Had a great chat

[mightyrooster]

Fair comment Geo.

I agree it can be wrong what PG said. I wouldn't say it that way personally but will admit I didn't even notice PG used the term originally.

I guess a lot of respondents know PG personally. We know he's a lovely bloke and someone I wouldn't call racist especially knowing his heritage and some of the people he's employed/employs. In fact I'm sure over the years PG has been subjected to many slurs similar in nature, about his heritage.

I also guess age has a bit to do with the race issue. Older blokes are a lot more loose in general with their language I've found. They've grown up saying it as they see it and at times forget we live in a time where you can say black but not carnt.

That's the issue I've always found strange. Even in a newspaper or on this forum they will censor the c word but not the b word, but the b word causes all the angst where the c word is fine without the b word attached. In fact the c word won't raise a headline without the b word attached.

I know playing footy over the years I've heard a lot worse said around the boys. The black issue is something that I can't recall ever being a problem back in the day.

I attended a school with every different race creed and colour imaginable. Multiculturalism was a big issue then. I'm a skip and we were always refered to as dumb skips, lol, it was just the way it went.

I remember playing soccer for sport also revered to as wogball. Now the teams were always wogs vs skips. Funny thing was there were a number of skips in the wog team and vice versa. It was more about who you hung out with. And the wog mob were the ones who named the teams, they called themselves the wog mob.

IMO it's wrong to incite hate about a persons race creed or colour. IMO that was never PGs intention. He was angry about what Lui did, not his race. I don't think anyone's excusing anything or anyone.

Teabags has started this to deflect from the real issue at hand. He's the real carrrrnt.

You make some good points. I don't know PG personally and like you say he's just going off at Lui and just used careless language without any real racial intent. My father uses racial language often too and I'm always pulling him up on it. He's 70 this year! The in-laws do the same.
The main point being that the racial slant, while not appropriate, should not take away from the main issue here - which is the double standards in the media about what is and isn't newsworthy. And the media self-appointing itself as moral guardian in determining what is and isn't acceptable behaviour and skewing peoples' perceptions of individuals and clubs as a result of their BIASSED and agenda-driven reporting.

[novice chook]

Somehow I don't recall Anthony Watts being afforded the same 'softly softly' approach by the media as Loui has received. He was front and back page of the papers for a few days. And yet in the end the allegations against him were thrown out of court.

So why the difference in reporting? Is it because Watts is white and Loui is black?? Or is it because Watts was a Rooster and Loui is a Tiger??

News Lackie - please explain.

[Guest]

You speak alot of sense old son, what are you doing here?

You obviously have never met Backwards lol

[Guest]

Somehow I don't recall Anthony Watts being afforded the same 'softly softly' approach by the media as Loui has received. He was front and back page of the papers for a few days. And yet in the end the allegations against him were thrown out of court.

So why the difference in reporting? Is it because Watts is white and Loui is black?? Or is it because Watts was a Rooster and Loui is a Tiger??

News Lackie - please explain.

The difference is that Watts is connected to Carney.

Carney sells papers, and Carney had to go.

[Kingbilly]

The difference is that Watts is connected to Carney.

Carney sells papers, and Carney had to go.

NO NO NO NO NO .
Carney does not sell papers, thats the problem they will tell you things like this but it just isn't true. RL articles get people interested, but printing dozens of irrelevent articles about Carney doesn't increase the sales anymore than if they wrote dozens of articles about Whatmough or Lui.

[Juggler]

NO NO NO NO NO .
Carney does not sell papers, thats the problem they will tell you things like this but it just isn't true. RL articles get people interested, but printing dozens of irrelevent articles about Carney doesn't increase the sales anymore than if they wrote dozens of articles about Whatmough or Lui.

You are right. The main thing is that they are all prominent first graders and repeat offenders.

[Guest]

NO NO NO NO NO .
Carney does not sell papers, thats the problem they will tell you things like this but it just isn't true. RL articles get people interested, but printing dozens of irrelevent articles about Carney doesn't increase the sales anymore than if they wrote dozens of articles about Whatmough or Lui.

I meant it sarcastically. As in that wouldn't be far off their little mantra.

Obviously, an article on Lui beating up his wife with a front page spread of Lui involved in a fight during a rugby league game etc. etc. cue Telegraph sensationalism would sell every bit as much as a photo of Carney getting into a cab, which is why the disparity in coverage is so suspect.