#15 Josh Green - delisted

[wimmera1]

I’m getting old.
Too old to be calling anyone who puts in a preseason of AFL football soft or lazy.
Especially a kid, and while there’s something weird in me that says all AFL players are older than me and always will be, a far larger part recognises that just about All of them are kids from my perspective.

I’m still gonna get annoyed when opposition players don’t play in what I consider to be the spirit of the game (I’m even…close to ashamed…when one of ours does it).
But I’ll never call them weak, or uncommitted, or anything like that.
I can’t.
It just doesn’t seem right coming from a fat old ■■■■■■■ sitting on the couch.

[cul_de_sac]

You’re always going on about a slew of multiple accounts. I sure there’s a few, but I would have thought they were mostly joke/parody accounts, like Heather Mills. What are you basing this notion on?

[Killer_Mike]

The media say far worse things and to a far greater audience than any Internet forum or social media person can say. Only difference is that for the players to get paid they know the media are necessary evil.

If the players really don’t like what they read then just don’t read it. But I’m guessing they like the money.

[HarryJay]

And to me this last point is the key - it’s not what you intended with your booing that’s important, but how it was received.

It is kind of key to me as well, but in the exact opposite way.
Too often people are taken to task because the inference taken to a comment by the hearer, is different to what the implication was intended to be by the speaker.
The speaker should not be held responsible for a listener misinterpreting his meaning.

[saladin]

Yeah nah. The media can be utter ■■■■■■, but they don’t come close to some of the rancid stuff that social media is plagued by.

This place isn’t too bad. Relatively, of course.

[Killer_Mike]

The media are utter garbage and obviously reach far more people.

[stir_fried_ewok]

You’re always going on about a slew of multiple accounts. I sure there’s a few, but I would have thought they were mostly joke/parody accounts

Spot on. All my aliases are joke/parody accounts ie wimmera, henry’sangryballs, noondog_10, deck’em and all usernames with ant or SMJ in 'em. They’re all mine. And baccusfox too.

[Deckham]

Nothing hard. Maybe just delusion. There are patterns I recognise. I’m probably wrong.

[Lance84]

People should be able to have their faith and not influence at footy.

Saad/Houli have never had many issues with the crowd.

People didn’t boo Ablett because he’s religious. Nobody gives a ■■■■ about that. They did it because he liked a homophobic post on social media (and because he’s Gary Ablett). It’s as good a reason as any to boo somebody and it caught on. The reason cats supporters didn’t (if they didn’t) is because they’re cats supporters.

[Deckham]

At least spell my ■■■■■■■ name right for ■■■■’s sake.

[efc1robbo]

Meh, who cares if Ablett is being booed.

The more they make a big deal of it, the more people will join in

Geelong people having a sook? What else is new

[Deckham]

Wheatly…

[Lance84]

Meh, who cares if Ablett is being booed.

The more they make a big deal of it, the more people will join in

Geelong people having a sook? What else is new

I couldn’t care less. Whether you think he did anything wrong or not, somebody in his position should know better.

[wimmera1]

Religious people need to accept that some people will consider them suggesting that they deserve an eternity of unbearable torture somewhat rude.

[Humbert_Humbert]

And to me this last point is the key - it’s not what you intended with your booing that’s important, but how it was received.

It is kind of key to me as well, but in the exact opposite way.
Too often people are taken to task because the inference taken to a comment by the hearer, is different to what the implication was intended to be by the speaker.
The speaker should not be held responsible for a listener misinterpreting his meaning.

I think if you’ve made a reasonable effort to clearly communicate your message then you shouldn’t be taken to task if the receiver misinterprets it. Which is definitely not the situation when tens of thousands of people boo one man.

[saladin]

Religious people need to accept that some people will consider them suggesting that they deserve an eternity of unbearable torture somewhat rude.

Perfectly true, but it would have been the last thing I’d have been thinking about were I heading to that game.

I just figured Hawthorn fans don’t like Ablett for historical football reasons . I’m really surprised if him liking a tweet generated mass booing.

[Lance84]

I just figured Hawthorn fans don’t like Ablett for historical football reasons .

It could be the case. This time they had a PC reason to go about harassing him.

[cul_de_sac]

The media say far worse things and to a far greater audience than any Internet forum or social media person can say. Only difference is that for the players to get paid they know the media are necessary evil.

If the players really don’t like what they read then just don’t read it. But I’m guessing they like the money.

Even if that were true how does that excuse anyone’s behaviour? You can’t absolve someone of responsibility for their own actions just because someone else may have done something worse independently.

Regardless of wether they’re done in person or online, people need to take ownership of their own actions

[wimmera1]

Who knows what moves the masses?
It seems odd to have just sprung up now.
Perhaps all people needed was an excuse.

I wouldn’t boo Ablett.
Now, Selwood…

[Henry_s_Angry_Pills]

It shouldn’t be too much to ask to just keep in mind these are real people. I believe you’ve suffered mental health problems, and I know I have. It should go without saying you can’t ever tell what people are going through.