Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Yosser

The Sun now banning RL indefinitely

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

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.

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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!! 


Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Edited by JohnM

Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Edited by JohnM

Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 5

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)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

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.

No it isn't, it is utterly ridiculous to pretend that groups and organisations and individuals are the same. 

One is a human being with an intrinsic value placed upon it, the other is an organisation with absolutely no intrinsic value to it. Frankly its preposterous beyond the extreme to argue that The Sun newspaper is worthy of forgiveness and redemption at the same level as a human being. 

The death of Daphne Caruana Galizia was a tragedy, the death of the News of the World, much less so. Human life and newspapers are valued differently by normal people

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I previously stated, if it was the RFL who banned the Sun's reporter from attending then I can understand the newspaper's attitude towards further coverage of RL. However, it was Liverpool FC who prevented the journalist being there then I just don't understand the Sun's ban on reporting our game in future.

However, irrespective of peoples' own view on the content of the Sun, the reporter was there to promote our game and if it was Liverpool FC's decision to prevent a RL writer from attending the event then how many people would be willing to show solidarity, not for the Sun but for the game of RL, and boycott going to the Magic Weekend if it was again at Anfield ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is this the same newspaper that used to give jonathan king a full page to write in every week?

  • Like 2

the grass may be greener on the other side of the fence but the crows are just as black

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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? 

Edited by JohnM
  • Haha 1

Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 12
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

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.

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

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.

More people aren't reading newspapers then are they? They are using websites. 

The sun having the best newspaper on-line brand isn't quite the same as having the most visited news website, which is the BBC. 

And im not all that sure what visitors to SunBingo and Dreamteamfc.com add to RL's coverage so we shouldn't really worry about losing them (though the Sun are happy to use them as visitors to their website)

Buzzfeed get about 3times as many visitors as the sun (including SunBingo and Dream team) get per month. There hasn't been much complaint that they weren't covering Magic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.  

Edited by redjonn
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, redjonn said:

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.  

I suspect the the MW wont be held at Anfield next season and not just because of The Sun incident.

I hope that's not an elitist comment from someone who's from a council estate and one of 10 kids

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

I suspect the the MW wont be held at Anfield next season and not just because of The Sun incident.

I hope that's not an elitist comment from someone who's from a council estate and one of 10 kids

Not so sure it won't be at Anfield as Elstone gave a good indication in his commentary immediately after the last game of the MW.   As I remember he went on about having to carefully review how it went and not rush decisions, etc, etc... then a couple of questions later said he thought it would be at Anfield as it went well.

We have a similar background.... but I could be elitist now despite that..... I'm not but...

Edited by redjonn
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Martyn Sadler said:

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.

UEFA overturn the ban for Champions League fixtures. 

I suspect that if Liverpool didnt comply they would be made to play home games in a different stadium.

As you state, the only recourse the RFL have would be to take the magic weekend elsewhere.

It's interesting though that LFC upheld their principles for the magic weekend yet not for the Champions League. 

I suspect the amount of money they receive from UEFA has a large influence.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours 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. 

The sun still has a massive readership and losing its backing it a major disaster going into a TV negotiation with Sky and when looking for sponsorship.  I dont like the politics of any of the newspapers but they are essential part in giving the sport a national media profile.

 

My opinion of Elstone is that he is fairly dim witted individual who has found a sport to shine in because he looks nice in a suit and the other administrators struggle to string a sentence together.

 

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Niels said:

UEFA overturn the ban for Champions League fixtures. 

I suspect that if Liverpool didnt comply they would be made to play home games in a different stadium.

As you state, the only recourse the RFL have would be to take the magic weekend elsewhere.

It's interesting though that LFC upheld their principles for the magic weekend yet not for the Champions League. 

I suspect the amount of money they receive from UEFA has a large influence.

Thanks for posting that. I hadn't realised that the ban doesn't apply for Champions League games.

I also didn't realise that the ban wasn't imposed until early 2017, if I understand it correctly, which seems to be a case of shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.

In my view that makes the ban on Gary Carter totally unjustifiable.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...