Blue_Eyes84
Bull Shark
I much prefer to be flying under the radar.
You have to think how f****t is used, that you're 'less' if you are one. That's hateful and discrimatory and perpetuates the idea that gay, black or whatever other downcast group you're insulting (n****r has a slave or lower evolutionary person connotation in it's use unless you're black and reclaiming it) are beneath you. That can't be okay.It's not the same. I can spot a black fella, if I call him the N-word it's a hateful racist insult pointed right at him because of the colour of his skin, no doubt about it. As far as I'm aware gay doesn't have any distinguishing physical features (except Mitch Moses looks like a lesbian). Unless I know you're gay it's just a poor choice of word not a homophobic attack. As I said substitute "******" for "soft ****" no one bats an eye, substitute "black ****" for N-word you're not making things better.
Why do you require to know all the gay players? Can't they just keep their private lives private? Should everyone disclose their sexual orientation upon signing an NRL contract?
I don't believe a gay player would receive a shitstorm of media & hate in 2022 mate. Matt Checcin didn't & he was a ref so already hated. Roberts wasn't shunned from the game 30yrs ago. I was young when Roberts came out but he's basically been a hero since.
If a gay player were to come out publicly fine, good on him. If they choose not to that's okay too. NRLW SoO a yr or 2 back ended with opposition players having a pash and no one gave a toss. I don't think being gay is the big taboo you make out.
OK but that is not an NRL club. For the sake of our discussion I think saying that Rabbitoh's should get the credit in NRl is not too far fetched. What do you think?He went there after developing at Kings playing Rugby.
I don't know mate, did they do much?OK but that is not an NRL club. For the sake of our discussion I think saying that Rabbitoh's should get the credit in NRl is not too far fetched. What do you think?
Sounds like they got him to start playing the sport, which seems like an important role.I don't know mate, did they do much?
So what can be done when a club outside of the "17" developes a player? Who gets the credit? @bort has a point but then again it will be a race to get those young players. Maybe for those cases no one gets credit?I don't know mate, did they do much?
That's not true.Sounds like they got him to start playing the sport, which seems like an important role.
Yeah I don't see why there always needs to be credit.So what can be done when a club outside of the "17" developes a player? Who gets the credit? @bort has a point but then again it will be a race to get those young players. Maybe for those cases no one gets credit?
I agree. I think we got caught up on the article and the author's biased view (of the Roosters).Yeah I don't see why there always needs to be credit.
Following this conversation in the thread it sounds like he was playing Rugby for Kings, signed into an NRL system with Rabbitohs and then got 'developed' over to the Roosters at a level of development they very quickly went out of their way to argue to the NRL about.That's not true.
The cost is in developing the player, not in putting them in your first grade team. I think you said it before, that's where any cash 'credit' should supportYeah I don't see why there always needs to be credit.
You said they started to get him playing League, that's just not true. That's what I was responding toFollowing this conversation in the thread it sounds like he was playing Rugby for Kings, signed into an NRL system with Rabbitohs and then got 'developed' over to the Roosters at a level of development they very quickly went out of their way to argue to the NRL about.
If he played League before Union it still arguably is true interest from Rabbitohs got him to start playing League (again) vs the Roosters doing nothing but sign him from Rabbitohs.
If he never stopped playing League different story but I don't have that information.
Yep totally agree, the proposed model is complete bollocks.The cost is in developing the player, not in putting them in your first grade team. I think you said it before, that's where any cash 'credit' should support
So he was playing league while he was playing Union? Or had he stopped playing League?You said they started to get him playing League, that's just not true. That's what I was responding to
ding ding ding - perceptions & sensibilitiesThe NRL have to stop it for so many reasons. Litigious, community, international... it's a minefield for their growth
Think it actually read "Litigious, community, international... it's a minefield for their growth... and it's wrong."ding ding ding - perceptions & sensibilities
Played League as a junior, didn't start playing Rugby until high school at Kings, I believe.So he was playing league while he was playing Union? Or had he stopped playing League?
I just left in the stuff that hurts the bottom line most.Think it actually read "Litigious, community, international... it's a minefield for their growth... and it's wrong."