The Roar
The Roar

You'llNeverHawkAlone

Roar Rookie

Joined May 2019

17.3k

Views

13

Published

68

Comments

Published

Comments

You’re as selective as he is. Seems to be a Christian requirement? Why so happy to defend his religious freedom to spout religious hate, but ignore the absolute blatant, anti-Christian greed he is showing? The Bible focusses MUCH more on greed and gluttony than it does on homosexuality, so only focussing on those things shows how selective you are. All Christians should be disgusted by the notion of a man suing for 14 million dollars, 10 of which was never his to begin with. The religion of love? Well, how about showing some love to your gay brethren, instead of hate all the time. Or is money more important than love in Christianity? That wasn’t my understanding.

Folau’s hypocrisy has become embarrassing

Nah I’m not going to accept that nonsense haha. Would you have preferred if I had posted the entire Bible for complete context? He cherry picks things for his own purpose. Is greed not a serious part of Christianity? Is there any way of spinning asking for $14m as not greedy with a little bit of Christian context? I’d love to hear it

Folau’s hypocrisy has become embarrassing

❤️

Folau’s hypocrisy has become embarrassing

What else would you expect me to write but a biased article? This is an opinion based website. I’m a bit disappointed that most comments ignore the hypocrisy claim I made. I mean the only defence people have had for him is he’s expressing his beliefs. Yet his greed is TOTALLY at odds with his exact same beliefs. It’s awfully convenient the way his beliefs mean so much to him until millions of dollars are involved. And if religious people with a voice are being so hypocritical, I think it’s important they get called out for it. That way people can think critically about statements like “we can never be good enough in our own power to be restored to God that’s why Jesus died” and not just accept them as gospel.

Also can you post his contract here for us all to read?

Folau’s hypocrisy has become embarrassing

Pot calling the kettle black there mate. Can you read?

Folau’s hypocrisy has become embarrassing

Calling Israel Folau a hypocrite isn’t virtue signalling. It’s calling Israel Folau a hypocrite

Folau’s hypocrisy has become embarrassing

I know what he said. I’ve listened to what he said. You can’t half blame or link those things to the fires. They’re either responsible or they’re not.

And he did appoint himself. His Instagram post wasn’t to a church congregation who wanted to hear it, but to his diverse group of his followers, with direct instruction on how to live.

As for the money thing. Well, if he were as true to his religion as he pretends to be, it wouldn’t matter why he thinks that money should be his, it would be by definition, greedy to demand it. Greed is a huge no no for people like him. I can’t see how that aspect of everything isn’t extremely clear.

Folau’s hypocrisy has become embarrassing

This comment deserves it’s own article

Geelong Cats vs West Coast Eagles: AFL semi-final forecast

I am a little bit disappointed you misinterpreted what I said. If you can quote directly the part where I tarred every critic with the same part I’d be fascinated to see it. But until then, I’ll state that I was quite clearly referring to some particular critics who don’t know what they’re talking about.

Yes, art is subjective. But I think it takes the smallest sliver of imagination to realise the statue quite obviously wasn’t made to say Tayla has achieved more on the football field than many legends who don’t have statues. My point is that people make the issue into something it isn’t

The Tayla Harris statue transcends sport

Thankyou kindly for your thoughts. Couldn’t agree with you more

The Tayla Harris statue transcends sport

I’m all for alternative strips. It’s just that when they wear dark shorts and Geelong white there isn’t an issue. I don’t understand why there isn’t clarity from the AFL. Either they just mandate Geelong wear white in the fixture, or Collingwood need alternative colours. But I think it’s a myth this is a Collingwood exclusive issue. Essendon’s clash strip is still dark. Hawthorn’s away jumper has almost the same amount of brown and gold as their home. This isn’t an attack at Collingwood at all. Simply, if Geelong are able to wear blue shorts against them, then they do need different colours. Other than that, their white inverse clash strip is sufficient for every away game

Friday's jumper clash was a long time coming

I certainty wasn’t prattling about tradition, if that was directed at my article. I couldn’t care less about it. The fact is when Geelong wear white shorts in this fixture there isn’t an issue. That they didn’t is where the issue came from. I’m quite happy for Collingwood or anyone to change their colours completely.

Friday's jumper clash was a long time coming

What you’re suggesting is that NO MATTER WHAT, two teams who started lower on the ladder, will be at an advantage total who finished higher. Yes there are finals rankings. Richmond and Collingwood are now the top two. The 1-8 doesn’t stay the same, but it does adjust. And ultimately, what you’re saying is that teams who lost to 3rd and 4th deserve to be at a disadvantage to teams who beat 7th and 8th. There are two levels or finals at the start. 1-4 only relate to 5-8 come week two. You can’t suddenly be below them becuase you lost to a better team than they beat. Ludicrous suggestion

To the losers go the spoils

There’s a bit of tally poppy syndrome about “while Gary Rohan is back to doing nothing, as has been the case for most of his career”. Pretty pointless and inaccurate criticism I would’ve thought.

Straight-sets exits await Geelong and Brisbane

I’ll add to this and point out, which no one seems to be aware of, Ablett has been booed since his return to Geelong. Melbourne booed him last year in round one and almost every team last year did the same.

It’s strange to me. I remember he started getting mocked a lot on social media in 2017 when it became clear he wanted to return home. He cited family reasons. And then everyone mocked him for saying it. Like it was an excuse. Then his sister died…

People didn’t stop mocking his. They doubled down. Different issue, same outcome. Booing can be fun. But it can also be pretty awful

No excuse to boo Goodes

Not sure anyone is implying that. But things can be wrong without being the worst thing to ever happen. Maybe we should just ban jail. No one will ever commit a crime as bad as Hitler, and he’s dead, so why even bother? And before you call that a stupid analogy, I’m using your approach.

No excuse to boo Goodes

Its just so east these days isn’t it haha. You don’t agree with someone so you mock their cause, or the person themselves. I put in a thought out, logic piece of writing that uses evidence to support my view. You came back with “he is a flog”, and an insinuation you read the headline only. I called for thought and justification for your views. I’m fine with people not agreeing with me, but blind prejudice isn’t a positive trait. Enjoy

No excuse to boo Goodes

Evidence would suggest otherwise. I think it remains important. If you don’t, go read something else

No excuse to boo Goodes

Where did I say that? It was the inability of the masses the interpret reality that created this entire mess. Maybe engage with the critical thought I put into the article and come up with a more clever question. A question that makes some sense in the context of the article

No excuse to boo Goodes

Well if you hold both those opinions concurrently, then given he hasn’t killed or hurt anyone, perhaps you should take a look at yourself, before judging him

The Kyrgios case of Australia’s tennis public

Great. And you’re free to scroll past my title and ignore it, but you didn’t. And people are free to not watch him on channel 7, but they’ll keep doing it. They’ll keep hating him, but they’ll keep following him. So actually I think most more people agree than they would admit. They can’t help talking about him

The Kyrgios case of Australia’s tennis public

I never suggested that Geelong never wanted to play home games in Melbourne. I’m suggesting they no longer do, and the fact they once did should not condemn them to do it forever.

My point that “the only example of a team handing home ground advantage to their opponent other than Geelong” is not incorrect. Certain teams host games away from home, but ONLY Geelong in Melbourne, or the yearly Collingwood v StK, WB or NM game is a home team playing an away team, at that team’s ground. With the exception of GC v FRE in Perth, or other such ridiculous situations, of course. So you didn’t understand me. Richmond v Sydney at Docklands, for example, takes away some of the Tiger’s advantage, but it is not Sydney’s home ground.

Yes I did remember it was a Richmond home game.

Under the current circumstances, Richmond, Collingwood and Hawthorn never do. That seems relatively easy to understand. Admittedly I didn’t spell that out, but I don’t think you’ve found the holes you think you have.

“Regardless, tickets are sold to members of both clubs first, so home supporters have never had a right over away supporters for finals.” That’s fine. But the 2017 final was played on a Friday, at the MCG. So it clearly suited Richmond fans. As for the access, well, Geelong have some fans in Melbourne, but they have a lot of fans in Geelong. I can jump online and buy a ticket for a Bob Dylan concert in Montreal, but I don’t have the same access to it that Montreal locals do.

Possibly a fair point on the Bulldogs Adelaide final. Yet that game, you know, the one time it didn’t involve Geelong, was actually debated at large. Many people have said they earned the right to play at home.

I’m well aware there were tickets on sale that day for that prelim. My understanding is 1000 tickets were held back and put up for sale on the day. I guess by that time people didn’t think they could still get them. This was possibly so it wouldn’t sellout so they could justify claiming they’d made the right decision. I guess that worked…

The GMHBA final integrity contradiction

No. It’s not their main ground, nor is it a complete AFL venue. GMHBA is

The GMHBA final integrity contradiction

Yes but the more unique anyone ground is, the more different away grounds are. So it should be equally hard going away. But no one says that.

But that’s so exceptionally arrogant and selective. “Proper ground” haha. The MCG is extremely wide, the SCG is extremely short, Subiaco was also extremely narrow, Docklands has a roof. Surely all these things are just as relevant in terms of specific home advantages, but no, like all the other sheep you just think the Geelong narrowness matters. It’s so incredibly selective

The GMHBA final integrity contradiction

Right. Do you not see how Geelong gets shafted with this way of thinking though? If some have to go there, but others don’t, it’s not fair. But you don’t think it’s unfair on Geelong not being able to play at home. Anyway if you want to get technical, maybe Geelong should have to play all their finals at the opponent’s ground. I mean, MCG teams get to play away Geelong finals at home, so shouldn’t interstate teams as well? After all, the SCG is no less Sydney’s home than the MCG is Richmond’s. And no amount of Caro spin is going to make the MCG Geelong’s home ground

The GMHBA final integrity contradiction