Sledging: What's acceptable nowadays?

[saintspremiers]

In the wake of this "dob a yob" footy culture we now have, what sort of sledging can be done by players without fear of getting caned by someone?

Clearly, Minson has overstepped the line twice now.

What is fair game?

Interesting to hear the American bloke on Harf Time say that in the US it's still basically open season re sledging, and the culture in sport is different to here.

[Sobraz]

Ask Mick Malthouse...

[Wrote for Luck]

does Eddie Maguire and falafels have anything to do with this?

[PJ]

Sledging is dead...it has to be because unless you can say exactly what is and what is not sledging it's unfair to suspend a player.

[St Chris]

Everything or nothing, it all depends on the victim. And lets not get this confused, Danyle Pearce's Mum is not the victim here. Not until it all became public at least....

Will Minson had every intention to intimidate his opponent, and good on him, because it worked perfectly. I'm tipping Will Minson has never met Danyle's mum, and had no intention of causing any distress or offence to her. Because he could say exactly the same to every opponent every week, and 90% of them will cop it, and give some back. And they will shake hands at the end of the game, and thats it.

He got suspended for using insulting language.....imagine our game if every person, both on the field and off it, got suspended for insulting language??? You'd have about 50 supporters allowed in the gates, and it would be 5-a-side footy.

And before the do-gooders get stuck into it, this is not a racial, or sexist, or religous issue. If Will Minson had walked up to Pearce's Mum and said what he said, fine, throw the book at him, and let him cop the public redicule that goes with it. But what happened on the weekend is no worse to Batchelor (maybe??) from the Tigers, what he was doing to the young bloke from GWS, just rather than a physical test, it was a test between the ears, and Pearce failed miserably.

[SainterK]

Sledging is dead...it has to be because unless you can say exactly what is and what is not sledging it's unfair to suspend a player.

Don't agree with that.

Pretty obvious that sledging involving being disrespectful to women is a no-no.

For a supposed smart guy, he isn't that clever.

[plugger66]

Everything or nothing, it all depends on the victim. And lets not get this confused, Danyle Pearce's Mum is not the victim here. Not until it all became public at least....

Will Minson had every intention to intimidate his opponent, and good on him, because it worked perfectly. I'm tipping Will Minson has never met Danyle's mum, and had no intention of causing any distress or offence to her. Because he could say exactly the same to every opponent every week, and 90% of them will cop it, and give some back. And they will shake hands at the end of the game, and thats it.

He got suspended for using insulting language.....imagine our game if every person, both on the field and off it, got suspended for insulting language??? You'd have about 50 supporters allowed in the gates, and it would be 5-a-side footy.

And before the do-gooders get stuck into it, this is not a racial, or sexist, or religous issue. If Will Minson had walked up to Pearce's Mum and said what he said, fine, throw the book at him, and let him cop the public redicule that goes with it. But what happened on the weekend is no worse to Batchelor (maybe??) from the Tigers, what he was doing to the young bloke from GWS, just rather than a physical test, it was a test between the ears, and Pearce failed miserably.

What a load of crap. There is no need to bring anyones Mum or family into sledging. If you are going to sledge be clever not an arsehole. Minson was an idiot and you sound like one too. So it is alright to racial sledge a mate of an aboriginal person because he wont hear it. Makes no sense and luckily most dont think that way.

[PJ]

I'll ask you this then

Do you teach kids zero tolerence towards any form of ridiculing of others whether that be for wearing specs, being overweight, walking funny, anything that is demeaning and call it bullying - then say we accept that in footy because old codgers have done it for years? Isn't that called double standards? - just asking the question

[SainterK]

Everything or nothing, it all depends on the victim. And lets not get this confused, Danyle Pearce's Mum is not the victim here. Not until it all became public at least....

Will Minson had every intention to intimidate his opponent, and good on him, because it worked perfectly. I'm tipping Will Minson has never met Danyle's mum, and had no intention of causing any distress or offence to her. Because he could say exactly the same to every opponent every week, and 90% of them will cop it, and give some back. And they will shake hands at the end of the game, and thats it.

He got suspended for using insulting language.....imagine our game if every person, both on the field and off it, got suspended for insulting language??? You'd have about 50 supporters allowed in the gates, and it would be 5-a-side footy.

And before the do-gooders get stuck into it, this is not a racial, or sexist, or religous issue. If Will Minson had walked up to Pearce's Mum and said what he said, fine, throw the book at him, and let him cop the public redicule that goes with it. But what happened on the weekend is no worse to Batchelor (maybe??) from the Tigers, what he was doing to the young bloke from GWS, just rather than a physical test, it was a test between the ears, and Pearce failed miserably.

Minson has form, he certainly hasn't come across as clever, and he absolutely didn't win some kind of mind battle.

He has just disgraced himself.

Again.

[PJ]

Sledging is dead...it has to be because unless you can say exactly what is and what is not sledging it's unfair to suspend a player.

Don't agree with that.

Pretty obvious that sledging involving being disrespectful to women is a no-no.

For a supposed smart guy, he isn't that clever.

Why do you draw the line at women K? Who sets the standards what is and what is not acceptable?

[plugger66]

I'll ask you this then

Do you teach kids zero tolerence towards any form of ridiculing of others whether that be for wearing specs, being overweight, walking funny, anything that is demeaning and call it bullying - then say we accept that in footy because old codgers have done it for years? Isn't that called double standards? - just asking the question

Well no one in the AFL would have any problems like that so it wouldnt happen there. It could only happen in either junior footy or local footy. No one in junior footy should ever say things if a person has those issues. Poor parenting if they do. As for local footy well I reckon it is ok because they are are obviously overwright, walk funny or wear glasses. IMO having a go at race, religion or family is different to the other things. By the way we accept a lot of things in footy that you wouldnt in the outside world. Just look at the tribunal charges.

[SainterK]

Sledging is dead...it has to be because unless you can say exactly what is and what is not sledging it's unfair to suspend a player.

Don't agree with that.

Pretty obvious that sledging involving being disrespectful to women is a no-no.

For a supposed smart guy, he isn't that clever.

Why do you draw the line at women K? Who sets the standards what is and what is not acceptable?

I didn't draw the line PJ.

The AFL did, and the players have all come out yesterday and today and said they know it's an absolute no-no.

What's his excuse?

(oh, and let's not forget the McGinnity already was penalised for something similar last year, so I don't buy feigned ignorance)

[Little Dozer]

Minson is a clownshoes but this is ridiculous. What a joke the AFL has become.

[saintspremiers]

Minson is a clownshoes but this is ridiculous. What a joke the AFL has become.

It's all about public image. The AFL want it sanitized and that's what we have.

[joffaboy]

Yeah - whats next?

Not being able to abuse anyone with black skin?

Geez - what a nanny state.

[PJ]

He doesn't have an excuse..... clearly but the bigger question in the OP is sledging and its acceptance or not. I think the problem is that this is an issue about what is acceptable in society, when it crosses onto the footy field the lines get blurred especially when you have an entrenched culture that follows a long held view that what's said on the field stays on the field - well it's not on the field any more.

[plugger66]

Minson is a clownshoes but this is ridiculous. What a joke the AFL has become.

So anything goes then? What is a joke is ignorant people.

[The Redeemer]

Yeah - whats next?

Not being able to abuse anyone with black skin?

Geez - what a nanny state.

Let's just laugh at Danyle Pearce. Just such a softie outsider that would probably not get a game at most other clubs.

Wait on. He has black skin. Am I racist now?

What happens if his mother genuinely is a shithouse person? Does Minson get an apology?

[joffaboy]

Let's just laugh at Danyle Pearce. Just such a softie outsider that would probably not get a game at most other clubs.

Wait on. He has black skin. Am I racist now?

Only if you added you black see you next tuesday to your critisism of him being an outside softie

What happens if his mother genuinely is a shithouse person? Does Minson get an apology?

Subjective and judgemental. None of Minsons business if she is or isn't.

[SainterK]

He doesn't have an excuse..... clearly but the bigger question in the OP is sledging and its acceptance or not. I think the problem is that this is an issue about what is acceptable in society, when it crosses onto the footy field the lines get blurred especially when you have an entrenched culture that follows a long held view that what's said on the field stays on the field - well it's not on the field any more.

What blurred lines PJ?

The line is very clear here, it's been drawn.

[supersaints]

You can still say " I slept with your Sister" .
That's providing it's said to your brother in law......

[The Redeemer]

Let's just laugh at Danyle Pearce. Just such a softie outsider that would probably not get a game at most other clubs.

Wait on. He has black skin. Am I racist now?

Only if you added you black see you next tuesday to your critisism of him being an outside softie

What happens if his mother genuinely is a shithouse person? Does Minson get an apology?

Subjective and judgemental. None of Minsons business if she is or isn't.

When black people call white men 'white fellas' is that racist? or better yet 'white man'?

[Con Gorozidis]

Let's just laugh at Danyle Pearce. Just such a softie outsider that would probably not get a game at most other clubs.

Wait on. He has black skin. Am I racist now?

Only if you added you black see you next tuesday to your critisism of him being an outside softie

What happens if his mother genuinely is a shithouse person? Does Minson get an apology?

Subjective and judgemental. None of Minsons business if she is or isn't.

When black people call white men 'white fellas' is that racist? or better yet 'white man'?

oh god not this again. there is a difference. anyways i aint going there.
where is dr spaceman with is mike moore photo

so what did minson say? 'i porked ur mum' or something? i dont reackon that is bad at all.
as long as it wasnt racist. then who gives a toss. people say that to me all the time!

[joffaboy]

When black people call white men 'white fellas' is that racist? or better yet 'white man'?

Do you think there is a moral equilivent between aboriginals being racially abused and the dominant culture being racially abused?

If you are called a white man that is not racist, but if you are called a white c##t, that is.

There is no room for any type of racism, but there is no moral equilivence.

But I'm not getting into a debate with you on this, it has been done to death and if you think there is an equivelence, people like you dont get their minds changed by forums.

[Austinnn]

As I've said before, the key is not intent, but offense taken. If I call you a nunderflub, that might make you very upset, despite the fact that this word means nothing. Surely then any decent person would stop using this word, based on how upset it makes the target.

Seems a bit like thought crime to you? Consider how you would take this insult to your mother. Let it go or deck the mug that challenged you? What happened in The Old Days if you did start a fight? What happens now?

Perhaps the real issue is that if we ban the natural course of retaliation (which we have essentially in society in general and now on football fields), we have to surely ban the cause of that retaliation. Fair's fair. The other alternative is let a fight break out and let it go and it's all forgotten. Except it's not. It stays in the minds of some victims. Some dwell on it. In some cases it leads to depression, substance abuse (even legal substances like ciggies and booze), maybe a lot worse. HTFU will be some people's reply. Maybe those heroes should meet someone who's been a victim of that kind of abuse. If they are hard enough to tolerate it and live happy, then good on them. But should we expect everyone in our society to be so strong? Survival of the fittest? Are we Spartans? Is this an army? What kind of citizens do we want to be exactly? What kind of society?

No one is banning anyone for thinking, but society now is trying to find ways of discouraging people to upset other people and get away with it.

For example, if Will Minson and Danyele Pierce were sitting in a bar in Bali at 10pm after a few beers and Minson repeated his appraisal of Pierce's mother, he'd most likely be going home in an ambulance. On a football field, with thousands of spectators and a very strict MRC watching every move he makes, Pierce knows full well the consequences of retaliation. So if he can't retaliate in a normal way, does he just have to suck it up and look into Minson's eyes as he taunts him, both of them knowing that he got away with what in normal (in the old days) circumstances would have got him decked?

It's only soft and sanitized if you come at it from an old-school perspective, which is that anything goes, what happens on the field stays on the field. Most people are happy to work like that until they've experienced abuse like that personally. After that you have to ask the question "Why do we tolerate this?" It doesn't seem to do much good to me, apart from making people's skin thicker.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's good to have thick skin, but I think in an era where cameras can read close up what people are saying, and even microphones can pick up some sledging (remember Milne vs Joseph recently?), it probably sets a negative precedent for society. Just like what we've seen with the ban on smoking indoors in public, the less it's tolerated, the less it will happen, and eventually the old dinosaurs that still cling to the old ways will die out and we'll be left with people who are more in tune with the current climate.