Australian Rugby / RA

[PhilClinton]

Kind of hard to single him out in a team that was abysmal and have been generally poor over the past few weeks.

I don’t think he should be immune to criticism though. I’m not negging the rugby deal, I think it’s a good move by us.

But the reality is the bloke looks flat at the moment, agreed in a team that isn’t playing well, but hopefully it’s just a form slump. Maybe getting outta there will be good for him sooner than later.

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

I don’t think he should be immune to criticism though. I’m not negging the rugby deal, I think it’s a good move by us.

But the reality is the bloke looks flat at the moment, agreed in a team that isn’t playing well, but hopefully it’s just a form slump. Maybe getting outta there will be good for him sooner than later.

I reckon there is a good chance we’ll see him in Rugby next year. From November the Roosters will be able to sign players for 2025 themselves and if someone is available they will want it instead of any potential distraction. They will then push for the player to get an early release from their current club.

 

[PhilClinton]

I reckon there is a good chance we’ll see him in Rugby next year. From November the Roosters will be able to sign players for 2025 themselves and if someone is available they will want it instead of any potential distraction. They will then push for the player to get an early release from their current club.

Aren’t they getting Dom Young from the Knights in 2024 as well? Another outside back who’s signed a long term deal with them. He will find a way into the side (is playing well right now)

 

[The Ghost of Raelene]

Aren’t they getting Dom Young from the Knights in 2024 as well? Another outside back who’s signed a long term deal with them. He will find a way into the side (is playing well right now)

Was talk of Tupou and Japanese Rugby although a lot of NRL teams would want him. Billy Smith is a good player just plagued by injury but a lot cheaper than Suallii

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I don’t think he should be immune to criticism though. I’m not negging the rugby deal, I think it’s a good move by us.

But the reality is the bloke looks flat at the moment, agreed in a team that isn’t playing well, but hopefully it’s just a form slump. Maybe getting outta there will be good for him sooner than later.

No not immune from criticism. Has looked off recently but that could have a fair bit to do with all the rubbish surrounding his signing with RA in the media. He's still only 19 after all.

 

[RebelYell]

Only Aussie team to lose this weekend lost to another Aussie team. Good weekend.

 

[Rebel man]

Only Aussie team to lose this weekend lost to another Aussie team. Good weekend.

No it wasn’t a good weekend.

 

[RebelYell]

No it wasn’t a good weekend.

I know bud. I'm looking past that too on this occasion.

 

[Rebel man]

I know bud. I'm looking past that too on this occasion.

Can’t look past how bad that was.

 

[liquor box]

‘Why be divisive?’ Rugby wrestles with the Voice to parliament

One of Australia’s most successful Super Rugby sides has weighed into the debate over the Indigenous Voice to parliament.

www.brisbanetimes.com.au

Rugby Australia is facing pressure from within to take a neutral stance on the Indigenous Voice to Parliament, with at least one Super Rugby club urging the governing body not to mix sport and politics.

Brumbies chairman Matthew Nobbs said the ACT Rugby board had taken the unanimous view that the club should not take a position on the matter and hoped RA would do the same.

Rugby, along with cricket and netball, is one of the last major professional and participation sports not to have voiced its support for the yes campaign ahead of a referendum on the matter that will be held later this year.

Another Super Rugby source said they were worried the issue would bring more division in the game.

“Why does Rugby Australia have to be involved in politics? Why does any sport have to be,” they said. “People go and enjoy, consume and follow sport because it’s a break from the usual rigmarole. Why be divisive?”

This could be interesting over the next few months.

I must say that for me personally I don't care what any athlete or sporting organisation supports when it comes to any political decision, I make my mind up by myself and vote based on what I think after making an informed decision.

I find it strange that anyone would change their vote based on what a footballer or organisation recommends, I would feel like an idiot for not being able to make an informed decision by myself and find their recommendations insulting to my intelligence rather than being divisive.

I am guessing that Fitzsimons will be writing about this given his recent articles about the voice and sporting organisations.

 

[Highlander35]

Politics and sport have always been intertwined, any idiot who suggests otherwise is underinformed, genuinely privileged (in the proper sense of the word, where background has allowed them to remain benignly ignorant to the reality of negative life circumstances of others) or are hiding something they don't want to have to say.

But from a dirty leftist POV, I don't really care what RA does. Coming out this late comparatively, particularly if it avoids any semblance of actually backing it through time, dollars or resources, while better than directly opposing it, is the worst kind of performative behaviour, where they're obviously more concerned about brand impact than actually caring about the outcome.

 

[Wallaby Man]

I’d much prefer the media asked individual players their views than an overarching body that represents 100s of people expressing a view on behalf of people that might disagree with it.

I want to hear from Michael Hooper, Quade Cooper, Taniela Tupou on their thoughts, than a blanket statement. Unfortunately that’s not the way media or sponsors want things done as it’s harder to control a narrative when you increase the amount of variables into the mix.

I also admit society isn’t mature enough to have respectful disagreements for differentiating views, so players probably wouldn’t express views unless it supports the expected narrative.

 

[kiap]

Unfortunately that’s not the way media or sponsors want things done as it’s harder to control a narrative when you increase the amount of variables into the mix.

The media is very different to sponsors. Media love to increase the amount of variables in the mix. Sponsors, not so much.

Conflict, in any direction, is gold for the media. "If it bleeds, it leads" ... you only have to look at the Folau saga. Year upon year of material generated on that story. There is still residual juice left in it now.

By contrast, sponsors only like conflict if there's a slam dunk "good news" story for them. The more variables added to the mix, the less likely that is to pan out. Dunno that they'd be thrusting out Hooper or Quade wearing their sponsored gear to weigh in ... unless it's a done-deal winner.

 

[Micheal]

The reality is: politics pervade all areas of life, particularly so with politics of representation, inclusion or race.

The now tired conservative shield of “lets keep politics out of X” is simply a transparent way to communicate: “you may not like the opinions I hold, and therefore I’d rather not face the consequences of sharing them openly”.

I find it funny that people will defend others with statements like: “he’s a good person despite his views on X”, or - my favourite, but not necessarily relevant - “he’s a good person outside of work”, as if someone’s views and beliefs, or behaviour from the hours or 9-5, aren’t somehow relevant to their general conduct and quality as a human being.

Whata the point of the Indigenous jersey if RA won’t take a stance on this? It’d reduce that gesture to simple tokenism, and reveal that the true reason for the lack of Indigenous representation in rugby union is largely because rugby union in Australia doesn’t care for, or consider, Indigenous people at all.

The NRL has already taken a stance, so should we. Lay your beliefs on the table.

 

[RugbyReg]

The reality is: politics pervade all areas of life, particularly so with politics of representation, inclusion or race.

The now tired conservative shield of “lets keep politics out of X” is simply a transparent way to communicate: “you may not like the opinions I hold, and therefore I’d rather not face the consequences of sharing them openly”.

I find it funny that people will defend others with statements like: “he’s a good person despite his views on X”, or - my favourite, but not necessarily relevant - “he’s a good person outside of work”, as if someone’s views and beliefs, or behaviour from the hours or 9-5, aren’t somehow relevant to their general conduct and quality as a human being.

Whata the point of the Indigenous jersey if Rugby Australia won’t take a stance on this? It’d reduce that gesture to simple tokenism, and reveal that the true reason for the lack of Indigenous representation in rugby union is largely because rugby union in Australia doesn’t care for, or consider, Indigenous people at all.

The NRL has already taken a stance, so should we. Lay your beliefs on the table.

whose beliefs are you wanting laid on the table?

 

[Wallaby Man]

I think governing bodies only have to voice their political views because a small percentage of the population expects them to. And even then there is only one political view they are allowed to express otherwise it’s not acceptable. The vast majority couldn’t care less. It’s just social media pressure now has created expectation, again from a small percentage of people.

As for using the indigenous jersey means you automatically have to vote yes. That’s nonsense because there is plenty of indigenous figures that are undecided or said they will vote no. Latrell Mitchell and Cody Walker have both said they are undecided, so a blanket statement basically indicating you support indigenous people or not, is a silly place for society to be. However in 2023 we find ourselves here, lacking nuance.

I’m happy for sporting bodies to support human rights issues where it’s pretty clear cut, however this isn’t isn’t either of these.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Why should someone's or a sporting organisation have their beliefs laid on the table?

I didn't like the AFL saying to their clubs that they want them to come to a view on the matter. Why, do the clubs get a vote? It's up to every individual of voting age across the country to come to a view individually and vote accordingly.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Politics and sport have always been intertwined, any idiot who suggests otherwise is underinformed, genuinely privileged (in the proper sense of the word, where background has allowed them to remain benignly ignorant to the reality of negative life circumstances of others) or are hiding something they don't want to have to say.

But from a dirty leftist POV, I don't really care what Rugby Australia does. Coming out this late comparatively, particularly if it avoids any semblance of actually backing it through time, dollars or resources, while better than directly opposing it, is the worst kind of performative behaviour, where they're obviously more concerned about brand impact than actually caring about the outcome.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. So much of it based on marketing and brand building, as opposed to any real concern about the issue at hand. Or that could just be me being cynical.

 

[RugbyReg]

As someone who bordered more in the ‘why should a sporting organisation have a stance on this’ side of things (as per Gee Rob’s article, probably as a hangover from the Folau affair) I really like this messaging from RA.

 

[LeCheese]

As someone who bordered more in the ‘why should a sporting organisation have a stance on this’ side of things (as per Gee Rob’s article, probably as a hangover from the Folau affair) I really like this messaging from Rugby Australia.


View attachment 16041

This is exceptionally well done - kudos to the marketing pigeon.