Talking Footy

NlolRL wrote: Sun Nov 26, 2017 10:13 pm

King-Eliagh wrote: Sun Nov 26, 2017 8:13 pm

NlolRL wrote: Sun Nov 26, 2017 5:45 pm

one offical said it may head that way unless indigenous recruits were better supported, but there's absolutely no evidence it has

post some. All they will show is exactly what Ive said, the majority are caucasian, just like our population

One official seriously nlol, don't downplay and try to hide the extent of racism in ur code bro. It's a bad look and you don't wanna be going down that ugly road to being viewed as a racist apologist. One recruiter

privately admitted to the league that his club would be unlikely to draft an indigenous player unless at least one parent were white.

Furthermore the afls community engagement manager

Mifsud said the attitude of some recruiters meant that "if you are too black you are not going to get drafted]

http://www.theage.com.au/AFL/AFL-news/a ... 1v8az.html


Its not one recruiter and it's not even just one club nlol don't ever suggest that again ok

Now stop making excuses and pretending the AFL is not a sport for white gangly men!!

dear oh dear, this saga has been done to death. Rendell spoke to Mifsud, the AFL indigenous official, about his concerns. Rendell came out and explained exactly what he said and why very soon after.

Rendell had told AFL community engagement manager Jason Mifsud that the AFL was heading towards a situation in which the Crows wouldn't recruit a player unless he had at least one white parent.

The comments came during a conversation the pair had about a concern that the growing attrition rate in the AFL could force Indigenous players out of the game.

"I've never had a policy like that in my life," a fired up Rendell said, referring to the belief that he would not have recruited players with two Aboriginal parents.

"I wouldn't have a policy like that, that's ridiculous. It's silly. Everyone's the same.

"The comment that I made originally was ... stupidly trying to over-emphasise the problem that we've got at the moment and we need to do something about it quick and the AFL need to get involved in it. Not bloody bulls**t around and talk and blame Paul Roos and blame James Hird.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/archive ... 8e45231edf

Think about it, why would Rendell openly admit to the AFL's indigenous official that he wouldnt recruit indigenous players?

Furthermore, the recruiting patterns show there is, nor was there ever, such a policy

This is disgraceful.
First I've heard of it. Where's this magot work now....? Some of the most exciting players the game has seen are Aboriginal.

Lol first you've heard of it .

AFLcrap1 wrote: Mon Nov 27, 2017 5:53 am

Lol first you've heard of it .

This is no laughing matter. It's totally disgraceful.
I was surprised i hadn't heard of it too. But the date of it put me somewhere in South America. Probably Argentina.
Little to no news from Aus there. Not that i was looking for it.

Just another chapter in the disgusting book of AFL racism .

AFLcrap1 wrote: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:16 pm

Just another chapter in the disgusting book of AFL racism .

except it was a recruiter approaching the AFL to see how indigenous players could be better supported, not racism at all

Oh dear .
Lol
It's all I can say

Shiiiiiit nlol? R u for real ?

The afls own community engagement manager acknowledged the one white parent rule was from several recruiters and several clubs.

The afls Aboriginal player cohort acknowledge the vast common and widespread racism across the league.

Even a massive 8club research which gained media attention in 2016 showed how racist the AFL is with some 50 odd percentage of non-indigenous players stating they don't think Aboriginal communities are disadvantaged by low life expectancy etc

Ol sport capital can even see and state how bad it is. I'm sorry nlol , but ur looking like a massive dildo right now bro. clean ur act up

King-Eliagh wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2017 12:08 pm

Aflcrap seems to be on the money here. I've been to many AFL games in Melbourne and I can tell ya, the crowds are nowhere near 50/50. Just look at the images of crowds and you'll see. Then there's the article sportscapital provudes. It's vague, doesn't come from a reputable org or tell us where the figures come from and I recall Australia's leading market research org Roy Morgan citing something like 30% of Aussie rules supporters were women and that this number was declining.

Sportscapital - he tries hard, we must give him that

One last whack on this one for you two knuckle heads.

Now, I'm not discounting Roy Morgan, they seem reputable enough. But their sample sizes seem to vary a bit.
And in the case of the survey you cited KE it was a smidge over 3000 from what I can tell.
Hard to call that comprehensive.
And you two aren't even on the same page. One cites a RM survey, the other has slammed them on other topics.
(Silly move Crap. Once you discount a data source you can never use that source to back your opinion ever again. You'd look like a flog)
This prompted me to call out to the author of the piece I put up.
And the good Doctor informed me the data set he used for his story was from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. With a sample set over 38000. (He also suggested I buy one of his books on the history of Sport)
Yes, he wrote book on the history of Sport.
And I want to add. If you wanted to become a professional researcher and study at Melbourne Uni. Guess who'd conduct some of your lectures.
He teaches where Roy Morgan's CEO completed her studies. Total professionals.
Anyway, from the data he extrapolated the figures stated in his story. Average footy match has 40% women.
Somewhat higher for AFL. 41.38%
Slightly lower for NRL. 37.5%
Within 10% that's fucking close.
Then apply these figures to attendance numbers and you have more than any other league in the country.

Now 38000 still isn't a comprehensive amount but it is shit loads more than yours.
As to all the pictures. We could sling a thousand photos back and forth to back any story. Gets ya nowhere.

Like calling me out on this one. Got you nowhere but on your arse.

You said close to 50/50
That is blatantly wrong .

Plus you were not talking raw numbers
You were talking ratio
You said no other league comes close to the 50/50 of AFL

Geez ...you're not very bright are you .

Now you're doing the usual bullshit of avoiding admitting you were wrong .

AFLcrap1 wrote: Sun Dec 03, 2017 11:54 pm

You said close to 50/50
That is blatantly wrong .

Suck it up Princess.
Take a big whiff.
And cop your whack.

Bhaaaa
Another joins the long list of AFL bullshitters .

Sports liar ...

AFLcrap1 wrote: Sun Dec 03, 2017 11:54 pm

You said close to 50/50
That is blatantly wrong .

That's right. I said that, and proved it.
I consider anything within 10% is close.
It's only wrong to you.
You obviously don't consider within 10% close.
That's your entire argument.
Fucking compelling! Truely!
I'm curious, what do you consider close?

And when your ready, just point out which league had close to 3,000,000 women attend their games. Other than the AFL of course.

Hang on a minute, how many in total attended NRL games?
Wasn't it "close" to 3,000,000?

AFLcrap1 wrote: Sun Dec 03, 2017 11:57 pm

Plus you were not talking raw numbers
You were talking ratio
You said no other league comes close to the 50/50 of AFL

Geez ...you're not very bright are you .

Now you're doing the usual bullshit of avoiding admitting you were wrong .

Where did I mention a ratio?

50/50 is a ratio
It's not raw numbers is it .
It's a ratio of 50% male 50% female
& it was blatantly wrong
As was your bullshit that no other league comes close to this'll .

Lol
Go back & look at what you posted & see the self ownage .
My guess is you're too dumb to see it .