Manly Sea Eagles players to boycott NRL match over pride jersey

[psyche101]

3 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Jason Saab is not an Islander there goes your identity politics.

Neither is Josh Schuster.

[Golden Duck]

39 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

 

Standard jersey

 

Controversial jersey

 

Indigenous jersey

 

 

It's actually old news here. Duck and I briefly mentioned it in another thread about a week ago. 

The team lost significantly as a result. Dropped out of the top eight. Currently tenth on the ladder I believe.

This protest cost the entire team. 

I was hoping the players who didn't let the team down would win convincingly and they could sack the seven. Not the case unfortunately.

It's not a personal statement. It's a club statement. The official statement was that the jersey is to represent diversity in all its forms.

And now the club looks bad. 

It's all on those seven players. I feel they definitely did the wrong thing. 

The seven appear remorseful as they have backflipped and stated that next year they will wear the jersey. Big drama over nothing. All they did was cause a significant loss and make the club look stupid. Not very loyal to the club are they. And believe me, they are well paid to represent the club. It's not a hobby or something.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-premiership/nrl-2022-manly-pride-jersey-controversy-seven-players-sitting-out-rainbow-manly-kit-owner-scott-penn-ian-roberts-pride-round-next-year-2023-religious-grounds-news/news-story/fb32aefbeffa8c3dcd0b2c7f97afb1a5

 

Manly Sea Eagles owner Scott Penn has revealed the club’s rainbow-trimmed pride jersey will be back next year — and the seven players who stood down are open to donning the kit.

Josh Aloiai, Jason Saab, Christian Tuipulotu, Josh Schuster, Haumole Olakau’atu, Tolutau Koula and Toafofoa Sipley have all withdrawn from the Roosters clash on religious grounds.

Following meetings between the group and the club’s owner, the players have revealed they would be willing to take part in representing members of the LGBTQIA community, according to 9News.

 

I reckon it died down before the start of this thread (as if you couldn't tell.)

I don't think any of the seven have been interviewed.  The club supports the seven players.  All Ian Roberts has expressed os a sense of disappointment and looking to move foraward.

In fact some of the press trying to take the high ground have made rhemselves look silly by trying present baseless theological arguments.

Manly sold all their pride jumpers and jumpers.

Maria Folau accused the NRL of hypocrisy - because the seven were supported and respected.

Israel Folau probably would have worn the jumper given his history of appearing on the cover of LGBT+ Magazines. 

Lucky, for the antipodes they've found something to whinge about again. 

Edited August 4, 2022 by Golden Duck

[itsnotoutthere]

To quote somebody else:- "It seems the word ‘tolerance’ has almost lost all meaning… Forcing people to believe what they actually don’t for whatever reason is bullying.
Personally, I don’t give a flying fig about skin colour, sexuality, religion etc. If you’re a lovely person, great! but try and force me to celebrate your beliefs? ...you can do one.".

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

I reckon it died down before the start of this thread (as if you couldn't tell.)

I more than enjoyed that

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

I don't think any of the seven have been interviewed.  The club supports the seven players.  All Ian Roberts has expressed os a sense of disappointment and looking to move foraward.

What about Scott Penns announcement at the link? 

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

In fact some of the press trying to take the high ground have made rhemselves look silly by trying present baseless theological arguments.

Well.....

Taking a religious moral high ground when you're entertaining gambling and drinking does seem somewhat at odds with the reasons offered for refusing the jersey......

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

Manly sold all their pride jumpers and jumpers.

I thought they usually did that after the round with special jerseys? 

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

Maria Folau accused the NRL of hypocrisy - because the seven were supported and respected.

I saw, because getting online and abusing many groups of people is exactly the same. Not. A chance to make noise. Not sure how social media saw it, but I thought it was simply attention grabbing.

Falaou was playing almost in my backyard a few months ago. I'm hearing distance from the club. Didn't bother to take the short walk though. 

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

Israel Folau probably would have worn the jumper given his history of appearing on the cover of LGBT+ Magazines. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

Lucky, for the antipodes they've found something to whinge about again. 

Short lived but a rock thrown is a rock thrown I suppose. I expect they are happy with that.

I honestly wonder how many of the posters commenting have seen even a single game. For all the outrage I suspect it's news to most of them that the Sea Eagles exist. NRL even.

[psyche101]

10 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

To quote somebody else:- "It seems the word ‘tolerance’ has almost lost all meaning… Forcing people to believe what they actually don’t for whatever reason is bullying.
Personally, I don’t give a flying fig about skin colour, sexuality, religion etc. If you’re a lovely person, great! but try and force me to celebrate your beliefs? ...you can do one.".

Don't you have that backwards? Assuming that you are berating the club not the player's?

The players beliefs are the issue. They expected the entire community and club to share their belief that the gay community has no place in society. All the club did was say we celebrate diversity. That's not a belief. Diversity exists. It's what both our countries are comprised of and built on. 

Do you agree with the religious belief that the gay community should not be recognised in its own right? That the club has no right to welcome them to the stadium? That's what caused the issue isn't it? Where does belief become hate? Why is it OK that the game actively encourages gambling? Isn't that bad too? What about drinking to excess? There's a lot of that going on right in front of them. Why do you suppose those transgressions are mitigated? 

Do you know who Ian Roberts is? 

[preacherman76]

56 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Don't you have that backwards? Assuming that you are berating the club not the player's?

The players beliefs are the issue. They expected the entire community and club to share their belief that the gay community has no place in society. All the club did was say we celebrate diversity. That's not a belief. Diversity exists. It's what both our countries are comprised of and built on. 
 

That’s some strange logic. If they are not for the gay community then they are against it? Wear this shirt or you believe certain people shouldn’t exist? Just because someone refuses to support a group doesn’t mean they are against them. They just personally don’t support them. 

56 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Do you agree with the religious belief that the gay community should not be recognised in its own right? That the club has no right to welcome them to the stadium? That's what caused the issue isn't it? Where does belief become hate? Why is it OK that the game actively encourages gambling? Isn't that bad too? What about drinking to excess? There's a lot of that going on right in front of them. Why do you suppose those transgressions are mitigated? 

Do you know who Ian Roberts is? 

I doubt you’d have such a big problem with these religious beliefs if this was  all Muslim team who refused to wear the shirt. But to answer the question, it becomes hate when hate is expressed. Not showing support has no where near crossed that line. 

[preacherman76]

3 hours ago, psyche101 said:

 

Standard jersey

 

Controversial jersey

 

Indigenous jersey

 

 

It's actually old news here. Duck and I briefly mentioned it in another thread about a week ago. 

The team lost significantly as a result. Dropped out of the top eight. Currently tenth on the ladder I believe.

This protest cost the entire team. 

I was hoping the players who didn't let the team down would win convincingly and they could sack the seven. Not the case unfortunately.

It's not a personal statement. It's a club statement. The official statement was that the jersey is to represent diversity in all its forms.

And now the club looks bad. 

It's all on those seven players. I feel they definitely did the wrong thing. 

The seven appear remorseful as they have backflipped and stated that next year they will wear the jersey. Big drama over nothing. All they did was cause a significant loss and make the club look stupid. Not very loyal to the club are they. And believe me, they are well paid to represent the club. It's not a hobby or something.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-premiership/nrl-2022-manly-pride-jersey-controversy-seven-players-sitting-out-rainbow-manly-kit-owner-scott-penn-ian-roberts-pride-round-next-year-2023-religious-grounds-news/news-story/fb32aefbeffa8c3dcd0b2c7f97afb1a5

 

Manly Sea Eagles owner Scott Penn has revealed the club’s rainbow-trimmed pride jersey will be back next year — and the seven players who stood down are open to donning the kit.

Josh Aloiai, Jason Saab, Christian Tuipulotu, Josh Schuster, Haumole Olakau’atu, Tolutau Koula and Toafofoa Sipley have all withdrawn from the Roosters clash on religious grounds.

Following meetings between the group and the club’s owner, the players have revealed they would be willing to take part in representing members of the LGBTQIA community, according to 9News.

 

The only thing I see from this is 1 to bad they didn’t have the conviction to stand by their beliefs and 2 the word tolerance means nothing anymore. 
 

Now it’s believe what the hive wants you to believe or you won’t be tolerated. 

[itsnotoutthere]

"Now it’s believe what the hive wants you to believe or you won’t be tolerated. "

Yep.

 

[psyche101]

7 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

The only thing I see from this is 1 to bad they didn’t have the conviction to stand by their beliefs

And that doesn't tell you anything?

7 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

 and 2 the word tolerance means nothing anymore. 

So the gay community should not be welcomed at a stadium?

7 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

Now it’s believe what the hive wants you to believe or you won’t be tolerated. 

What beliefs exactly? What are you insinuating the "hive" has made someone believe in?

[preacherman76]

13 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

And that doesn't tell you anything?

Sure it does. 

13 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

So the gay community should not be welcomed at a stadium?

What the hell are you talking about? This is where you guys just get stupid. No one said anything like that. 

13 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

What beliefs exactly? What are you insinuating the "hive" has made someone believe in?

That people must validate the gay lifestyle. 

[odas]

2 hours ago, itsnotoutthere said:

To quote somebody else:- "It seems the word ‘tolerance’ has almost lost all meaning… Forcing people to believe what they actually don’t for whatever reason is bullying.
Personally, I don’t give a flying fig about skin colour, sexuality, religion etc. If you’re a lovely person, great! but try and force me to celebrate your beliefs? ...you can do one.".

Yes. Like kicking out a player who took a knee. Tollerance goes both ways. I myself might not agree personally with pride movement, but I do support the marginalised and oppressed therefore I support the rainbow collered t-shirts.

You cannot talk about intollerance from one group against whom you were intollerante your whole life. By "you" I mean in general.

[psyche101]

15 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

That’s some strange logic.

You've got to be kidding me. 

15 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

If they are not for the gay community then they are against it? Wear this shirt or you believe certain people shouldn’t exist? Just because someone refuses to support a group doesn’t mean they are against them. They just personally don’t support them. 

What do you think the religious beliefs cited actually entail? 

I'll give you the tip. It's not live and let live. 

15 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

I doubt you’d have such a big problem with these religious beliefs if this was  all Muslim team who refused to wear the shirt.

Why do you think that? 

As far as I know, no such thing exists in the NRL. You get that it's sport, not church yeah?

15 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

But to answer the question, it becomes hate when hate is expressed. Not showing support has no where near crossed that line. 

It's not the player's support. It's the club's. Perhaps you don't know of a bloke called Ian Roberts. He was the first openly gay NRL player. Take a would guess at what club he played for. As I said, they are paid handsomely. This is professional sport, not a hobby. And it's not like the club just suddenly decided to support the gay community. Why did they suspend belief knowing that, long enough to sign a lucrative contract? So how is it not their beliefs expecting everyone to change? They are representing fans, investors, sponsor's let alone the club, who have shown that very support diversity historically. 

But although it upsets American posters, this is just another example of how you just don't get community or teamwork. It's every person for themselves. These guys let down the team. And it cost them. They chose to do that.

But gambling, drinking to excess also contravene religious beliefs. You didn't say why that was OK? 

[psyche101]

15 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

Sure it does. 

I honestly don't think so. I honestly think you had your mind made up as soon as you read past the title. 

15 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

What the hell are you talking about? This is where you guys just get stupid. No one said anything like that. 

No that's exactly what those beliefs entail. Exclusion. Why do you think they didn't want to play? Us and them mentality. That's not welcome in sports. 

15 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

That people must validate the gay lifestyle. 

That's not a belief either. Nor was it the reason for that matter.

The club actually stated it was to celebrate diversity. Inclusive of all. Just as Duck mentioned, they also do ANZAC and indigenous jerseys. The club has a history of celebrating unique aspects of the community. It's not validating anything, it's supposed to be a welcoming gesture. Under 18s and women's league is getting more coverage this year as well I noticed. Did you see how little the controversial jersey changed? I bet half of the spectators wouldn't even notice, and the other half would forget after five minutes. 

Games are often opened by a representative of the indigenous community who welcome the players and participants to their traditional ground's. Everybody has a voice. Usually. 

[psyche101]

14 minutes ago, odas said:

Yes. Like kicking out a player who took a knee. Tollerance goes both ways. I myself might not agree personally with pride movement, but I do support the marginalised and oppressed therefore I support the rainbow collered t-shirts.

You cannot talk about intollerance from one group against whom you were intollerante your whole life. By "you" I mean in general.

It was only three very minimal stripes at that. Hardly noticeable. Not the whole shirt. Pic previous page.

Edited August 4, 2022 by psyche101

[preacherman76]

20 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

You've got to be kidding me. 
 

Not even a little. 

20 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

What do you think the religious beliefs cited actually entail? 

I'll give you the tip. It's not live and let live. 

I don’t know. I don’t know what their religious beliefs are. If they are Christians, their beliefs say that we are all sinners. That includes homosexuality. According to Christ that doesn’t give them authority to do anything more than live and let live. Seems to me that’s exactly what they were trying to do. Let live in no way implies support others sinful lifestyles. 

20 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Why do you think that? 
 

Cause we never hear anything from you folks about the horrible crap Muslims do the gay folks. Why would I think you’d say anything about them simply not supporting homosexuality? You don’t say anything when they throw gay people from rooftops. 

20 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

As far as I know, no such thing exists in the NRL. You get that it's sport, not church yeah?

So what? Talk about missing the point. 

20 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

It's not the player's support. It's the club's. Perhaps you don't know of a bloke called Ian Roberts. He was the first openly gay NRL player. Take a would guess at what club he played for. As I said, they are paid handsomely. This is professional sport, not a hobby. And it's not like the club just suddenly decided to support the gay community. Why did they suspend belief knowing that, long enough to sign a lucrative contract? So how is it not their beliefs expecting everyone to change? They are representing fans, investors, sponsor's let alone the club, who have shown that very support diversity historically. 
 

So it was in their contract that would have to validate homosexuality?

20 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

But although it upsets American posters, this is just another example of how you just don't get community or teamwork. It's every person for themselves. These guys let down the team. And it cost them. They chose to do that.

I’m not upset at all. You are the one throwing stones at them, not the other way around. And don’t give me some anti American rant over this. Would you, if in their situation wear a GOP symbol, or an NRA symbol if it was expected of you? 

20 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

But gambling, drinking to excess also contravene religious beliefs. You didn't say why that was OK? 

I don’t see that on their jerseys anywhere. I see no reason why you’d believe they support that. They are not responsible for what other people do. They play a sport, that’s it. Probably some of the very few of us that get to make a living doing what they love. They don’t get paid through gambling, they aren’t drunk on the field. Why hold them responsible? 

[preacherman76]

23 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

I honestly don't think so. I honestly think you had your mind made up as soon as you read past the title. 
 

So what? That doesn’t mean it didn’t tell me something. 

23 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

No that's exactly what those beliefs entail. Exclusion. Why do you think they didn't want to play? Us and them mentality. That's not welcome in sports. 
 

Ok so when is Christian week? When will they all wear crosses on the front of their jerseys? Wouldn’t want to be accused of exclusion right??

23 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

That's not a belief either. Nor was it the reason for that matter.

The club actually stated it was to celebrate diversity. Inclusive of all. Just as Duck mentioned, they also do ANZAC and indigenous jerseys. The club has a history of celebrating unique aspects of the community. It's not validating anything, it's supposed to be a welcoming gesture. Under 18s and women's league is getting more coverage this year as well I noticed. Did you see how little the controversial jersey changed? I bet half of the spectators wouldn't even notice, and the other half would forget after five minutes. 
 

How does the rainbow express diversity? It expresses pride in homosexuality. Why does everyone have to agree that’s a good thing? Why would anyone be expected to express that when they don’t believe it’s a good thing? 

23 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

 

Games are often opened by a representative of the indigenous community who welcome the players and participants to their traditional ground's. Everybody has a voice. Usually. 

How are these players taking away anyones voice? It’s not like they said they wouldn’t play unless the whole team ditched the shirts. They just didn’t want to wear it themselves. 

[preacherman76]

50 minutes ago, odas said:

Yes. Like kicking out a player who took a knee. Tollerance goes both ways. I myself might not agree personally with pride movement, but I do support the marginalised and oppressed therefore I support the rainbow collered t-shirts.

You cannot talk about intollerance from one group against whom you were intollerante your whole life. By "you" I mean in general.

Who got kicked out for taking a knee? The guy was literally the worst starting QB in the league. He had been on his way out for some time. 
 

NTM gay people are not marginalized or oppressed. Accept in Muslim countries. No one seems to care much about that though. 

[Golden Duck]

1 hour ago, preacherman76 said:

That’s some strange logic. If they are not for the gay community then they are against it? Wear this shirt or you believe certain people shouldn’t exist? Just because someone refuses to support a group doesn’t mean they are against them. They just personally don’t support them. 

I doubt you’d have such a big problem with these religious beliefs if this was  all Muslim team who refused to wear the shirt. But to answer the question, it becomes hate when hate is expressed. Not showing support has no where near crossed that line. 

Why would an all Muslim team arrange a "pride" round?  There wouldn't be a jumper to refuse to wear in the first place.

Remember, TajTaj El-Din Hamid Hilaly, it took quite an effort to find his "cat and the uncovered meat" sermon in full; and, confirm that the notorious metaphor wasn't the offensive thing about that sermon.

It demostrated that the media goes off half cocked and elements of society.

Fortunately,  there are people like me that believe the journey is just as important as the destination.

We have the Romeyko judgement, unfortunately not many can see the profound broader application.

[Golden Duck]

1 hour ago, preacherman76 said:

The only thing I see from this is 1 to bad they didn’t have the conviction to stand by their beliefs and 2 the word tolerance means nothing anymore. 
 

Now it’s believe what the hive wants you to believe or you won’t be tolerated. 

Who didn't stand by their convictions?

[preacherman76]

2 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Why would an all Muslim team arrange a "pride" round?  There wouldn't be a jumper to refuse to wear in the first place.

It was a hypothetical, and the point still stands. 

2 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Remember, TajTaj El-Din Hamid Hilaly, it took quite an effort to find his "cat and the uncovered meat" sermon in full; and, confirm that the notorious metaphor wasn't the offensive thing about that sermon.

It demostrated that the media goes off half cocked and elements of society.

Fortunately,  there are people like me that believe the journey is just as important as the destination.

We have the Romeyko judgement, unfortunately not many can see the profound broader application.

I have no idea what any of this means. 

[preacherman76]

2 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Who didn't stand by their convictions?

These players said next year they’d wear the homosexual pride jerseys. 

[Golden Duck]

1 hour ago, itsnotoutthere said:

"Now it’s believe what the hive wants you to believe or you won’t be tolerated. "

Yep.

 

We speak conventional english here.  Boycott means "boycott" and not "I get to imagine what I want."

[preacherman76]

2 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

We speak conventional english here.  Boycott means "boycott" and not "I get to imagine what I want."

Accept I’m sure they wanted to play the game. They just didn’t want to wear the Jersey. Who got boycotted here??

[Golden Duck]

Just now, preacherman76 said:

It was a hypothetical, and the point still stands. 

I have no idea what any of this means. 

Yes the point that an all Muslim team would not produce a "pride" jumper does still stand.  You don't need to tell me this.  It's kind of why I made the point. 

The Taj Hilaly example demonstrates that Muslims are not free from the trial by media.  How do you not know this?  Everyone has heard about this.  The "cat and the uncovered meat" sermon occurred in 2006.  How did you miss it?  Are you 14?

[psyche101]

11 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

Not even a little. 

Well, you can't say I didn't offer you an out.

11 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

I don’t know. I don’t know what their religious beliefs are. If they are Christians, their beliefs say that we are all sinners. That includes homosexuality. According to Christ that doesn’t give them authority to do anything more than live and let live. Seems to me that’s exactly what they were trying to do. Let live in no way implies support others sinful lifestyles. 

So it's blind support without any knowledge of the beliefs involved.

By the same method you should consider head hunting an important belief that should be respected and allowed to be performed in peace?

I can't say all, but as far as I know all do not consider it a live and let live situation. A bit more like your Muslim example earlier. As "strongly traditional Christian communities" (after missionaries brainwashed them of course) they consider it a crime. Punishable by law  Harsh punishments, police dismissal, homophobia and beatings are condoned. 

Great cause you picked there

11 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

Cause we never hear anything from you folks about the horrible crap Muslims do the gay folks. Why would I think you’d say anything about them simply not supporting homosexuality? You don’t say anything when they throw gay people from rooftops. 

Can't say I've seen that, threads about that, or current information on that..

What we do know is the Muslim community outright rejects the gay community. There are no gay friendly mosques. On the ABC (here) I've seen an Iman, seemingly nice chap, respected in his mosque, outright say if you are gay do not come to Islam. You are not be welcomed, you will be not be accepted. If a gay person walks into a Muslim environment, they know it's not going to be pleasent. I'd like to think our public places could never echo that sort of thinking.

Not really like a club with a history of supporting community causes is it. 

11 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

So what? Talk about missing the point. 

Whoosh..

You really think religion should factor at football games? Again, where drinking and gambling is encouraged?

11 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

So it was in their contract that would have to validate homosexuality?

They are paid to represent the club.

That is in their contract.

And they personally are not validating anything. No matter how many times you say that, it doesn't make it true.

11 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

I’m not upset at all. You are the one throwing stones at them, not the other way around. And don’t give me some anti American rant over this. Would you, if in their situation wear a GOP symbol, or an NRA symbol if it was expected of you? 

If they had a history of doing so, I'd have to. I would after all be representing the club. Not me. There's nothing that would stop me saying so in the many interviews available either. They weren't asked to share the support, they were asked to represent a club that supports diversity. 

You seem to be really struggling with that part. And you wonder why I point out the inability to comprehend team work? 

11 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

I don’t see that on their jerseys anywhere.

No?

Look again. That huge noticeable word across the front of the jersey. Take a wild guess what Pointsbet is. 

Go on. Wild stab.

11 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

I see no reason why you’d believe they support that.

Because they are major sponsors and that's how the club's and stadium's generate revenue?

Maybe?

11 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

They are not responsible for what other people do. They play a sport, that’s it. Probably some of the very few of us that get to make a living doing what they love. They don’t get paid through gambling, they aren’t drunk on the field. Why hold them responsible? 

They aren't asked to be gay bi or other on the field either. Yes, they are privileged. So you think they would pull together as a team rather than expect everyone to change for them? I bet there's a line of people waiting in line for such an amazing opportunity. Pity it didn't go to some more open minded team orientated blokes.