NRL 2020
-
@antipodean said in NRL 2020:
This is already good marketing for Rashays. I didn't know they were a chain (have walked past their Darling Harbour restaurant) and thought they were Indian place. Now I know they're a chain and they're not an Indian restaurant.
I'd never heard of them before this. They've certainly got their money's worth.
If not for the Darling Harbour one I would be the same and to be quite frank I only noticed it because they had a pretty maitre' D.
-
how good. one of the blokes also plowed a teacher from another school he met on a separate visit. loves Port Maquarrie!
-
@mariner4life just loves giving back and is passionate about education 😁 sex ed that is!
-
@antipodean said in NRL 2020:
I don’t see why any reasonable contract wouldn’t have a clause about behavior that negatively reflects on the brand (association) that led to them sponsoring the club.
I should imagine any sponsor involved with the NRL has that clause automatically inserted by the NRL these days.
Yep, exactly.
I should add that I don't really see why a company that promotes this:
The Sydney restaurant chain changing lives through true inclusion
Australian family-owned restaurant brand Rashays Casual Dining recently announced that it is working towards making each of its 22 restaurants deaf-friendly by 2019, rolling out the initiative
is going to the NRL with sponsorship and not expecting trouble, but the conspiracy theorist in me thinks that from a branding perspective for the restaurant, it's kind of a win-win or at least there is some risk hedge, because if there are no problems the sponsorship deal puts your brand in front of people all over, but if it does go wrong, you can pull out, recoup some investment if you structure the contract the right way, and get lots of free press about being on the right side of things - strengthening your brand positioning.
Although they had been their sponsor for quite some time now(hadn't they?) This was all about renewal??
From the link above:
Schoolgirl sex scandal costs Bulldogs new $2 million sponsorship
Canterbury were just hours away from announcing a new major sponsor and even had jerseys made.
The Bulldogs were on the verge of announcing the two-year deal on Tuesday night, having agreed to terms with Rashays after long-time sponsor Kia left the club for the Brisbane Broncos this year.
-
@antipodean said in NRL 2020:
I don’t see why any reasonable contract wouldn’t have a clause about behavior that negatively reflects on the brand (association) that led to them sponsoring the club.
I should imagine any sponsor involved with the NRL has that clause automatically inserted by the NRL these days.
Yep, exactly.
I should add that I don't really see why a company that promotes this:
Australian family-owned restaurant brand Rashays Casual Dining recently announced that it is working towards making each of its 22 restaurants deaf-friendly by 2019, rolling out the initiative
is going to the NRL with sponsorship and not expecting trouble, but the conspiracy theorist in me thinks that from a branding perspective for the restaurant, it's kind of a win-win or at least there is some risk hedge, because if there are no problems the sponsorship deal puts your brand in front of people all over, but if it does go wrong, you can pull out, recoup some investment if you structure the contract the right way, and get lots of free press about being on the right side of things - strengthening your brand positioning.
Although they had been their sponsor for quite some time now(hadn't they?) This was all about renewal??
From the link above:
Canterbury were just hours away from announcing a new major sponsor and even had jerseys made.
The Bulldogs were on the verge of announcing the two-year deal on Tuesday night, having agreed to terms with Rashays after long-time sponsor Kia left the club for the Brisbane Broncos this year.
Sweet
Just not main sponsor. Been with the club since 2014
Rashays had first joined the Bulldogs as a sponsor in 2014 under Raelene Castle and Ray Dib's leadership.
-
-
not guilty your honour!!! she flat out told me what was up, with a wink! my penis can't fight that kind of mind control!
-
@mariner4life :smiling_face_with_open_mouth_closed_eyes:
-
After the hilarity of yesterday, the season begins tonight with the Eels and the Dogs
In a great piece of news for the Warriors, RTS is actually still in doubt. FML
Any predictions for the year?
I would love for a breakup of the Roosters/Storm stranglehold. My problem is the teams best placed to do that are the Raiders (fuck Ricky Stuart) and Manly (fuck Manly, and fuck Des Hasler). I also hope Bennett and the Rabbits fall in a heap. And the Sharks collapse.
I think i could handle the Eels doing well. And the Tigers (pffft hahaha). Obviously the Cowboys (i will actually make an effort and go down to check out their new stadium). Pretty much everyone else can die in a fire.
Oh, and in the first real shock, guess which club doesn't have a single 5-day turnaround? One of only 2?
-
@mariner4life said in NRL 2020:
Oh, and in the first real shock, guess which club doesn't have a single 5-day turnaround? One of only 2?
Broncos and Warriors?
-
so close, but you picked the wrong deadbeat team. The Titans the other one.
As if the NRL would ever flick the Warriors a bone
-
@mariner4life said in NRL 2020:
A remarkable uproar for a story with no victim.
Nobody was hurt, ( quite the opposite), except, I guess, the sensibilities of sponsors and the public.
The lads will be severely punished for jeopardizing an income stream, with no weeping victim to show for it all.
-
Game 1 of the season was a fizzer. Defense was okay, attack was piss poor. Eels win 8-2 with a 65th minute try
Only funny thing was the introduction of the "captain's challenge", and it was predicatbly a joke. Footballers are too fucking dumb to use this properly. The Eels wasted theirs when a prop convinced the captain it wasn't dropped, it was stripped. In a huge shock, that wasn't overturned. Everyone LOLed at the Eels for being fucking idiots and wasting it on at best a 50/50.
The Dogs then said "hold my beer" and used it on a play where they dropped the ball, it got shunted around by both teams, and all i can imagine was, they hoped there was no vision of them knocking it on. There was. Shane Watson applauded the TV on both occasions.
-
A remarkable uproar for a story with no victim.
Nobody was hurt, ( quite the opposite), except, I guess, the sensibilities of sponsors and the public.
The lads will be severely punished for jeopardizing an income stream, with no weeping victim to show for it all.Siam,
"the lads" have effortlessly done some further "
jeopardizing an income stream" cutting the guts out of a vital financial sponsorship, the biggest the Club has, by pissing all over yet another:“(local construction company) MPA were recently notified by Canterbury Bulldogs management of the off-field allegations relating to two Bulldogs players,” MPA said in a statement.
“As a result, MPA terminated our sponsorship agreement with the Canterbury Bulldogs on Wednesday, which was a high performance partnership with the coaching team.
“We are disappointed that circumstances have required this action, however it is imperative that the values we strive for are reflected in the organisations we choose to align with.”
Look, really, you are right, nobody important was hurt - "the lads" each jagged a root or two and their contract payments come from an ATM after all. What's not to like?
And no, the Club bar staff and cleaners can't claim to be "weeping victims" when they get fewer shifts because supporters have fallen away. They were going to end up with less work because of the corona virus anyway.
People who don't agree are being over-sensitive - yes, most assuredly. .... cash strapped parents of teenage girls who pay for their admission tickets, school principals who decline the offer next year, morals na z is, former club captains on walking sticks with rickety voices who are old and know nought of the modern world, volunteers who now find better things to do, families that set standards not by reference to statutes and regulations but by their own expectations (how dare they!) young mothers who are about to decide what young Siam's going to play next year who suddenly do a 180 and start googling "soccer".
It's amusing alright.
Canterbury-Bankstown RLFC is $2 million plus worse off this Friday, with poorer future prospects, than it was last Friday and the reason why is crystal clear.
-
Broncos look good taking care of the Cowboys.
-
@Mick-Gold-Coast-QLD said in NRL 2020:
A remarkable uproar for a story with no victim.
Nobody was hurt, ( quite the opposite), except, I guess, the sensibilities of sponsors and the public.
The lads will be severely punished for jeopardizing an income stream, with no weeping victim to show for it all.Siam,
"the lads" have effortlessly done some further "
jeopardizing an income stream" cutting the guts out of a vital financial sponsorship, the biggest the Club has, by pissing all over yet another:“(local construction company) MPA were recently notified by Canterbury Bulldogs management of the off-field allegations relating to two Bulldogs players,” MPA said in a statement.
“As a result, MPA terminated our sponsorship agreement with the Canterbury Bulldogs on Wednesday, which was a high performance partnership with the coaching team.
“We are disappointed that circumstances have required this action, however it is imperative that the values we strive for are reflected in the organisations we choose to align with.”
Look, really, you are right, nobody important was hurt - "the lads" each jagged a root or two and their contract payments come from an ATM after all. What's not to like?
And no, the Club bar staff and cleaners can't claim to be "weeping victims" when they get fewer shifts because supporters have fallen away. They were going to end up with less work because of the corona virus anyway.
People who don't agree are being over-sensitive - yes, most assuredly. .... cash strapped parents of teenage girls who pay for their admission tickets, school principals who decline the offer next year, morals na z is, former club captains on walking sticks with rickety voices who are old and know nought of the modern world, volunteers who now find better things to do, families that set standards not by reference to statutes and regulations but by their own expectations (how dare they!) young mothers who are about to decide what young Siam's going to play next year who suddenly do a 180 and start googling "soccer".
It's amusing alright.
Canterbury-Bankstown RLFC is $2 million plus worse off this Friday, with poorer future prospects, than it was last Friday and the reason why is crystal clear.
Cheers Mick. A good portrayal of the situation.
But this one intrigues me mate because it's the first "scandal" that has the girls in the driver's seat. They held the power. They were exercising their rights as independent sexual beings able to hold dominion over their own bodies, urges and desires - all backed up by the law and empowering women ideologies of the day. The moment that lass replied "you" to an innocent question, the whole dynamic changed
Let's not patronize or misogynise by removing all agency from the legal age young women in this story and portray them as demure waifs sitting in the corner while the men and adults discuss what to do with the vile rascal boys. To deny or omit the girl's input to this is blatantly sexist
I think it's great that the girls got what they wanted, all power to them. Everybody had a law abiding good time and nobody was hurt. A fine scenario for sex in a modern world.
So what do we have to get all "tut tut" over?
There's no sexual assault or lack of consent.
It's the words "school girls" isn't it?
Two 16 year old female tradie apprentices don't get the same story.
We've judged the boys primarily on the group identity of: NRL thugs who have a history of Rape and sexual assault.
We've judged the girls as vulnerable children with little agency, whose innocence and chastity must be maintained .
Neither is fair or realistic, but that's how the identity religion works. You're not an autonomous individual living within society's laws, you're an NRL rich, privileged potential rapist.
You're not a resourceful sexually active (for longer than your mother knows) young woman learning how to leverage the technology of the modern day, you're an impressionable virgin to be coddled and saved from voracious boys...until you marry, then you can have at it.
Again, who got hurt? What crime against humanity, if not the law?
2 young people fucking. Same as all over the real (not on a device screen) world. Everyday.
Yet sponsors, administrators, social and political commentators will implore that there's been a breach of values and if this behaviour isn't sternly stomped on then, well, all of society is doomed.
You see, so much of the wokeness and virtual signalling of our time relies on all of us forgetting or not believing in the things we know to be true about the world and life.
We have to deny that we know 14, 15 and 16 year olds are sexually active, and actually on the whole fuck like rabbits if presented with an opportunity. Always have.
We acknowledge that women have choices now, - for sure, good - but scurry backwards and pretend these girls didn't.It's a dangerous religion this virtuosity at all costst and in this case normal behaviour has induced a flurry of virtuosity that's completely ruinous to all parties except the supposedly most aggrieved- the sponsors. Yes those pure and respectful donators to the game who, with their magnanimous millions, are the cornerstone of every sporting contest and code.
The sponsors. Ever important. The first point of any sporting decision.
And what displays of leadership and conduct do the sponsors demonstrate during a scandal?
Well, they routinely stand on a pulpit, diss and lecture all and sundry, then after making enough " statements" they withdraw their money, double that windfall with the free publicity and then point to two sparsely educated athletes in their early twenties and declare "It's all those fluffybunnies fault!!" before storming out of the room (and de-stresses by visiting his favourite porn website...). Leaving a fucken big mess for everyone else to clean up.
And we nod and mutter, jolly good show to that behaviour??
All because we can tenuously attach the word schoolgirl to an occasion where 4 young people had consensual sex.
At least call it what it is; those boys will be punished for breaking corporate laws, not legal or moral ones.
I get why they'll be done over and I accept that it'll be called " team rules". But it's a paper thin principle and it's predicated on us all forgetting what we know about the world and nodding obediently.
No decent club volunteer would ditch the boys for this one Mick 😉👍
-
Siam – I am ever so fortunate having three daughters to advise me over the years on topical social practices for their generation (and they had the grand benefit of the protection of their older brother and his First XV mates at their co-educational Catholic college). I would advise any parent to place their children in such a school for their final two years, so that they get to work out with the opposite sex which way is up before they are let loose into an exciting, satisfying, rewarding, disappointing and dangerous world.
Putting together what my children told me with my observations of the younger generations around the nightclubs of Orchid Avenue in Surfers Paradise I could be alarmed or disgusted or despairing but that would be pointless, unproductive. More often than not one must see things as they are and work from there.
That is what they do, that is the modern culture. A man would be a fool to stride in and bellow “Stop it once!” and expect anyone to pay any attention.
I have no illusions about the sweet innocence of young females and their need for special protection – I was schooled long ago, by my lot, that they are as predatory as the males. We had a spate of drink spiking here on the Gold Coast about fifteen years ago. An ambulanceman mate revealed the local hospital’s most brisk weekend trade was built on drugs and alcohol, young missy needed an excuse when daddy came to collect her and the little known phenomenon of drink spiking was effective camouflage.
A parent has up to fifteen years to shape their children’s values and attitudes. After that you get to exercise influence at the margin, to hang onto your seat during the bumpy ride for five years or so and to hope madly for the best.
If you are lucky they emerge in their early twenties as responsible and impressive young adults on their way to success - if you are lucky! Later on the reward comes at you in waves, when you find yourself surrounded by thoughtful, generous, loving and protective adults for whom family is all. I will be replaced by (a carefully trained) No 2 daughter as family head and they will all succeed (mostly) and fail as they will. That follows my own experience, when the eldest - my sister - took the reins when my father died.
I will digress – you never stop learning. I am reminded of a story I read about the impressive Tana Umaga suggesting to the wise Sir Graham that belligerent speeches were unproductive, that the players were switching off as soon as he started his delivery. Good on Tana for having the foresight and confidence to step forward and all credit to the oracle for realising he was going down the wrong path and changing that.
Anyhow, my post commented only on the commercial realities, as distasteful as they may be, and nothing else.
