Slightly bemused that anyone cant see that on balance it would be better if another less potentially controversial skit had been chosen... and that after the media run we've had (justified or otherwise, it's been very ordinary) it would have been prudent of the club to enquire about the skit beforehand... and not look like headless chooks in the aftermath.
No, no one died ('get a life', oh dear.... 'whatever'?), but the incident demonstrates a lack of judgement and effective communication, again.
To me, that's the crux.
St Kilda Performance on Footy Show Review
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
Dr Spaceman
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 14102
- Joined: Thu 24 Sep 2009 11:07pm
- Location: Newtown Institute of Saintology
- Has thanked: 104 times
- Been thanked: 62 times
It's not necessarily one or the other markp.markp wrote:Slightly bemused that anyone cant see that on balance it would be better if another less potentially controversial skit had been chosen... and that after the media run we've had (justified or otherwise, it's been very ordinary) it would have been prudent of the club to enquire about the skit beforehand... and not look like headless chooks in the aftermath.
No, no one died ('get a life', oh dear.... 'whatever'?), but the incident demonstrates a lack of judgement and effective communication, again.
To me, that's the crux.
I for one wish they had shown the good sense to say "no, we are not going to perform that piece." But I also believe that it really wasn't that bad. Or certainly not that bad in the context of the whole revue, which is pretty tasteless anyway. And I say that having watched it again 3 days later after a bit of the hysteria had died down.
Yep, I would have been glad if it had never happened. But it did. And strangely, the only place where it still seems to be being discussed is on this forum.
-
thejiggingsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9373
- Joined: Wed 03 Aug 2005 10:01pm
- Has thanked: 662 times
- Been thanked: 498 times
SPOT-ON Markp! some on here rant on about the (perceived) bias and persecution of us by the media (and Ch9 in particular) and then back those nobheads who went on the footy show skit! 
Really, these guys can't have it both ways, if you put yourselves into the spotlight in the way they did (given all the previous history of this issue) then you're going to cop whatever flak comes with it! DUMB DUMB DUMB!!!!!! 
Really, these guys can't have it both ways, if you put yourselves into the spotlight in the way they did (given all the previous history of this issue) then you're going to cop whatever flak comes with it! DUMB DUMB DUMB!!!!!! St Kilda forever 
( God help me)
( God help me)-
thejiggingsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9373
- Joined: Wed 03 Aug 2005 10:01pm
- Has thanked: 662 times
- Been thanked: 498 times
SPOT-ON Markp! some on here rant on about the (perceived) bias and persecution of us by the media (and Ch9 in particular) and then back those nobheads who went on the footy show skit! Really, these guys can't have it both ways, if you put yourselves into the spotlight in the way they did (given all the previous history of this issue) then you're going to cop whatever flak comes with it! DUMB DUMB DUMB!!!!!!
Really, these guys can't have it both ways, if you put yourselves into the spotlight in the way they did (given all the previous history of this issue) then you're going to cop whatever flak comes with it! DUMB DUMB DUMB!!!!!! St Kilda forever ( God help me)
( God help me)-
thejiggingsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9373
- Joined: Wed 03 Aug 2005 10:01pm
- Has thanked: 662 times
- Been thanked: 498 times
SORRY! about the double-post-
Dr Spaceman
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 14102
- Joined: Thu 24 Sep 2009 11:07pm
- Location: Newtown Institute of Saintology
- Has thanked: 104 times
- Been thanked: 62 times
-
thejiggingsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9373
- Joined: Wed 03 Aug 2005 10:01pm
- Has thanked: 662 times
- Been thanked: 498 times
-
markp
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 15583
- Joined: Mon 26 Mar 2007 4:22pm
- Has thanked: 63 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
I agree with everything except your last sentence.Dr Spaceman wrote:It's not necessarily one or the other markp.markp wrote:Slightly bemused that anyone cant see that on balance it would be better if another less potentially controversial skit had been chosen... and that after the media run we've had (justified or otherwise, it's been very ordinary) it would have been prudent of the club to enquire about the skit beforehand... and not look like headless chooks in the aftermath.
No, no one died ('get a life', oh dear.... 'whatever'?), but the incident demonstrates a lack of judgement and effective communication, again.
To me, that's the crux.
I for one wish they had shown the good sense to say "no, we are not going to perform that piece." But I also believe that it really wasn't that bad. Or certainly not that bad in the context of the whole revue, which is pretty tasteless anyway. And I say that having watched it again 3 days later after a bit of the hysteria had died down.
Yep, I would have been glad if it had never happened. But it did. And strangely, the only place where it still seems to be being discussed is on this forum.
I see in an unrelated article quoted on here today it's being called the footy show stripper fiasco, on ten news I saw it reported as a St Kilda's sleazy dance routine, and on it went and goes... all very preventable.
Do a consumer test and ask people what words they'd associate with the club in light of the routine, or in general over the last couple of years... and ask yourself if you'd want to associate a product of yours with that image.
In isolation the skit is a virtual nothing... in the context of our run over the last couple of years, you've gotta say WTF.
-
Dr Spaceman
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 14102
- Joined: Thu 24 Sep 2009 11:07pm
- Location: Newtown Institute of Saintology
- Has thanked: 104 times
- Been thanked: 62 times
Yeah well I shouldn't have said the only place. But regardless, it has died down a hell of a lot since the first 24 hours and I'm not sure it helps for us to keep going on about it. And in saying that I'm in no way intending to denounce you're right to be really angry at what happened.markp wrote:I agree with everything except your last sentence.Dr Spaceman wrote:It's not necessarily one or the other markp.markp wrote:Slightly bemused that anyone cant see that on balance it would be better if another less potentially controversial skit had been chosen... and that after the media run we've had (justified or otherwise, it's been very ordinary) it would have been prudent of the club to enquire about the skit beforehand... and not look like headless chooks in the aftermath.
No, no one died ('get a life', oh dear.... 'whatever'?), but the incident demonstrates a lack of judgement and effective communication, again.
To me, that's the crux.
I for one wish they had shown the good sense to say "no, we are not going to perform that piece." But I also believe that it really wasn't that bad. Or certainly not that bad in the context of the whole revue, which is pretty tasteless anyway. And I say that having watched it again 3 days later after a bit of the hysteria had died down.
Yep, I would have been glad if it had never happened. But it did. And strangely, the only place where it still seems to be being discussed is on this forum.
I see in an unrelated article quoted on here today it's being called the footy show stripper fiasco, on ten news I saw it reported as a St Kilda's sleazy dance routine, and on it went and goes... all very preventable.
Do a consumer test and ask people what words they'd associate with the club in light of the routine, or in general over the last couple of years... and ask yourself if you'd want to associate a product of yours with that image.
In isolation the skit is a virtual nothing... in the context of our run over the last couple of years, you've gotta say WTF.
Just not sure it helps is all I'm saying.
-
Dr Spaceman
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 14102
- Joined: Thu 24 Sep 2009 11:07pm
- Location: Newtown Institute of Saintology
- Has thanked: 104 times
- Been thanked: 62 times
-
Johnny Member
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4157
- Joined: Thu 05 Oct 2006 12:27pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
I know my opinion doesn't matter, but I reckon this is completely and utterly nothing.
The biggest issue for us is, that we didn't win a flag. When you lose, no matter by how much, all of this totally irrelevant stuff suddenly becomes an issue.
If you win, no one cares.
Last year, Saints and Collingwood players are drinking together in the pre-season. A Collingwood player gets beaten up.
We lose the Granny to Geelong, so the story is 'Saints Players on a 12 Hour Drinking Binge'.
Collingwood of course, go on to the win flag.
Heath Shaw's gambling, Krakouer and Swan's thuggery, Collingwood's attitiude towrdas women (Blair and Beames), Didak, etc. etc. didn't matter cause they won.
Our stuff was nothing compared to what went on there, but we lost. So it did matter.
Now that Collingwood have lost, all their s*** might suddenly become an issue!
The biggest issue for us is, that we didn't win a flag. When you lose, no matter by how much, all of this totally irrelevant stuff suddenly becomes an issue.
If you win, no one cares.
Last year, Saints and Collingwood players are drinking together in the pre-season. A Collingwood player gets beaten up.
We lose the Granny to Geelong, so the story is 'Saints Players on a 12 Hour Drinking Binge'.
Collingwood of course, go on to the win flag.
Heath Shaw's gambling, Krakouer and Swan's thuggery, Collingwood's attitiude towrdas women (Blair and Beames), Didak, etc. etc. didn't matter cause they won.
Our stuff was nothing compared to what went on there, but we lost. So it did matter.
Now that Collingwood have lost, all their s*** might suddenly become an issue!
Last edited by Johnny Member on Tue 04 Oct 2011 11:18am, edited 1 time in total.
-
markp
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 15583
- Joined: Mon 26 Mar 2007 4:22pm
- Has thanked: 63 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Not angry DS, just bemused, and of course it will die down.... my point is it can only add to an already poor perception, and IMO it is further indication that something aint right down there.Dr Spaceman wrote:Yeah well I shouldn't have said the only place. But regardless, it has died down a hell of a lot since the first 24 hours and I'm not sure it helps for us to keep going on about it. And in saying that I'm in no way intending to denounce you're right to be really angry at what happened.markp wrote:I agree with everything except your last sentence.Dr Spaceman wrote:It's not necessarily one or the other markp.markp wrote:Slightly bemused that anyone cant see that on balance it would be better if another less potentially controversial skit had been chosen... and that after the media run we've had (justified or otherwise, it's been very ordinary) it would have been prudent of the club to enquire about the skit beforehand... and not look like headless chooks in the aftermath.
No, no one died ('get a life', oh dear.... 'whatever'?), but the incident demonstrates a lack of judgement and effective communication, again.
To me, that's the crux.
I for one wish they had shown the good sense to say "no, we are not going to perform that piece." But I also believe that it really wasn't that bad. Or certainly not that bad in the context of the whole revue, which is pretty tasteless anyway. And I say that having watched it again 3 days later after a bit of the hysteria had died down.
Yep, I would have been glad if it had never happened. But it did. And strangely, the only place where it still seems to be being discussed is on this forum.
I see in an unrelated article quoted on here today it's being called the footy show stripper fiasco, on ten news I saw it reported as a St Kilda's sleazy dance routine, and on it went and goes... all very preventable.
Do a consumer test and ask people what words they'd associate with the club in light of the routine, or in general over the last couple of years... and ask yourself if you'd want to associate a product of yours with that image.
In isolation the skit is a virtual nothing... in the context of our run over the last couple of years, you've gotta say WTF.
Just not sure it helps is all I'm saying.
I hear rumblings.
-
thejiggingsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9373
- Joined: Wed 03 Aug 2005 10:01pm
- Has thanked: 662 times
- Been thanked: 498 times
You're not the only one it seems.markp wrote:I hear rumblings.
"He also is committed to staying long-term, amid speculation about his future as chief executive"
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/s ... 6157591773
-
thejiggingsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9373
- Joined: Wed 03 Aug 2005 10:01pm
- Has thanked: 662 times
- Been thanked: 498 times
skeptic wrote:I just don't get how rational ppl can see this as an issue
by all reports the whole revue had a rather provocative flavor to it and this was one aspect to it.
if your genuinely offended by this, I think you have a poor balance in your life... it's a non-issue in a world full of serious stuff
is it any more offensive then underbelly on ch9
there's all this poverty and crime and other social issues out there and this is what ppl feel outraged about... a consensual song and dance
the club's not making a statement
ppl need to get some perspective
i agree 100%...although the missus said that the skit objectified women....
...me?...i just get pissed off with ads showing men as pawns or clowns.....it is okay....and gets a belly laugh ..when a woman shoves a man out of a hot air balloon...but would the same pple laugh if it was the woman who got shoved out......of course not.....not in the softcock pc solicialist world we now are forced to live in.....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
-
thejiggingsaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9373
- Joined: Wed 03 Aug 2005 10:01pm
- Has thanked: 662 times
- Been thanked: 498 times
-
barks4eva
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10748
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:39pm
- Has thanked: 190 times
- Been thanked: 92 times
markp wrote:Slightly bemused that anyone cant see that on balance it would be better if another less potentially controversial skit had been chosen... and that after the media run we've had (justified or otherwise, it's been very ordinary) it would have been prudent of the club to enquire about the skit beforehand... and not look like headless chooks in the aftermath.
No, no one died ('get a life', oh dear.... 'whatever'?), but the incident demonstrates a lack of judgement and effective communication, again.
To me, that's the crux.
PRECISELY!
Once again the club goes into damage control!
What it reveals is an administration who are asleep at the wheel 24/7!
Every player review has players in states of undress with scantily clad females!
How on earth the St kilda board did not even bother to inquire as to exactly what the St kilda players would be doing on the FS player review, given the way we have been portrayed in the media is mind boggling in the extreme!
IMO it's all a storm in a teacup about nothing but that's NOT the point!
To the media it's another free hit and to potential SPONSORS it's poison!
How a board can be so naive, stupid, vacuous and incompetent to not be over this BEFORE the event to avoid this even happening in the first place is the real issue!
Now once again like headless chooks the board are in damage control releasing press statements after the event.
This has the potential to cost the club hundreds of thousands of dollars in sponsorship contracts which is the real issue!
Seriously it's ANOTHER clear example of how amateurishly run and how incompetent these clowns are!
It's mystifying that no one on the board would think
St kilda players doing a skit on the FS player review where every year lot's of scantily clad women cavort with players in states of undress
perhaps we should inquire to see what they are actually doing given the sensitivities with how the club has been portrayed in the media in recent times and our need to acquire new sponsors
You'd reckon, surely!!!!!!!!!!
Another **** up by the board and could potentially cost the club hundreds of thousands of sponsorship dollars!
It's mind boggling in the extreme that would once again they react after the event rather than take action before it!
Asleep at the wheel 24/7!
-
dragit
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13047
- Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2010 11:56am
- Has thanked: 605 times
- Been thanked: 315 times
You really have no idea if you think 'the Board' should be involved in approving media appearances.barks4eva wrote:markp wrote:Slightly bemused that anyone cant see that on balance it would be better if another less potentially controversial skit had been chosen... and that after the media run we've had (justified or otherwise, it's been very ordinary) it would have been prudent of the club to enquire about the skit beforehand... and not look like headless chooks in the aftermath.
No, no one died ('get a life', oh dear.... 'whatever'?), but the incident demonstrates a lack of judgement and effective communication, again.
To me, that's the crux.
PRECISELY!
Once again the club goes into damage control!
What it reveals is an administration who are asleep at the wheel 24/7!
Every player review has players in states of undress with scantily clad females!
How on earth the St kilda board did not even bother to inquire as to exactly what the St kilda players would be doing on the FS player review, given the way we have been portrayed in the media is mind boggling in the extreme!
IMO it's all a storm in a teacup about nothing but that's NOT the point!
To the media it's another free hit and to potential SPONSORS it's poison!
How a board can be so naive, stupid, vacuous and incompetent to not be over this BEFORE the event to avoid this even happening in the first place is the real issue!
Now once again like headless chooks the board are in damage control releasing press statements after the event.
This has the potential to cost the club hundreds of thousands of dollars in sponsorship contracts which is the real issue!
Seriously it's ANOTHER clear example of how amateurishly run and how incompetent these clowns are!
It's mystifying that no one on the board would think
St kilda players doing a skit on the FS player review where every year lot's of scantily clad women cavort with players in states of undress
perhaps we should inquire to see what they are actually doing given the sensitivities with how the club has been portrayed in the media in recent times and our need to acquire new sponsors
You'd reckon, surely!!!!!!!!!!
Another **** up by the board and could potentially cost the club hundreds of thousands of sponsorship dollars!
It's mind boggling in the extreme that would once again they react after the event rather than take action before it!
Asleep at the wheel 24/7!
You think Eddie & Gary Pert read the run-sheet of Before the Game every time a Collingwood player appears?
The only way the board are at fault here is if they have employed the wrong people in the Communications department… even that would be the job of HR, not the board…
-
dragit
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13047
- Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2010 11:56am
- Has thanked: 605 times
- Been thanked: 315 times
If they aren't doing 'their jobs' properly, then they need to be replaced with people who can…markp wrote:Who's responsible for them?dragit wrote:As I said earlier, there are people responsible for media and it's not the CEO.
Seriously, blame these guys…
Communications
Kimberley Gardiner General Manager - Communications
Michael Artup Marketing Manager
Joc O'Connell Communications Coordinator
You don't sack the head coach when a runner causes a free during a game…