There were two intriguing statements in the AFL this past week that harken back to the racism column I wrote a few weeks ago.
One was in the aftermath of the St Kilda-Carlton boilover: the sledges thrown Marc Murphy’s way, and the one he threw at a prostrate Jake Carlisle, which Saints teammate Jarryn Geary took physical offence to on Carlisle’s behalf.
While the niggling the Saints gave Murphy was apparently not racial (or sexual or religious) in nature, Murphy’s statement that he was offended on his wife’s behalf suggests that there are other topics that are inappropriate on the pitch beyond those ‘big three’.
Certainly, the call from Paul Roos, Chris Scott, Damian Barrett, and a host of others to “move into the 21st century” has been clarion clear, and Barrett, in particular, points out that the AFL pitch is their workplace, and in no other workplace in Australia would such sledging be acceptable (no other workplace is this competitive, but that’s an argument for another day).
On Access All Areas, Matthew Lloyd set out a reasonable guideline, one that will change with the times as we have over the years: if you can’t shake a bloke’s hand after the match, or more specifically if he won’t shake yours, then you’ve crossed that line.
I don’t know what was said to Murphy, and I certainly don’t know what he said to Carlisle, but I strongly suspect that both failed the ‘Lloyd test’.
The other statement was an off-hand comment by Ross Lyon on the troubled state of former star Harley Bennell, acquired by Fremantle from the Gold Coast two years ago and yet to play a game for the Dockers – at least, the Fremantle version.
Bennell played for the Peel Dockers last weekend and showed that he’s as troubled as the US President right now. Fremantle ‘docked’ him $5000 for his behaviour on the sideline at three-quarter time, with another $5000 suspended as a carrot for sticking with his rehab program.
But it was this set of comments from his coach that caught my eye, quoted by Travis King on the AFL’s website:
“It wasn’t ideal. It wasn’t exactly pleasing. He certainly caused no harm to anybody and wasn’t putting his best foot forward,” Lyon said. “We’ve sanctioned Harley, but we’ll always challenge that behaviour and support the person, and work really hard to get Harley back to his best.
“It would be a terrible shame, wouldn’t it, to lose a young indigenous footballer in this country of this level of talent.”
While there is nothing about Lyon’s comment that could be considered racist, it is interesting that part of Bennell’s appeal as a player (to Lyon) is that he is an “indigenous” footballer. Wouldn’t it be a terrible shame if Harley threw away his career through his mistakes regardless of his race?
[latest_videos_strip category=”afl” name=”AFL”]
In 2017, we all walk an awkward line, a line between politically correct and being honest about the state of the world. Too many people who say they’re just being honest are actually being crude and cruel, while too many trying to espouse political correctness are actually trying to sanitise our speech into meaningless drivel.
The line between takes both intelligence and courage to walk.
We do have a race problem: in Australia, where you’re reading this; in America, where I’m writing this; and in the rest of the world as well. To say otherwise is to bury our heads in the sand. But to spend our lives focusing on it would be to encourage that division through constant attention.
In my earlier column on racism, I mentioned Doug Williams, the first black quarterback in the NFL Super Bowl. He hated the attention. In fact, his fondest wish was to see the day when nobody mentioned the fact that the quarterbacks were black, white, red, or green.
Christ was clear that the way to get around issues like race was to “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Whether that neighbor was white, black, indigenous, or Martian, treat them as you would treat yourself. We get the Golden Rule from this fundamental commandment of the Lord’s, and it’s still a universal guideline even in non-Christian cultures: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” – not as they have done to you! You don’t seek revenge through the Golden Rule, you demonstrate equality.
Sledging becomes easy to regulate if you live your life by this principle. For example, I’m somewhat overweight, and my congenital health issues prevent me from doing much about it. Is my being fat fair game? I’d say so; I joke about it myself. My wife died three years ago; is her death fair game? I would hope not.
It’s not difficult to figure out the magical imaginary ‘line’ not to cross, if you simply turn the question around. Should you tease Murphy about his wife on some unfounded rumor? Well, how would you react if that was said (repeatedly) to you? Yeah, me neither.
Ever hear Jarryd Roughhead sledged over his cancer? Expect to hear anything against Jesse Hogan when he returns? Any sledging of Lance Franklin after his bout with depression? Some topics are obviously off the board; for the rest, we turn the question around.
AAP Image/Rob Blakers
As for Lyon’s comment? Innocuous. If he’d said about me, “It’d be a shame if we lost an American player of his level of talent”, I’d first question his sanity about describing me in those words, and then I’d say, “Yeah, I see where you’re coming from; it’s good for business from a PR standpoint, to be honest.”
So, whether you’re Christian or not, following the actual Golden Rule, the command to “Love your neighbor as yourself”, to treat every other person in the world the way you would want to be treated, will get you down that thin line between PC and brutally honest with your character, integrity, and friendships intact.
Here’s hoping the AFL and its players can conduct themselves in that manner from here on out.
Gordon P Smith
Roar Guru
I have a doctor named A. Gordon Smith. I tease him that while he may be A Gordon Smith, I'm THE Gordon Smith. Guess I'll have to change that joke! Your comment about trigger warnings...I presume that's as big a problem there in Australia as it is here in the US. Our colleges are becoming bubble wrapped cocoons for the very people who most need to be exposed to conflicting ideas. Those people who claim the title of "offended" feel that word gives them the right to dictate everyone else's behaviour. More and more we pick and choose our news sources so that we can shelter ourselves from opinions we don't agree with. But I do think there is a near-universal line that can be drawn, if only in retrospect, and that's Matthew Lloyd's handshake rule I described in the article. We'd like to think we can use the Golden Rule without fail, but your point that YOU might be offended by something that I'm fine with rears its head. And when the blow up starts on the field, and the "offended" starts to retaliate? If they have a genuine reason to be offended, his teammates go to battle WITH him. If their reason is that they're a "snowflake"? Then the teammates come to his aid and HOLD him back, instead trying to calm him down. You'll know pretty quickly if you've miscalculated or not. If you end up offending a "snowflake"? The rest of the team will still shake your hand. You can't please everybody; that way lies madness.
Mark
Guest
At Etihad in front of 30,000 and half a million watching at home isn't private.
Gecko
Guest
By your logic Dougie, there would be no such thing as guidelines in any field of life. Every time someone proposed a set of guidelines, the police of political correctness would come along and say , 'if it doesn’t have any force, ... then what use is it?'
Gecko
Guest
Sorry Col but there's a difference between a pub and a footy field and there's a difference between legal slander and comments made privately on a footy field. Up until last week you could get away with swearing at somebody and tackling somebody to the ground on a footy field but you couldn't do it in a pub or playing lawn bowls. Sure there need to be standards for the footy field but they need to be looser.
I ate pies
Guest
Because there has never ever been male quotas.Talk about a strawman argument.
Paul D
Roar Guru
Assume you're replying to me, I can't see my original post to you. No. But I also don’t think there is an issue in aboriginal kids wanting aboriginal role models There is a giant divide in this country between aboriginals and non-aboriginals in virtually every demographic ranking you care to assess – wealth, employment, incarceration, life expectancy, drug & alcohol use – simply trying to pretend it should be otherwise and blaming everything on an identity culture is a facile argument The aboriginals were already marginalised and treated like dirt long before offence culture and identity politics became a thing. Us vs them has been in existence since 1788 and to try and pretend it’s a recent invention or that they are somehow milking this is laughable
Gordon Smith
Guest
Hi Gordon - you are not me but when I wrote an article on cricket it was initially attributed to you but all sorted now ? One thing that interests me about community standards is who decides. It seems to me that the "community" are never asked but are told what has been decided by some "higher authority". I am not defending sledging family members but am bemused that experienced adult "role models" as you put it lack basic resilience training. This is a societal problem and we all can choose what to be offended about. It seems to me that both the sledges and the receiver has a choice. I am not blaming the victim but that the "offended" player was unable dismiss this as a tactic shows a lack of basic resilience training. He is after all a "role model" and many have copped it worse and dismissed it by saying to themselves "this says more about them than it does about me" which is a choice he could have taken. As an adult he is responsible for his actions and reactions especially when he is a highly paid experienced senior player. People will say "you have to draw a line". My concern is that the line is moving so rapidly that we might be left with a very fragile society filled with people unable to cope with adversity. Perhaps I should have added a "trigger warning" at the start of this tirade ? Great name by the way.
Joe B
Guest
You still don't get it... Carlisle had to slag off a woman to get his jollies. How weak is that?
I ate pies
Guest
Let's put aside yet another insult from you for a moment. Do you really think that the only role models Aboriginal kids could/should have are Aboriginals? And you don't think that that perpetuates the us vs them mentality?
Macca
Guest
Slane - every aboriginal player who ever reacted to a sledge was told he should have been able to rise above it and was "weak of mind" to let it get to him.
Macca
Guest
SHM- Syd Jackson was told not to be so soft about the abuse he copped too.
Tricky
Guest
Fascinating and eye opening article, there is one thing left out and yet to be see in the comments. It's not a one size fits all, some would see this as abhorrent yet others would see it as trying to get inside your opponents head - it depends on the audience I guess. Marc was not going to take that from Geary yet I'm more than certain that another audience (not all but some and probably in the minority) would laugh it off and come back with a sledge stopping 1 liner The following did actually happen sometime ago in Australia; an employee kindly asked another employee if that person would like to join the 1st person for coffee. Correct me if I'm wrong but the questioner was convicted of sexual harassment in the work place and I know for certain that this law does exist, if someone asks you out for coffee you can charge them with sexual harassment. So in summary of that - it all comes down to the eye of the beholder for want of a better term, going by that logic we cannot possible define a line where it is ok. So do we all just shut up and be safe or do we continue as we have for the last 10000 years and choose to take offence or not? Good luck in inventing a solution for that
SmithHatesMaxwell
Guest
I interpret Carlisle's comment as making fun of Murphy for not "being man enough" to take care of business at home. It's not a misogynistic attack on his wife. It was said on the footy field and aimed in Murphy's ear to make him lose his focus in which he did. Carlisle wasn't on social media telling the world that Carey slept with Murphy's wife hardeehaha. That would have a misogynistic element to it for sure. If Murphy kept his mouth shut then none of this would have leaked and 99% of the population would never have been aware of the rumour. Murphy brought embarrassment to his wife because he was trying to make excuses for his actions. I follow football closely and had never heard of the rumour until Monday. Now everyone knows because of Murphy's grandstanding. I agree Lyon did nothing wrong, but there's many women in the world and he knew the effect it would have on Brownless to saddle up with his ex-wife. I don't judge Lyon, but here he is on furrowing his brow telling us how Carlisle's words are completely unacceptable. Give me a break.
Gordon P Smith
Roar Guru
(I keep checking to see if you're me, and I'm pretty sure you're not! Hopefully I haven't besmirched your name in my writing!) I agree entirely, other me. These gents are now being paid six figures, for the most part, to play a game, and we're discussing whether they're hurting each other's feelings. On the surface, ridiculous. But your use of the phrase "community standards" is important. We see some of these blokes as role models, and even if we don't, our KIDS sure do. How THEY handle these situations is important because our kids watch them. They're not blind or stupid, and they'll emulate what their idols do. To me, that's the primary reason it's worth our time to discuss. 95% of rules are for those 5% of people who need them. Ideally, we could just trust them to be responsible, and for the most part, we do.
Gordon P Smith
Roar Guru
BigAl, thanks for the direct feedback. I didn't know points one and two; your comment about it being "then?" acceptable is probably spot on. And if Mumford got on Buddy's case, Brendan, I'll confess I've forgotten that. As for point 4, I wouldn't have called it a red herring, but I included it to point out the contrast between being racist and bringing up race in a more constructive context. I certainly wasn't putting any "racist spin" on Lyon's comments - to the contrary, I exonerate him completely.
joe b
Guest
Gary Lyon did nothing wrong.. both adults where single. A woman is not a possession owned for life by an ex. Besmirching an innocent woman's reputation is a "dog act", but apparently misogyny is ok with you, because YOU don't think it is as bad as racism.
Paul D
Roar Guru
I'll give you the ex-players, it is ridiculous to see them moralising about this Understand though they are paid to trot out the company line. the AFL can't be seen to be endorsing this sort of behaviour. hence what you describe, where men who did far worse in their time now have to be seen to be repentant even if they secretly think otherwise your real argument is with the offence culture in this country that now means this sort of stuff is newsworthy - which is the ultimate gripe with most of your work I daresay
joe b
Guest
How weak is it to attack a loved one of a player who isn't even on the ground? seriously, how thick and gutless do you have to be? You sledge the man, not someone he knows. It is a coward sledge slagging off someone's partner.
joe b
Guest
anyone can make up a rumour... just put it out there on comment sections in online articles, twitter, facebook... after a while someone will believe it and re-broadcast as fact. So.. NO... now you should take every thing you see online as most likely rubbish.. there is no fire, just smog.
joe b
Guest
that is exactly what they did for racial, religious, and sexual orientation vilification. And it worked straight away... having said this, that type of abuse is not that common anymore according to other articles on this incident.