Jump to content

Martyn Sadler

  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

1,914 Excellent

About Martyn Sadler

  • Rank
    League Publications Ltd

Member Profile

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

7,720 profile views
  1. I give my reaction to some of the proposed changes proposed by the RFL Rules Committee. I'm not completely enthusiastic.
  2. You have come very close without technically overstepping the mark. You were skirting the touchline while just managing not to cross it. If you believe someone has made a racist comment, the correct response on this forum is to report it to the moderators, who will then deal with the offender. On the other hand, if you call a fellow poster a racist when clearly that accusation isn't justified, then it is you who will be reported and dealt with by the moderators.
  3. Far from ignoring them, we are now on our seventh page of discussing the words he used. My advice actually relates to the way you interact with other posters in an accusatory style. I also criticised your apparent view that you understand the nature of racism better than anyone else on this thread, which I rather doubt. Clearly there was a problem of him using a form of words, because if there hadn't been we wouldn't be discussing them. But when you highlight a statement and blow it up out of context, it becomes all too easy to paint a false picture of the individual concerned. I've made the point that Shaun's words in this particular example were perhaps naive, but they were not racist You can challenge anyone's views as much as you like, but making wild accusations of racism against other posters will ultimately get you banned from the forum. I'm simply trying to discourage you from doing that.
  4. It's perfectly possible to have a reasonable discussion about Shaun Wane's comments while agreeing that he might have chosen his words unwisely. The problem is, though, that there is always someone who is out to magnify those words and define someone as a racist when clearly they are not. And it's even worse when that person claims to have a superior knowledge of what is and isn't racism, while making insinuations against people who disagree with your particular point of view. If I could just give you a piece of gentle advice, I think you should pull your horns in a little.
  5. One thing I can guarantee is that Shaun is not as judgemental as you appear to be and if he were he wouldn't be a good coach of anyone.
  6. I think they should be accountable, and Shaun is. That's why we've been debating what he said. I agree that he is an eloquent speaker and an intelligent man. But even the most politically adept operators can sometimes use words that are ill-chosen. The examples are too numerous to mention. I suspect that on reflection Shaun might use a different form of words, but he is fiercely patriotic and I'm very glad to see that quality in an England coach.
  7. Yes, but it's for individual nations to decide who qualifies for their passport, not for sporting authorities. The inconsistency would be between nations in how they view citizenship. The sporting bodies would have to accept the criteria set out by their national governments. But there would be consistency, in that they would select people holding their passports.
  8. Victor could get a passport, and if he did he would qualify to be considered for England under my selection criteria. Given that we are not using the possession of a passport as the relevant criterion, however, I think that the residential qualification should ideally be based on the player having lived in the country prior to making his professional debut.
  9. The qualification process for a passport would be complicated, as you suggest. But the question of whether you have one or not is not complicated. It's either yes or no.
  10. The problem is that in these days of social media we all need to be as wise as Socrates in choosing our words carefully for fear that someone will accuse us of an offence that we had no intention of committing. It would be wonderful if Shaun had a command of the language and was able to use it as precisely as an Oxford Professor of English Language. But he's a Rugby League coach, who is employed not for his mastery of English phrasing but for his ability to coach and motivate a team. I have some sympathy with your final point, which is why I think a national passport should be the criterion for selection.
  11. Passport qualifications are not a subject in which I have any expert knowledge. But the point is that obtaining a passport is a sign of commitment to a particular country, rather than saying that a mere three years living there entitles someone to represent it.
  12. There seems to be an element here of taking quotes out of context to create controversy where none should exist. With reference to Victor Radley, Wane said that he wants to select players who are committed to England, regardless of the qualification criteria. Players who have lived in England for virtually their whole lives, but were not born here, didn't come into the discussion. Wane was clearly differentiating himself from his predecessor, who was happy to select Australian-born players who qualified on ancestry grounds for England or Great Britain but who were Australian at heart. Having said that, i think the qualification criteria for international selection should be that you hold a passport of the country you want to play for.
  13. Most Rugby League journalists are fans of the game. And only Sean knows which journalists he was referring to. But I must object to your comments about my colleague Matt Shaw, who breaks stories every week in League Express. Super League officials are almost desperate to prevent club officials from talking to Matt because he has the ability to extract information from them like almost no one else. To say that he doesn't rock the boat is ridiculous. And to suggest that Aussie journalists who cover the NRL are somehow more incisive in their coverage of the game is not really true, despite the fact that they get much more space to write in national newspapers, although there are some very good individual writers such as Roy Masters, who has the space to write informed and analytical articles in the Sydney Morning Herald. But ultimately the problem with Rugby League in this country is that the people who run the game, or run the clubs, can't be compelled to speak to the media. And very often they prefer not to. Until sporting bodies are brought into the Freedom of Information provisions I'm afraid that is likely to continue. But we will continue, and hopefully with great success, to try to penetrate the almost impenetrable undergrowth of Rugby League bodies.
  14. I'm glad you listened to Tony's podcast, which is always worth listening to. Sean McGuire, who joined Tony for this episode, is an intelligent observer of the game who was the CEO of St Helens for five years until 2007. Sean always saw himself, I think, as a potential CEO of the game as a whole. And he might have been very good at the job. He certainly is able to talk publicly about the game in a way that I wish we saw more of from our current senior officials. When it comes to transparency, however, I don't recall that we were ever given the exact reasons why Sean left Saints, although the time of his departure coincided with an apparent approach for the club by an Irish investor, which the Chairman Eamonn McManus turned down emphatically and apparently with some anger. So perhaps transparency should begin at home.
  15. https://www.totalrl.com/how-the-championship-can-still-secure-a-promotion-place/
  • Create New...