Talking Footy

It proves racial tensions and is clearly yet another "racist issue" the AFL has been embroiled in this season. It also seems very suss as to whether or not there was a bit of 'talk' behind closed doors to effectively sweep this one under the carpet considering the shocking year the organisation has had racist issues popping up here there and everywhere.

Xman your statement was bogus.

Racial tensions?? It proves nothing of the sort! Like I said, the only tension there was provided by Grant Thomas - the article makes that plain as day. And it was also clearly noted that his motivation was hate for the AFL!

Closed door talk my rear end! It's all out in the open there and like I said before - you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Actually scratch that - you're making a monsoon out of a raindrop!

King-Eliagh wrote:

Yes you certainly are hardly the right person to adjudicate this one and considering Beaussies dodgy affiliations with Xman in the past so is he.

Who else we got?

Oh and there was another racist issue in the AFL this season which hit the media. Get a load of this one. Very suspicious indeed and what about how he wasnt reprimanded like the bloke in adelaide was with the sacking...? I know our TLPG would incorrectly liken this to reverse racism but its a real wonder what was going on behind closed doors on this one...The public comments on the story are interesting too. What a season full of racist issues the AFL has had this season!

http://www.foxsports.com.au/AFL/AFL-pre ... 6317771946

As TLPG said the Melbourne issue was a mistake admitted by Mifsud. He apologised afterwards and admitted he got it wrong. Nice try though.

King-Eliagh wrote:

It proves racial tensions and is clearly yet another "racist issue" the AFL has been embroiled in this season. It also seems very suss as to whether or not there was a bit of 'talk' behind closed doors to effectively sweep this one under the carpet considering the shocking year the organisation has had racist issues popping up here there and everywhere.

Xman your statement was bogus.

AFL racial incidents this year:

- Collingwood fan

- Rendells misunderstood comments reported by Mifsud which were not racist anyway but just highlighting a potential issue if not addressed.

The others you quoted that were not issues:
- Goodes comments were just that, comments. Not an actual issue or incident.

- One of Melbourne's sponsors CEO's comments. Why not this CEO's neighbour's brother-in-law's cousin?

- Mifsud overhearing a comment regarding Melbourne and admitting he stuffed up. He actually got reprimanded for being a dope because there was absolutely nothing in it.

TLPG wrote:

And it was also clearly noted that his motivation was hate for the AFL!

And I wonder why...? He seems to think the AFL's got issues with racism.

Xman wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

It proves racial tensions and is clearly yet another "racist issue" the AFL has been embroiled in this season. It also seems very suss as to whether or not there was a bit of 'talk' behind closed doors to effectively sweep this one under the carpet considering the shocking year the organisation has had racist issues popping up here there and everywhere.

Xman your statement was bogus.

AFL racial incidents this year:

- Collingwood fan

- Rendells misunderstood comments reported by Mifsud which were not racist anyway but just highlighting a potential issue if not addressed.

The others you quoted that were not issues:
- Goodes comments were just that, comments. Not an actual issue or incident.

- One of Melbourne's sponsors CEO's comments. Why not this CEO's neighbour's brother-in-law's cousin?

- Mifsud overhearing a comment regarding Melbourne and admitting he stuffed up. He actually got reprimanded for being a dope because there was absolutely nothing in it.

If you think the latter two weren't issues you need to get the old braille back on your comp again. They were all over the media and were highly serious issues. The ins and outs of the issues are irrelevant. The context you set were "racist issues in the AFL". These two additional issues were just that my friend and I don't care if the racist melbourne sponsor was a hermaphrodite dwarf, fact is he was a racist and affiliated with the club and caused yet another racist issue in the AFL this season.

Sponsors are NOT affiliated with clubs, dummy! Did that sponsor have a chair on the club board? NO! The club had no idea that the sponsor's CEO was a racist - and when they found out that he was, out the door that sponsor went in an instant!! NO ISSUE!

See? On both of these you are desperately trying to paint the AFL as bad as the NRL, and in the process downplaying the SOO issue - which was far worse and Rendell and the fan combined. You have no perspective and it's about time you got some. Your bias is clearly showing with this BS file and you have NOTHING to hang your hat on while trying to defend the indefensible - the NRL's LACK of action over the SOO incident.

King-Eliagh wrote:

Xman wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

It proves racial tensions and is clearly yet another "racist issue" the AFL has been embroiled in this season. It also seems very suss as to whether or not there was a bit of 'talk' behind closed doors to effectively sweep this one under the carpet considering the shocking year the organisation has had racist issues popping up here there and everywhere.

Xman your statement was bogus.

AFL racial incidents this year:

- Collingwood fan

- Rendells misunderstood comments reported by Mifsud which were not racist anyway but just highlighting a potential issue if not addressed.

The others you quoted that were not issues:
- Goodes comments were just that, comments. Not an actual issue or incident.

- One of Melbourne's sponsors CEO's comments. Why not this CEO's neighbour's brother-in-law's cousin?

- Mifsud overhearing a comment regarding Melbourne and admitting he stuffed up. He actually got reprimanded for being a dope because there was absolutely nothing in it.

If you think the latter two weren't issues you need to get the old braille back on your comp again. They were all over the media and were highly serious issues. The ins and outs of the issues are irrelevant. The context you set were "racist issues in the AFL". These two additional issues were just that my friend and I don't care if the racist melbourne sponsor was a hermaphrodite dwarf, fact is he was a racist and affiliated with the club and caused yet another racist issue in the AFL this season.

Sorry buffoon but I the claimant set the context and it was always intended to be issues or incidents that came from within the AFL or their fans. It was never intended to include issues that were found to be a media beatup and not even true, or people outside the AFL or its fans.

Oh so the claimant sets the context, ok. That makes it awfully difficult to lose a claim but ohwell. Please take into account my context in the AFL coaches admit to tanking then.

Thaaaaaankks mate

Or on the other hand you could continue the farce of a forum you're running over here Xman and claim your and TLPG's context to support your claim and not allow others to have the same defence.

Go on Xman keep running the farce mate.

King-Eliagh wrote:

Oh so the claimant sets the context, ok. That makes it awfully difficult to lose a claim but ohwell. Please take into account my context in the AFL coaches admit to tanking then.

Thaaaaaankks mate

Or on the other hand you could continue the farce of a forum you're running over here Xman and claim your and TLPG's context to support your claim and not allow others to have the same defence.

Go on Xman keep running the farce mate.

Ive always said the claimants context is taken into consideration!!!

So what context were you using when claiming AFL coaches had admitted to tanking? That seems pretty clear to me...

Xman wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

Oh so the claimant sets the context, ok. That makes it awfully difficult to lose a claim but ohwell. Please take into account my context in the AFL coaches admit to tanking then.

Thaaaaaankks mate

Or on the other hand you could continue the farce of a forum you're running over here Xman and claim your and TLPG's context to support your claim and not allow others to have the same defence.

Go on Xman keep running the farce mate.

Ive always said the claimants context is taken into consideration!!!

So what context were you using when claiming AFL coaches had admitted to tanking? That seems pretty clear to me...

Funny that cause you dont practice what you preach now do ya.

I'd say that citing there was only two racist issues in the AFL this year is a pretty clearcut incorrect statement considering the evidence I've given. I've explained the context of my statement re coaches admitting tanking, and the evidence backs me up. Try reading the posts in that thread again to see the context freddy.

King-Eliagh wrote:

Xman wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

Oh so the claimant sets the context, ok. That makes it awfully difficult to lose a claim but ohwell. Please take into account my context in the AFL coaches admit to tanking then.

Thaaaaaankks mate

Or on the other hand you could continue the farce of a forum you're running over here Xman and claim your and TLPG's context to support your claim and not allow others to have the same defence.

Go on Xman keep running the farce mate.

Ive always said the claimants context is taken into consideration!!!

So what context were you using when claiming AFL coaches had admitted to tanking? That seems pretty clear to me...

Funny that cause you dont practice what you preach now do ya.

I'd say that citing there was only two racist issues in the AFL this year is a pretty clearcut incorrect statement considering the evidence I've given. I've explained the context of my statement re coaches admitting tanking, and the evidence backs me up. Try reading the posts in that thread again to see the context freddy.

1. you havent used any evidence....Ive asked you repeatedly to show quotes where AFL coaches admitted to tanking.. But nothing has been tabled!

2. You know the context of the racial discussion. We were talking about negatives or marks against each code. That was the intention of the entire discussion!
- a story about racism that wasnt even true is not a mark against the AFL.
- the AFL acting against a racist attitude from a 3rd party organisation is actually a positive, not a mark against the AFL.

And you say I'm blind!

The fact the whole grant thomas thing bubbled up was definitely a mark against the AFL. Noone can really explain why it happened. A cockup like that doesnt 'just happen' as the AFL would have us believe. There's something behind it and that wasnt provided in this racist issue for the AFL.

The CEO of a major sponsor of the melbourne footy club was a racist git. Well done melbourne for giving him the flick but the racist issue here lies in association. The Melb footy club was closely associated with this racist git. That was a racist issue and anothe mark against the AFL. While it was dealt with appropriately the media surrounding the issue was not overwhelmingly positive. Clearcut racist issue.

Oh and on the tanking issue. You knew the context of my statement. I was clearly stating that through his abstract admissions of what happened Bailey was admitting to tanking. And my evidence proves that, including the link you provided on the tanking issue Xman. Again clearcut,

King-Eliagh wrote:

The fact the whole grant thomas thing bubbled up was definitely a mark against the AFL. Noone can really explain why it happened. A cockup like that doesnt 'just happen' as the AFL would have us believe. There's something behind it and that wasnt provided in this racist issue for the AFL.

The CEO of a major sponsor of the melbourne footy club was a racist git. Well done melbourne for giving him the flick but the racist issue here lies in association. The Melb footy club was closely associated with this racist git. That was a racist issue and anothe mark against the AFL. While it was dealt with appropriately the media surrounding the issue was not overwhelmingly positive. Clearcut racist issue.

Oh and on the tanking issue. You knew the context of my statement. I was clearly stating that through his abstract admissions of what happened Bailey was admitting to tanking. And my evidence proves that, including the link you provided on the tanking issue Xman. Again clearcut,

The Thomas Mifsud issue was shown to be nothing, only Mifsud acting stupid. This was definately not a mark against the AFL. Unless incorrect stories are also marks!

The AFL's associate, being the sponsor, was not racist! One of their employees was a racist. Again, a black mark against the associate only. A tick for the AFL since they sacrificed money to make a statement.

The AFL conducted an investigation in to Bailey's comments and he was cleared of wrong doing after explaining them. Why should we believe your abstract definition over a full investigation?

Hey X, how did the Demons miss the racist? They didn't know? Why didn't they know? Didn't they do their homework? That's why it's a racist issue!

TL, Grant Thomas did what he did because he knew the truth about racism in the AFL! Yeah that's the real reason why he hates them!Mifsud made it public and the AFL had a go at him for making them look like the racists they are!