Dave T Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 1 minute ago, scotchy1 said: In what way is it elitist? Suggesting you are not a 'true' RL fan if you buy a certain newspaper is certainly elitist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tms Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 16 minutes ago, Damien said: . The game getting less coverage and less news in a publication that gets millions reading both in print and online the scumbags cover all home games and report breaking liverpool news all the time so getting reports on magic wasn't out of the realms of possibility bottom line they didn't want to and are using the ban as an excuse to finally get rid of northern working class flatcap sport rugby league Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave T Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 11 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: Is it? Im not sure elitist is the right word but thinking that The Sun newspaper and its behaviour and outlook are incompatible with the game and its history might not be an argument you agree with but its certainly a valid argument to make, rooted in supporting evidence and history. Urban dictionary definition fits quite nicely: In short, a person, or group of persons, who believes something about them make them superior to others, and they feel the need to flaunt it... It is entirely possible to be an RL fan and buy a certain newspaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damien Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 1 minute ago, POR said: the scumbags cover all home games and report breaking liverpool news all the time so getting reports on magic wasn't out of the realms of possibility bottom line they didn't want to and are using the ban as an excuse to finally get rid of northern working class flatcap sport rugby league I don't disagree and have said previously that its just an excuse. RL is small enough to ignore, Football isn't. However the game getting less publicity isn't good news and should never be seen as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damien Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 1 minute ago, Dave T said: Urban dictionary definition fits quite nicely: In short, a person, or group of persons, who believes something about them make them superior to others, and they feel the need to flaunt it... It is entirely possible to be an RL fan and buy a certain newspaper. I think the entire idea that Rugby League should only appeal to, or be open to and compatible with, certain sections of society is certainly elitist. It should be open to all and should be looking to attract all. It is also an attitude that has held the game back throughout its history and is often commonplace on this forum when we talk about expansion, new teams etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrispmartha Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 48 minutes ago, Dave T said: What a load of elitist nonsense. Quite, I don't quite understand his point, what has which Newspaper you buy have anything to do with whether you are a 'true supporter' and what does that even mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunbar Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 26 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: Is it? Im not sure elitist is the right word but thinking that The Sun newspaper and its behaviour and outlook are incompatible with the game and its history might not be an argument you agree with but its certainly a valid argument to make, rooted in supporting evidence and history. Scotchy, I have to say that you argue for the sake of arguing on these boards and often contradict yourself between threads in order to have the last say on any given subject. In the threads where we discuss the behavior of players you clearly and often state that we should keep players in the sport and provide a 'pathway to redemption' no matter what behavior they demonstrate (including racist and homophobic language). When I say that we should not tolerate this behavior you say we cannot solve societies ills. And yet now on this thread you brand the Sun as homophobic and racist and support the idea that this is incompatible with our game. You cannot have it both ways. "The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby. "If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerrumonside ref Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 Seems an obvious case here of the S*n newspaper trying to play one set of people off against another as part of it’s ongoing dispute with Liverpool Football Club who are acting upon the wishes of the families of the Hillsborough victims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrispmartha Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 9 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: The Sun newspaper is not a person. People are different to organisations. A Nazi can make restitution, be redeemed and rehabilitated. The Nazi Party, not so much. This seems obvious. What's a 'True `Rugby League fan' ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunbar Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 22 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: The Sun newspaper is not a person. People are different to organisations. A Nazi can make restitution, be redeemed and rehabilitated. The Nazi Party, not so much. This seems obvious. What an utterly spurious argument. If the sport of Rugby League is going to demonstrate that racism and homophobia is not compatible with its values then it does this by enforcing these within its own sphere of influence... those that play and work within the sport itself. It does not demonstrate these values by tolerating racism and homophobia within its ranks and then condemning other organisations for acting in the same way. To suggest that we can tolerate this behavior within our sport and then condemn it elsewhere is hypocritical and disingenuous. This seems obvious to me. "The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby. "If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrispmartha Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 16 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: That would be for each person to define for themselves. I'm asking how you define it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newguy Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 Flat caps and whippets it says in the OED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 3 hours ago, The Future is League said: No true football fan or Rugby League fan would buy The Sun. No intelligent person would but The Sun either. If a national newspaper doesn't cover Rugby League, Rugby League fans shouldn't buy it and encourage family and friends to do likewise. Let me put this as gently as possible: complete and utter nonsense. You can't possibly be serious!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 2 hours ago, POR said: pray tell how am i'm i ignorant on the scumbags and their ban for some one who list his interests as fact not fiction let me tell you a fact the scunbags are banned from anfield end of story I'm 73 and don't have enough time left to waste it repetitively explaining it to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 1 hour ago, POR said: the scumbags cover all home games and report breaking liverpool news all the time so getting reports on magic wasn't out of the realms of possibility bottom line they didn't want to and are using the ban as an excuse to finally get rid of northern working class flatcap sport rugby league You are Arthur Scargill and I claim my free sack of Sunbrite doubles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerjon Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 Given we don't have a time machine, we can't go back and change the situation that's led to this mess. So we just suck it up, frankly. We don't appear to have any options to get The Sun back on side. It rather shows the need for the RFL, and rugby league in general, to really up its social media game. Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunbar Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 53 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: Again, you have disingenuously inferred that I have argued we should tolerate racism or homophobia in our sport when I clearly haven't. This has happened a few times now and there is a point I struggle to believe it is accidental even though every time you are picked up on it you admit this is the case. The game can absolutely, 100% without equivocation, mitigation, contradiction or hypocrisy work for the betterment of society by acting as a shining light, standing up against homophobia and racism by working with those within the game to provide restitution and achieve redemption AND by standing up to outside organisations that promote homophobic, bigoted, racist, misogynistic views. Far from contradicting those two actions complement. I will state again what I said in the last thread on this subject "I accept that your view is not to condone these attitudes". However, you have told me that there is no act of racism or homophobia that you believe should warrant exclusion from our sport. I suggest that level of leniency (no matter how well intended) is tacit tolerance. I believe that some attitudes and actions have no place in our sport and excluding those that display them is the best way of showcasing our values. I would be happy to leave our disagreement at that but then to come onto this thread and condemn another organisation for these same behaviors is absolutely hypocritical. "The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby. "If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert Prince Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 All the press and TV peddle fake news and their own brand of prejudice. The Sun has pushed it's version that bit further in their case and everyone can take their view. It's a free country. As a rugby fan I am p!$$€d off over it and care even less for it, and there seems no valid excuse. But frankly the Sun is in with a poor crowd... to me we have the Sun on one spectrum and Ch4 on the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graveyard johnny Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 is this the same newspaper that used to give jonathan king a full page to write in every week? see you later undertaker - in a while necrophile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 24 minutes ago, graveyard johnny said: is this the same newspaper that used to give jonathan king a full page to write in every week? Possibly. Should we not allow the BBC to broadcast our sport because it used Jimmy Saville, Rolf Harris and Stuart Hall? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martyn Sadler Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 This topic has revealed that a lot of posters don't like The Sun and don't buy it, which makes me wonder who does buy it to make it the biggest selling newspaper in the country. It's worth pointing out that Liverpool FC have a perfect right to ban The Sun or any other media organisation from Anfield if they wish to do so. They can ban The Sun just for their games, or they can extend the ban to other events taking place at Anfield. But if they do the latter, you would imagine that they would inform the organisation booking the stadium at the time the booking is formalised, so that the organisation, in this case Super League, can decide whether it wants to proceed on this basis. What isn't satisfactory is not telling Super League this beforehand and then unilaterally overruling Super League's accreditation of Gary Carter for the Magic Weekend. It's also worth pointing out that Super League announced a few weeks ago that it had agreed a new sponsorship deal with Betfred on enhanced terms. In pitching for that agreement, Super League and Betfred will have based their agreement on how much media coverage Super League was likely to achieve. Although I obviously wasn't party to the agreement, it's likely that the coverage in national newspapers, including The Sun, will have been part of the thinking of both parties that will have determined the amount act Betfred will have agreed to pay. As has been pointed out on here, the demographic that buys The Sun isn't a million miles from the demographic that watches Rugby League. And for those who don't read The Sun, it's worth pointing out that Gary Carter is a fine journalist who has broken many stories in that newspaper. So if it is withdrawing its coverage it will be a loss for Super League, whether we like it or not. Before this row blew up I wouldn't have taken the Magic Weekend to Anfield simply because there appears to be very little interest in Rugby League in Liverpool. The city is obsessed by football and few alternative sports have much of a chance there. But, regardless of whether we think The Sun is acting petulantly or not, Super League can't allow other organisations to dictate its media accreditation policy. It has to decide for itself who it will accredit and if it wishes to ban The Sun it has to be its own decision, not Liverpool FC's. That is the issue, and it seems a pretty fundamental one to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martyn Sadler Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 17 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: Very few people buy newspapers anymore, its a tiny fraction of the population. The idea that the entrance of any newspaper, never mind the sun, would be anywhere close to a determining factor for where we hold Magic is just silly. More people are reading newspapers than ever before, if you factor in their online editions. And The Sun, according to this article from last year, is leading the pack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fieldofclothofgold Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 I've never bought the Sun anyway and I never will Soon we will be dancing the fandangoFROM 2004,TO DO WHAT THIS CLUB HAS DONE,IF THATS NOT GREATNESSTHEN i DONT KNOW WHAT IS.JAMIE PEACOCK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Future is League Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 8 hours ago, Dave T said: What a load of elitist nonsense. From a council estate and one of 10 kids and born the 1950's. I certainly can't be classed as elitist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redjonn Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 The Sun as we all know is banned because of its reporting over Hillsborough. That I understand, especially as I lost a close cousin & nephew. Never-the-less I remember how at the time an awful lot of people were very ready to believe the initial reporting as to were blame should lie, not just the Sun. I certainly hope that all those "holier than thou" people I heard and continue to hear didn't at the time believe anything other than what they know now. I can still hear the bleating of many from the time. For me time has moved on, people at the organisation are different people in the main, so for me I don't have a continued intense dislike for the organisation. I do however support the wider family groupings that wish to continue to ban the Sun from Anfield and for which the club are carrying out that wish. I don't think RFL/SL should accept playing at an arena for which it has no say over what media can attend. Different if they themselves followed the wishes of the families and the club by not allowing certain publications/media, but then that would be its own decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.