Field Theory by Hadyn Green

Read Post

Field Theory: Not doing enough

32 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

  • Deborah,

    Because in New Zealand two things are at the top of the stats: rugby and domestic violence. This is NZR’s chance to start defeating one with the other.

    We will know that the wider New Zealand community is starting to treat domestic violence as serious crime when an All Blacks player, or a Super Whatever-Number-It-Is player, donates his man of the match award to Women's Refuge.

    New Lynn • Since Nov 2006 • 1445 posts Report Reply

  • Hadyn Green, in reply to Deborah,

    When New Zealanders realise that David Pocock is a better man than any of the All Blacks

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 2090 posts Report Reply

  • simon g,

    I have a vague memory of Auckland or the Blues having some connection or appeal alongside Women's Refuge in the 1990's. Google hasn't helped, as it was back in the Lost Time before t'internet.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1321 posts Report Reply

  • Moz,

    team hiring the stripper

    Kinda saddens me that she still has to talk about all the amazing non-stripping things strippers do, in the hope that more people might agree that stripping is a job people do. Perhaps if those people also agreed that playing sport is also a job people do, and they're all people too? Worshipping one set while denigrating the other doesn't help anyone.

    Deborah, it'd possibly be more meaningful if after the next assault is reported the rest of the team gave their match fees to refuge. "we are not like him" is a powerful message. Can't bring myself to write "if there's...", it's when.

    Sydney, West Island • Since Nov 2006 • 1198 posts Report Reply

  • Ben Cragg,

    It maddens me that this seems to have been reduced to "they shouldn't have hired a stripper" and "how else would you expect them to behave". They should be able to hire a stripper, and treat them like a human being. I see nothing wrong with them hiring a stripper - I see a massive problem in their behaviour, and the infuriating "boys will be boys" attitude about it.

    Auckland • Since May 2011 • 9 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22754 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford, in reply to Ben Cragg,

    I see nothing wrong with them hiring a stripper – I see a massive problem in their behaviour, and the infuriating “boys will be boys” attitude about it.

    They themselves are also hired entertainment. Ive heard Rugby called “the mongrel sport that gentlemen like to watch”.

    There is also a bigger picture here, that’s bigger than the All Blacks donating things to Women’s refuge.

    I am at present, the technition that's working on a sculpture for Womens refuge. The artist is being sponsored buy a spring making company in south Auckland. And we all take lots of things seriously. And I can say with confidence, none of the team give a fuck about what sort of PR stunts the All Blacks do. Like I say, there’s a bigger sociological picture than that, to stand back and see.

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4311 posts Report Reply

  • izogi,

    This morning, RNZ seems to be reporting "the New Zealand Rugby said those claims were contradicted by independent witnesses not connected to the team".

    Is that actually true? All I've noticed reported directly, and in the press conference, is the word "unsubstantiated" or similar. To me there's a significant difference between "unsubstantiated" and "contradicted".

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to izogi,

    difference between “unsubstantiated” and “contradicted”.

    I suspect the problem also lies with the apparent 'transubstantiation' that occurs when immature dickheads are elevated to Super Rugby franchises...

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7889 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to izogi,

    Is that actually true? All I’ve noticed reported directly, and in the press conference, is the word “unsubstantiated” or similar. To me there’s a significant difference between “unsubstantiated” and “contradicted”.

    Yes, that distinction was made clear on Morning Report today. The whole thing reeks.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22754 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Attachment

    The Chiefs' self-serving, point-avoiding statement.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22754 posts Report Reply

  • Hadyn Green, in reply to Russell Brown,

    The Chiefs’ self-serving, point-avoiding statement.

    “the players have collectively accepted responsibility” – why? There are some big name players in the Chiefs who can, quite rightly, say they don’t want to be part of this. Sam Cane, Sonny Bill Williams, Brodie Retallick all now have a “black mark” on their records for something they didn’t do (I hope).

    Good players suffer the consequences when bad players do something like this. And for some stupid “unwritten code” or other steaming pile of bullshit.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 2090 posts Report Reply

  • linger, in reply to Hadyn Green,

    “Collective responsibility” doesn’t mean they all actively participated – more that nobody in the room spoke out and stopped this.

    Tokyo • Since Apr 2007 • 1889 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford, in reply to Hadyn Green,

    “the players have collectively accepted responsibility” – why?

    It’s becouse they are a commercial operation, super rugby isn’t actualy real. It’s all pretend, just like some aspects of the sex industry.

    Atlantis • Since Nov 2006 • 4311 posts Report Reply

  • Hadyn Green, in reply to linger,

    “Collective responsibility” doesn’t mean they all actively participated – more that nobody in the room spoke out and stopped this.

    By taking inaction they all did something. Deciding not to act is an action.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 2090 posts Report Reply

  • simon g,

    Many of the comments on this Stuff piece make for unpleasant reading, but they also illustrate why the rugby authorities have acted as they have. In short, they believe they know their audience:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/opinion/84023421/the-chiefs-stripper-saga-is-over-but-what-next-for-scarlette

    As with all matters of spin (political, corporate, etc), the "shut down, move on" tactic relies on public/media attention waning, and then the backlash ("bor-ing!"). It's morally stunted, but all too often it works.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1321 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to linger,

    “Collective responsibility” doesn’t mean they all actively participated – more that nobody in the room spoke out and stopped this.

    Yah. It's the refined term for "we'll all band together and protect each other so they can't assume any of us were clearly responsible". But I suppose they're "officially" talking about the collective acceptance they all apparently had for the designated straw man of celebrating with strippers, and not about the activities that allegedly occurred when that was happening.

    Many of the comments on this Stuff piece

    That's a shame. Stuff really shouldn't be enabling comments on this sort of issue on its own website, unless it's going to be serious about moderation and fact-checking of what people write. If people want to have a pub discussion of unverified hearsay and opinion about sexual assault (allegations etc), they can easily go to the pub, or to facebook, or to any other random place on the internet. Better that than directly underneath a story from a media outlet to which masses of people look for reliable information.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

  • linger, in reply to Hadyn Green,

    Deciding not to act is an action.

    Which was my point, too. There wouldn't be a need for after-the-fact "collective responsibility" PR (extending well beyond those present, which I think was your criticism of it?), or "not like us" messaging, if anyone had just sent a more timely "Don't be a dick" message in the moment.

    Tokyo • Since Apr 2007 • 1889 posts Report Reply

  • Euan Mason,

    Who were the “independent” witnesses who claimed that the stripper was not groped by Chiefs players? In what sense were they “independent”? Did they observe her the entire time? Why would a professional stripper tell stories about groping if it did not happen? She would have everything to lose by lying.

    The NZR “verdict” has all the hallmarks of a self-serving whitewash.

    Canterbury • Since Jul 2008 • 258 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Good luck getting female-focused sponsorship like My Food Bag for unrepentant thugby, writes Dita De Boni.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19686 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Euan Mason,

    Who were the “independent” witnesses who claimed that the stripper was not groped by Chiefs players?

    As if there was anyone there who was not connected to them. #pffft

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19686 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Jesus.

    Laura, the woman who came forward to say she'd suffered similar treatment to Scarlette at the Chiefs' function last year asked to speak to the internal inquiry and was ignored.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22754 posts Report Reply

  • Bevan,

    They might call themselves the Chiefs, but they sure don't act like it ..

    Wellington • Since Sep 2013 • 16 posts Report Reply

  • Hadyn Green,

    Update: NZR got back to me and said the formal citation “goes on their record – so is counted if anything similar happens again”. I have asked what ‘similar’ means

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 2090 posts Report Reply

  • izogi,

    Also as RNZ has pointed out this morning, some of the allegations of Scarlette were never actually aired by media.

    Consequently if NZR's lawyer didn't even interview her until after everyone else, it's hardly possible they could have quizzed other witnesses about all of the allegations. If it were not already obvious, NZR clearly set out for this to be a media damage control exercise, and not a genuine investigation.

    As nobody's yet mentioned it here, here's the open letter to the NZ Rugby Management and Board Members: http://www.loverugbyrespectwomen.org.nz/


    Eliota Fuimaono-Sapolu also had some great things to say this morning about problems with NZ culture around this stuff.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.