid good money but honestly, it is a very sad day for everyone if they do get used to it and shrug it off. The same goes for everyday life, if you see someone carrying on you do your best to let them know that they are idiots or report them.

Monky is at Hawthorn now. Tony Shaw was a bad racist sledger too, he was on record as having resorted to calling an aboriginal player "green b*stard" because he knew he was being racist if he called him "black". You'd like to hope they've learned their lesson and are better people now. If you read the MCC Twitter after the games you'll see examples from every match of racism, Tigers fans reportedly calling Aaron Davey a "petrol sniffer" last weekend for instance. Ryan and Franko, I respect the way you have raised it but it seems you need to understand the situation the indigenous player is comes from, and constantly faces. At the end of that Winmar game, the Collingwood President cheerfully said he was happy to have aboriginal players at Collingwood "so long as they behaved like white people". How would that make you feel? Racism can be constant, it can be in the way someone moves away when you get on a tram. It can be the constant fear that young punks will pick you out first on a tram late at night (which is probably 10 times more likely than for a white male). It can be the look of surprise in a job interview that you have the same qualification as a white person. The fact is, John Terry is not called a c*nt all day every day, yet many black players and people are treated differently all day every day. John Terry, by calling someone a "black" c knows that it will hurt the player, he understands at least the racism that player must face. Moron. I am ashamed as a Carlton supporter for the way my club treated its indigenous players in the past, and the result being that we hardly had an indigenous player playing for us throughout the '80's and '90's (especially the John Elliot era). I am proud now that we have Jeff Garlett and Eddy Betts happily playing good footy for my club. I am ashamed as a footy fan at the way Jimmy Krakouer (and Robbie Muir) were racially abused constantly by fans and even team mates ("just a joke mate.."), constantly week in week out, for years, then when they lashed out they somehow had a 'short fuse'? The opportunities for white players off the field and after the stopped playing were simply not offered to them. The amazing thing is the fact that the Winmar photo was nearly missed, the photographer had to push for his photo to be used. No one had noticed the fact that the Pies fans had abused him all day, and no one from the club cared.

I don't have the answer for that one either, but I believe John Terry got in a lot of trouble for calling Ferdinand a black c**t. Would he have got the same punishment for calling him a c**t? Racism is deplorable and it is clearly never ok to abuse someone on the grounds of race, but does that mean it is ok to abuse people to some point? If so, what is that point?

"Perspective" is the right word here Ryan...200+ years of it.

This is not going to be popular to say, but why is it viewed any differently when someone yells an insult at a highly paid professional athlete about their ethnic background than it is when someone yells an insult over any other factor such as their height, or weigth, or wearing glasses, or the family honour of their mother or their sister, or whatever else annoying or obnoxious thing the heckler can thing of? Nobody cares about any of those things and players are expected to put up with it. The unfortunate reality is that people look for whatever they think will be the most annoying or obnoxious thing to yell, why would it be expected that something so readily obvious as race would be "off the table" to drunken loudmouths? Not saying its ok, but to call it "abuse" or "torment" and make such a big deal out of it seems to me as much politicizing pettiness as it is fighting any real "abuse." Athletes get paid good money and get called all sorts of names from drunken idiots, I don't for a minute believe they aren't used to it. I think the publicity these things generate is more about bringing politics into sport to prove that society is still "unjust" and discriminatory to certain groups than it is about a real problem. Petty name calling is bad, but where's the perspective?

Amazing that it was Collingwood supporters, I would have thought Damian Monkhorst would have shushed them ;)

Amen

It is sad to see it still happening, albeit by a tiny minority. It's also sad and embarrassing to see those videos of buses and trains around the country showing bigoted d*ckheads carrying on with their pea-headed nonsense. The encouraging thing is that the majority of people on trains, or in stadiums, are taking a stand against it. *That's* the progress we're making.