Bledisloe I
-
@mariner4life said in Bledisloe I:
@nta said in Bledisloe I:
@mariner4life said in Bledisloe I:
We just don't respect the Wallabies any more. I wonder if the players do?
We had family movie night planned in my house. Wife says "Oh wait the rugby is on..." and I shrugged.
Pro rugby has done fuck all for me or my club. I ran around like a mad bastard to run an amateur club this year so I'm rugby'd out.
I still firmly believe watching Avengers: Infinity War for the second time was a better use of my evening.
The Avengers were in that movie for longer than the Wallabies were in the test for...
Is that a spoiler or is the movie only 41 mins long?
-
@nta said in Bledisloe I:
Pro rugby has done fuck all for me or my club. I ran around like a mad bastard to run an amateur club this year so I'm rugby'd out
That is a far more common story than the ARU want to admit. Add in people saying "i need to pay $35 every time i need to help the club out by playing on the weekend so that Michael Hooper can get his $1.2M per year" and there is a huge feeling of resentment towards the professional arm of the game.
The ARU's complete disregard for grassroots rugby has finally tipped over to complete apathy from those same "stakeholders".
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
@nepia said in Bledisloe I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
@nepia said in Bledisloe I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
@nepia said in Bledisloe I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
@nepia said in Bledisloe I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
@nepia said in Bledisloe I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
@nepia said in Bledisloe I:
I'm not sure why it's a big deal, just don't watch it if you're not interested (like haka and anthems). It's a few minutes out of a nearly 3 hour game and pre match.
Surely the question is why it is necessary and why the ARFU are paying tens of thousands of dollars for something that is pretty awkward for all concerned. Just because it is easily avoided is a pretty ordinary reason for having it there.
It's necessary because the ARU have deemed it necessary - and it's in line with a general trend in Australia in acknowledging the indigenous people(s).
How do you know the ARU paid 10s of thousands of dollars for that?
How does that make it necessary? What bizarre logic.
How much do you actually know about Welcome to Country. They charge big bucks for this "tradition". Look it up.
In Sydney I think they cap it at $400-$600. The local group did it for free at the film school I used to work at as we were an educational institution. The elders who did it when I worked up round M4L's region used to do it for transport and food. I don't know what kind of deal that the ARU has worked out, and I'm happy to be corrected, but 10s of thousands seems high.
Regarding necessary, nothing is necessary before the start of a rugby match (anthems, haka) aside from the players walking out and the whistle blowing for kick off. The point isn't whether it's necessary or not, it's whether the ARU want to have it or not and they appear to want to.
For every home match, I'd say 10s of 1000s is pretty close to the mark. I doubt very much the ARFU is getting a discount. An activist was paid $10,500 just to open parliament in 2013.
Again, so what if the ARU want to? That doesn't make it right or necessary. That is a nothing argument.
So you actually have no idea how much the ARU are paying but speculating based on the opening of parliament in 2013.
I don't know what kind of argument you want, if the ARU want to do it then that's up to them. If they find value in it for them they'll do it. As I said, it's irrelevant if it's necessary or not if the ARU want to do it. I assume the ARU would make the 'argument' that they want to acknowledge the indigenous people of Australia and Welcome to Country is a common way of doing that.
And why would that not be proper evidence to base that assumption on? Are you seriously going to claim that the ARU are getting a discount?
Again, just because the ARU, for whatever reason, has deemed this to be something necessary to have before games does not mean this is something that can't be discussed or disliked. Or is the ARU above reproach on everything and should never be questioned? That's an interesting position to take.
Who has said that?
As for your first point, of course that is not proper evidence, it's was a payment to open parliament in Canberra which isn't a rugby match in Sydney. As I said earlier the fees in Sydney are capped at $600 if the welcome is in Sydney (I think the Metro Aboriginal Land Council are the group that provides it).
You did. Your precise arguments have been (a) don't watch if you don't like and (B) ARU policy therefore has to be accepted. You want to put forward the merits and benefits of WTC then off you go, but the above arguments are quite simply lazy.
With regard to payment, I've shown that much higher fees can be charged. It's one thing to open an office another thing entirely in front of 50k people and a potential audience of millions. I don't think even you believe they are charging mates rates for that.
How on earth are you getting you're not allowed to discuss or dislike it from a) or b)? My precise arguments have not been you're not allowed to discuss it or dislike it.
As for the fees, come up with some actual facts on Welcome to Country at rugby matches in Sydney and I might take you seriously but you're just throwing out numbers at the moment.
Because those are precisely the arguments you've put forward. Do you actually have anything to contribute other than "don't watch" and "ARU decision final"?
Well I guess we're both making assumptions but imho there is more than enough evidence to suggest that the fee is very substantial.
- I guess I have to repeat this, I didn't say you can't dislike or discuss it. Spin it however you like in your head but I haven't said that and in fact you're both discussing it now (and I presume disliking it).
- What else am I expected to contribute? I don't have a problem with the Welcome and as long as the ARU decide they want to have it then there's nothing any of us can do about it other than watch it or ignore it.
- I provided you with a figure from the local Aboriginal body who conduct welcomes in Sydney whereas you've provided one example of a parliament opening from 2012 to justify your wild speculation on the fee.
-
@Nepia I would hope the ARU do not have the attitude that they will do what they want even if fans dislike it, given they are competing with a number of other forms of entertainment. Though TBH they probably do...
I'm 100% with you on the anthems though, scrap that shit.
-
@no-quarter said in Bledisloe I:
@Nepia I would hope the ARU do not have the attitude that they will do what they want even if fans dislike it, given they are competing with a number of other forms of entertainment. Though TBH they probably do...
I'm 100% with you on the anthems though, scrap that shit.
If fans turn off rugby because they don't like Welcome to Country before a test match then that's just frikkin stupid - it's not like the ARU are out on a limb of their own here. The NRL and AFL both have Welcome to Country for big matches.
While I don't like the anthems they're handy for shooting off to the loo, or getting some food, or giving me extra time to get seated before the haka so I probably don't need them to be scrapped.
-
@nepia said in Bledisloe I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
@nepia said in Bledisloe I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
@nepia said in Bledisloe I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
@nepia said in Bledisloe I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
@nepia said in Bledisloe I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
@nepia said in Bledisloe I:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
@nepia said in Bledisloe I:
I'm not sure why it's a big deal, just don't watch it if you're not interested (like haka and anthems). It's a few minutes out of a nearly 3 hour game and pre match.
Surely the question is why it is necessary and why the ARFU are paying tens of thousands of dollars for something that is pretty awkward for all concerned. Just because it is easily avoided is a pretty ordinary reason for having it there.
It's necessary because the ARU have deemed it necessary - and it's in line with a general trend in Australia in acknowledging the indigenous people(s).
How do you know the ARU paid 10s of thousands of dollars for that?
How does that make it necessary? What bizarre logic.
How much do you actually know about Welcome to Country. They charge big bucks for this "tradition". Look it up.
In Sydney I think they cap it at $400-$600. The local group did it for free at the film school I used to work at as we were an educational institution. The elders who did it when I worked up round M4L's region used to do it for transport and food. I don't know what kind of deal that the ARU has worked out, and I'm happy to be corrected, but 10s of thousands seems high.
Regarding necessary, nothing is necessary before the start of a rugby match (anthems, haka) aside from the players walking out and the whistle blowing for kick off. The point isn't whether it's necessary or not, it's whether the ARU want to have it or not and they appear to want to.
For every home match, I'd say 10s of 1000s is pretty close to the mark. I doubt very much the ARFU is getting a discount. An activist was paid $10,500 just to open parliament in 2013.
Again, so what if the ARU want to? That doesn't make it right or necessary. That is a nothing argument.
So you actually have no idea how much the ARU are paying but speculating based on the opening of parliament in 2013.
I don't know what kind of argument you want, if the ARU want to do it then that's up to them. If they find value in it for them they'll do it. As I said, it's irrelevant if it's necessary or not if the ARU want to do it. I assume the ARU would make the 'argument' that they want to acknowledge the indigenous people of Australia and Welcome to Country is a common way of doing that.
And why would that not be proper evidence to base that assumption on? Are you seriously going to claim that the ARU are getting a discount?
Again, just because the ARU, for whatever reason, has deemed this to be something necessary to have before games does not mean this is something that can't be discussed or disliked. Or is the ARU above reproach on everything and should never be questioned? That's an interesting position to take.
Who has said that?
As for your first point, of course that is not proper evidence, it's was a payment to open parliament in Canberra which isn't a rugby match in Sydney. As I said earlier the fees in Sydney are capped at $600 if the welcome is in Sydney (I think the Metro Aboriginal Land Council are the group that provides it).
You did. Your precise arguments have been (a) don't watch if you don't like and (B) ARU policy therefore has to be accepted. You want to put forward the merits and benefits of WTC then off you go, but the above arguments are quite simply lazy.
With regard to payment, I've shown that much higher fees can be charged. It's one thing to open an office another thing entirely in front of 50k people and a potential audience of millions. I don't think even you believe they are charging mates rates for that.
How on earth are you getting you're not allowed to discuss or dislike it from a) or b)? My precise arguments have not been you're not allowed to discuss it or dislike it.
As for the fees, come up with some actual facts on Welcome to Country at rugby matches in Sydney and I might take you seriously but you're just throwing out numbers at the moment.
Because those are precisely the arguments you've put forward. Do you actually have anything to contribute other than "don't watch" and "ARU decision final"?
Well I guess we're both making assumptions but imho there is more than enough evidence to suggest that the fee is very substantial.
- I guess I have to repeat this, I didn't say you can't dislike or discuss it. Spin it however you like in your head but I haven't said that and in fact you're both discussing it now (and I presume disliking it).
- What else am I expected to contribute? I don't have a problem with the Welcome and as long as the ARU decide they want to have it then there's nothing any of us can do about it other than watch it or ignore it.
- I provided you with a figure from the local Aboriginal body who conduct welcomes in Sydney whereas you've provided one example of a parliament opening from 2012 to justify your wild speculation on the fee.
And again I'm telling you that those are pathetically weak arguments that add nothing to the discussion.
Wild speculation? I've proven that huge fees can be charged for this. Do you honestly think that the same fee charged for the opening of a water fountain is the same fee charged for these matches? I don't think you believe that for a second.
-
@Nepia I'm not really arguing against you, I also have no problem with it but it is admittedely pretty awkward, I'd prefer they celebrate their indigenous cultures with a performance.
-
-
@canerbry said in Bledisloe I:
If they could do The Most Australian Thing Ever
before every match, I'd watch it respectfully.I prefer this version I imagine it’s @NTA , @barbarian and @Mick-Gold-Coast-QLD leading a mob to the ARU headquarters.
-
@mariner4life said in Bledisloe I:
grassroots rugby
Premier Rugby clubs say THEY are grassroots, with their million dollar budgets.
Like our politics, it's all echo chamber and self-interest.
-
Why all the angst about fees for performing something? The anthem singers get paid. The band playing the anthem gets paid.
Surely it is up to the ARU if they want to add this cultural aspect and they enter that decision knowing the cost. I don't get how that makes it any more or less worthwhile.
We have a similar situation with Koha in NZ and when using cultural groups abroad. It may seem at odds to our own traditional concepts around value and money but that doesn't, in itself, make it right or wrong. It is just a situation that has to be worked through so the balance of the act is suitable for all parties. Assuming it is about money grabbing is a one sided view IMO.
I also find it all comes across as awkward but again, that is judging it based on my 'norms'. Oratory is different in different cultures and when you think of it, what has become accepted and normal in NZ around Maori aspects would also probably sound very strange if spoken in English. Repititon of words and 'clunky' phrasing that doesn't sound so awkward simply because it is in another language. -
@kiwiinmelb said in Bledisloe I:
Welcome to country is an aboriginal tradition where an elder welcomes visitors to their land .
Doesn’t bother me , actually prefer it to that cheesy waltzing Matilda thing they used to do .
Yeah - sometimes it can be a little "awkward", but I seem to recall some of the people doing it have had a little bit of fun with it. And I'm sure there'll be more entertaining versions of it in the future.
It's certainly less awkward than the thing South Africa has started doing - of bringing some random local "person of some importance", with their heavily, heavily be-jewelled wife, onto the field to shake hands with all the (bemused) players.
Princess Anne doing it for Scotland - I don't mind, but the South-African one seems a little try-hard. -
@kruse said in Bledisloe I:
Yeah - sometimes it can be a little "awkward", but I seem to recall some of the people doing it have had a little bit of fun with it. And I'm sure there'll be more entertaining versions of it in the future.
It's certainly less awkward than the thing South Africa has started doing - of bringing some random local "person of some importance", with their heavily, heavily be-jewelled wife, onto the field to shake hands with all the (bemused) players.
Princess Anne doing it for Scotland - I don't mind, but the South-African one seems a little try-hard.Couldn't agree more - except for the Princess Anne thing.
Just before kick off is NOT the time to introduce players to a VIP, regardless of stature. Why make the world watch and wait??
-
@majorrage said in Bledisloe I:
@kruse said in Bledisloe I:
Yeah - sometimes it can be a little "awkward", but I seem to recall some of the people doing it have had a little bit of fun with it. And I'm sure there'll be more entertaining versions of it in the future.
It's certainly less awkward than the thing South Africa has started doing - of bringing some random local "person of some importance", with their heavily, heavily be-jewelled wife, onto the field to shake hands with all the (bemused) players.
Princess Anne doing it for Scotland - I don't mind, but the South-African one seems a little try-hard.Couldn't agree more - except for the Princess Anne thing.
Just before kick off is NOT the time to introduce players to a VIP, regardless of stature. Why make the world watch and wait??
Irish and their dwarf of a president is even worse. Every bloody test match and a red carpet FFS
-
@wreck-diver said in Bledisloe I:
@majorrage said in Bledisloe I:
@kruse said in Bledisloe I:
Yeah - sometimes it can be a little "awkward", but I seem to recall some of the people doing it have had a little bit of fun with it. And I'm sure there'll be more entertaining versions of it in the future.
It's certainly less awkward than the thing South Africa has started doing - of bringing some random local "person of some importance", with their heavily, heavily be-jewelled wife, onto the field to shake hands with all the (bemused) players.
Princess Anne doing it for Scotland - I don't mind, but the South-African one seems a little try-hard.Couldn't agree more - except for the Princess Anne thing.
Just before kick off is NOT the time to introduce players to a VIP, regardless of stature. Why make the world watch and wait??
Irish and their dwarf of a president is even worse. Every bloody test match and a red carpet FFS
I think the term you are looking for is Leprechaun.
-
@crucial said in Bledisloe I:
Why all the angst about fees for performing something? The anthem singers get paid. The band playing the anthem gets paid.
Surely it is up to the ARU if they want to add this cultural aspect and they enter that decision knowing the cost. I don't get how that makes it any more or less worthwhile.
We have a similar situation with Koha in NZ and when using cultural groups abroad. It may seem at odds to our own traditional concepts around value and money but that doesn't, in itself, make it right or wrong. It is just a situation that has to be worked through so the balance of the act is suitable for all parties. Assuming it is about money grabbing is a one sided view IMO.
I also find it all comes across as awkward but again, that is judging it based on my 'norms'. Oratory is different in different cultures and when you think of it, what has become accepted and normal in NZ around Maori aspects would also probably sound very strange if spoken in English. Repititon of words and 'clunky' phrasing that doesn't sound so awkward simply because it is in another language.The whole point is wasting good money on something that the vast majority of people consider to be something of a farce. Considering their financial woes, the ARU should be county pennies rather than throwing away cash on nonsense like this. Why would that not be something to gripe about?
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
The whole point is wasting good money on something that the vast majority of people consider to be something of a farce. Considering their financial woes, the ARU should be county pennies rather than throwing away cash on nonsense like this. Why would that not be something to gripe about?
Hadn't been in agreement with you at all up until this post, which is a fair point.
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Bledisloe I:
@crucial said in Bledisloe I:
Why all the angst about fees for performing something? The anthem singers get paid. The band playing the anthem gets paid.
Surely it is up to the ARU if they want to add this cultural aspect and they enter that decision knowing the cost. I don't get how that makes it any more or less worthwhile.
We have a similar situation with Koha in NZ and when using cultural groups abroad. It may seem at odds to our own traditional concepts around value and money but that doesn't, in itself, make it right or wrong. It is just a situation that has to be worked through so the balance of the act is suitable for all parties. Assuming it is about money grabbing is a one sided view IMO.
I also find it all comes across as awkward but again, that is judging it based on my 'norms'. Oratory is different in different cultures and when you think of it, what has become accepted and normal in NZ around Maori aspects would also probably sound very strange if spoken in English. Repititon of words and 'clunky' phrasing that doesn't sound so awkward simply because it is in another language.The whole point is wasting good money on something that the vast majority of people consider to be something of a farce. Considering their financial woes, the ARU should be county pennies rather than throwing away cash on nonsense like this. Why would that not be something to gripe about?
Fine argument if you also pull it out when they have some has-been singing Waltzing Matilda. Or providing free yellow flags to fans or hotel rooms to ARU free loaders etc etc
Many would also consider that paying the beady eyed captain $6M is a farce as well.
Being selective in what you term 'nonsense' is what is being questioned.
It's their money and they can choose how they spend it, then answer to those that put them in the position to do so. -
Okay - just started rewatching the game - and actually saw/heard that "Welcome To Country" for the first time (watched the game live at shit venue playing shit music throughout the game - no audio)...
... and yeah, can see why that particular one has raised a "debate". Cringeworthy - a guy not used to public speaking, with zero content other than half-arsed metadata about the Welcome-To-Country.
But when done well... it's a harmless nod to the aboriginal culture, in the form which the aborigines have presumably agreed upon as appropriate - regardless of when it was "invented". In a country where such gestures are long overdue.
Where some love to throw out the ubiquitous term "virtue-signalling", as usual - it can also be described as "just being fucking polite/considerate".
