Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
saintspremiers wrote:What right do TV networks have filming members of the public up close without their authorization?
Isn't this a privacy issue?
It seems that anyone sitting near the boundary that gets animated is fair game for a close up TV shot and possible humiliation by the public but worse by those the person knows.
Will someone's employment be effected due to them being caught on camera doing something perfectally legal but not "a good look" like yelling (non racially/sexist etc) at a player???
Well one example that would appear to contradict your thoughts, would be that woman from the Collignwood game that gave Milne a hard time. Admit we all had a good time laughing at her and her over the top behaviour. Should someone sought her permission before those shots were telecast? Ditto for any close ups of anyybody who comes in for a close up such as the footy or any other sport. How on earth would you get them all to sign disclaimers?
Having said that from now on in, the girl's face should be pixilated as she is still a minor and requires legal and privacy protection.
Sobraz wrote:As much as I can't stand him, thought Eddie was terrific in that impromptu post match interview.. Good on him..
It's called damage Control...he knows as well as anyone how feral and unstable his supporter base is and quite frankly I can't see him fixing the problem.
He won't fix the problem becasue that is the basis of his marketing campaigns withe the whole "Them vs Us" image.
I applaud Eddie for going into the swans' rooms and apologising. Now, perhaps next time Collingwood plays St.Kilda, he finds the courage and sense of outrage that will drive him to enter the Saints' rooms and apologise to Stephen Milne for the vile and disgusting actions of his former senior coach and the most identifiable section of his supporter group, the cheer squad, for the persistent and outrageous vilification of a man who committed no crime.
I started with nothing and I've got most of it left!
Adam Goodes@adamroy37
Just received a phone call from a young girl apologizing for her actions. Lets support her please
#racismitstopswithme #IndigenousRound
Enrico_Misso wrote:Goodes was perfectly entitled to point out the lone "lady" with the offensive comment to an official for them to take action.
But bursting into tears - spare me!
My appoligies folks, I was trying to say what Enrico said, that the bursting into tears was a bit over the top. It was not my intention to condone racism.
Fair Enough Toy Saint. Did Goodes burst into tears? Didn't know that.
saintbrat wrote:Adam Goodes@adamroy37
Just received a phone call from a young girl apologizing for her actions. Lets support her please
#racismitstopswithme #IndigenousRound
I read that tag as "racism, its tops with me"
Goodes is a great role model, what a man.
Gehrig emerged from scans yesterday saying he was "as sweet as a bun"
saintspremiers wrote:What right do TV networks have filming members of the public up close without their authorization?
Isn't this a privacy issue?
It seems that anyone sitting near the boundary that gets animated is fair game for a close up TV shot and possible humiliation by the public but worse by those the person knows.
Will someone's employment be effected due to them being caught on camera doing something perfectally legal but not "a good look" like yelling (non racially/sexist etc) at a player???
Well one example that would appear to contradict your thoughts, would be that woman from the Collignwood game that gave Milne a hard time. Admit we all had a good time laughing at her and her over the top behaviour. Should someone sought her permission before those shots were telecast? Ditto for any close ups of anyybody who comes in for a close up such as the footy or any other sport. How on earth would you get them all to sign disclaimers?
Having said that from now on in, the girl's face should be pixilated as she is still a minor and requires legal and privacy protection.
Perhaps if this woman was not made out to be some sort of "star" appearing on footy shows and made an example for what she was, then last night would never of happened. That woman was a disgrace that night, no one has the right to hang over the fence and abuse someone who is trying to do their job. It looked disgraceful that night and if it had of been anyone else but milney, people would have been upset.
I learned alot last night, watching Goodes down in the rooms was shattering to say the least. Learn your lesson young girl, and learn respect for people. The fence does not protect you from your mouth
Half the problem is the media swinging the cameras onto the crowd. Not just Pie fans, although they seem to provide the best material of what you would want to avoid, so stop giving these morons their five minutes of fame. This may in some small way take away part of the motivation to act like feral foul mouthed lunatics. I watch the footy for the footy , not for a window into some kind of tribal freak show that would be at home in medieval England.
Rugby League would have to be the stupidest, most moronic and over rated game of all time.
What was absurd was 5 minutes later security came and asked, I assume mum, to come with them too. You'd think mum would have gone with her in the first place! "Just wanna watch the last bit Shaniqua, I'll pick you up from security later"!
Thanks for your support mum!
I was above the incident but out of ear shot.
TB 1 - The Brightest Light on the Darkest Night - we miss you.
Think Globally, Act Sainterly
I have Phil Narkle's helmet
saintspremiers wrote:What right do TV networks have filming members of the public up close without their authorization?
Isn't this a privacy issue?
It seems that anyone sitting near the boundary that gets animated is fair game for a close up TV shot and possible humiliation by the public but worse by those the person knows.
Will someone's employment be effected due to them being caught on camera doing something perfectally legal but not "a good look" like yelling (non racially/sexist etc) at a player???
Well one example that would appear to contradict your thoughts, would be that woman from the Collignwood game that gave Milne a hard time. Admit we all had a good time laughing at her and her over the top behaviour. Should someone sought her permission before those shots were telecast? Ditto for any close ups of anyybody who comes in for a close up such as the footy or any other sport. How on earth would you get them all to sign disclaimers?
Having said that from now on in, the girl's face should be pixilated as she is still a minor and requires legal and privacy protection.
How about this for an idea...
Don't act like a complete f***wit in a public space...
Everyone knows the games are recorded and telecast, it's not a spy camera catching you off guard.
What gives anyone the right to verbally abuse and scream at other people?
People go on about the loud music & betting odds ruining the game... but personally it's the adults acting like abusive toddlers that turns me off, especially if children are to be taken.
saintspremiers wrote:What right do TV networks have filming members of the public up close without their authorization?
Isn't this a privacy issue?
It seems that anyone sitting near the boundary that gets animated is fair game for a close up TV shot and possible humiliation by the public but worse by those the person knows.
Will someone's employment be effected due to them being caught on camera doing something perfectally legal but not "a good look" like yelling (non racially/sexist etc) at a player???
Well one example that would appear to contradict your thoughts, would be that woman from the Collignwood game that gave Milne a hard time. Admit we all had a good time laughing at her and her over the top behaviour. Should someone sought her permission before those shots were telecast? Ditto for any close ups of anyybody who comes in for a close up such as the footy or any other sport. How on earth would you get them all to sign disclaimers?
Having said that from now on in, the girl's face should be pixilated as she is still a minor and requires legal and privacy protection.
you'd think you would forfeit your rights to privacy by doing something so public. and it's not like you don't know it's on tv.
