The persecution of Robert Muir is the story football doesn't want to hear

[Daughter of the West]

Re: The persecution of Robert Muir is the story football doesn't want to hear

For those interested,

A colleague and I wrote about Muir and the systemic racism in the AFL and associated media industry here.

Thank you RT, I appreciate you sharing that.

You've got it in a nutshell with the "gaffe, apologise, repeat" cycle, Eddie Maguire being first case in point.

[GVGjr]

Re: The persecution of Robert Muir is the story football doesn't want to hear

For those interested,

A colleague and I wrote about Muir and the systemic racism in the AFL and associated media industry here.

Thanks for that RT, I must admit Muir was an opposition player I really watched and enjoyed because I liked his pace, kicking abilities, tackling and endurance and I was blissfully unaware of the challenges he was facing as an indigenous player.
He was a really good player to watch especially if I blank out some of the reportable efforts over the years.

I've been moved by his story and I was clearly not attuned to what was really going on when he was playing. We've come a long way but gee there is a lot more to be done.

Really appreciate you adding the link so many thanks.

[Bornadog]

Re: The persecution of Robert Muir is the story football doesn't want to hear

For those interested,

A colleague and I wrote about Muir and the systemic racism in the AFL and associated media industry here.

The attacks continue online with various players vilified over the past few weeks.

From The Age: Demand to tackle online racism after attacks on footy stars

[Rocket Science]

Re: The persecution of Robert Muir is the story football doesn't want to hear

Reminder it was barely a month ago that Newman, Don Scott & industry doyen Mike Sheehan sat around pissing on the legacy of Nicky Winmar and the broader significance of his statement and what was that Gillon? Oh, nothing? As you were.

You can only assume they pulled their heads in after some soft diplomacy behind the scenes but a more vocal public stance from the league would help stamp this shit out, even if they have to embarrass a few mates in the process. In fact, all the better.

[jeemak]

Re: The persecution of Robert Muir is the story football doesn't want to hear

How's Mick Malthouse from the linked article:

“Don’t forget this is the 1970s and I still think that Robbie lived up to that name,” Malthouse said on Saturday.
“I think he was quite happy with that name. I question that he questioned it. It served him well to get recognised. He never said to me ever that he was upset by the nickname because we never discussed it.
“He may well have been, but it wasn’t something to discuss. That was a public name, and I think in the end he tried to live up to that name.”
Malthouse also claimed Collingwood legend Lou Richards was the first to call Muir “Mad Dog”, which contradicts his teammate’s recollections — the 66-year-old asserted St Kilda great Kevin Neale gave him the nickname in the ABC feature.
“When he was nicknamed ‘Mad Dog Muir’, that was basically Lou Richards,” Malthouse said.
“Lou wouldn’t have had any intent to hurt. It was just Mad Dog Muir. I never knew him as that. It was always ‘Robbie’.
“But he picked up that nickname. I think Robbie tried to live by that name. And that’s a shame. It really wrecked his ability to say ‘I was a good footballer’. He was a very good footballer.”

I mean words fail me. I get people being tone deaf, but good grief.

Thanks RT, great writing.

[Raw Toast]

Re: The persecution of Robert Muir is the story football doesn't want to hear

Reminder it was barely a month ago that Newman, Don Scott & industry doyen Mike Sheehan sat around pissing on the legacy of Nicky Winmar and the broader significance of his statement and what was that Gillon? Oh, nothing? As you were.

You can only assume they pulled their heads in after some soft diplomacy behind the scenes but a more vocal public stance from the league would help stamp this shit out, even if they have to embarrass a few mates in the process. In fact, all the better.

Gillon was indeed way too quiet (as were the other White AFL Execs), but what really lead them to pull their heads in was Winmar and Wayne Ludbey (one of the photographers of that image) initiating legal action against Newman, Sheahan, and Scott.

That's what lead to Newman making a very rare formal written apology, largely acknowledging that what they had said was 'racially discriminatory' (you can see the apology here).

They also paid out $100,000 (plus court costs).

But nevertheless, Newman gets to continue doing his stuff, so does Sheahan, and the AFL fails another test of leadership.

[jeemak]

Re: The persecution of Robert Muir is the story football doesn't want to hear

Gillon was indeed way too quiet (as were the other White AFL Execs), but what really lead them to pull their heads in was Winmar and Wayne Ludbey (one of the photographers of that image) initiating legal action against Newman, Sheahan, and Scott.

That's what lead to Newman making a very rare formal written apology, largely acknowledging that what they had said was 'racially discriminatory' (you can see the apology here).

They also paid out $100,000 (plus court costs).

But nevertheless, Newman gets to continue doing his stuff, so does Sheahan, and the AFL fails another test of leadership.

The good thing is I think the tide is slowly turning and common public perception is following. It's just that these guys have a disproportionate level of access to the megaphone cabinet, and that's what really needs to change.

If you look at Alan Jones and his radio show, or whatever the creep is doing now, most reasonable people don't agree with him but they're not represented and he is. It's a bit like Bolt etc. The platform they're given just ensures click or read inches over a cost threshold and represents cream to the media platforms on which they're publicised.

It won't be too long until these arsehats are gone, just need to play the long game unfortunately.

[comrade]

Re: The persecution of Robert Muir is the story football doesn't want to hear

How's Mick Malthouse from the linked article:

“Don’t forget this is the 1970s and I still think that Robbie lived up to that name,” Malthouse said on Saturday.
“I think he was quite happy with that name. I question that he questioned it. It served him well to get recognised. He never said to me ever that he was upset by the nickname because we never discussed it.
“He may well have been, but it wasn’t something to discuss. That was a public name, and I think in the end he tried to live up to that name.”
Malthouse also claimed Collingwood legend Lou Richards was the first to call Muir “Mad Dog”, which contradicts his teammate’s recollections — the 66-year-old asserted St Kilda great Kevin Neale gave him the nickname in the ABC feature.
“When he was nicknamed ‘Mad Dog Muir’, that was basically Lou Richards,” Malthouse said.
“Lou wouldn’t have had any intent to hurt. It was just Mad Dog Muir. I never knew him as that. It was always ‘Robbie’.
“But he picked up that nickname. I think Robbie tried to live by that name. And that’s a shame. It really wrecked his ability to say ‘I was a good footballer’. He was a very good footballer.”

I mean words fail me. I get people being tone deaf, but good grief.

Thanks RT, great writing.

Geez, way to read the room Mick.

[Happy Days]

Re: The persecution of Robert Muir is the story football doesn't want to hear

Geez, way to read the room Mick.

Finey on Footyology told a story about how Malthouse was the only guy at St Kilda when Muir was starting out that did anything to help him, or even was friendly to him, and used to give him a lift in from Ballarat to training and to games. I imagine hearing that from Mick would have been particularly hurtful.

[merantau]

Re: The persecution of Robert Muir is the story football doesn't want to hear

How's Mick Malthouse from the linked article:

“Don’t forget this is the 1970s and I still think that Robbie lived up to that name,” Malthouse said on Saturday.
“I think he was quite happy with that name. I question that he questioned it. It served him well to get recognised. He never said to me ever that he was upset by the nickname because we never discussed it.
“He may well have been, but it wasn’t something to discuss. That was a public name, and I think in the end he tried to live up to that name.”
Malthouse also claimed Collingwood legend Lou Richards was the first to call Muir “Mad Dog”, which contradicts his teammate’s recollections — the 66-year-old asserted St Kilda great Kevin Neale gave him the nickname in the ABC feature.
“When he was nicknamed ‘Mad Dog Muir’, that was basically Lou Richards,” Malthouse said.
“Lou wouldn’t have had any intent to hurt. It was just Mad Dog Muir. I never knew him as that. It was always ‘Robbie’.
“But he picked up that nickname. I think Robbie tried to live by that name. And that’s a shame. It really wrecked his ability to say ‘I was a good footballer’. He was a very good footballer.”

I mean words fail me. I get people being tone deaf, but good grief.

Thanks RT, great writing.

The "Cone of Silence" only works one way for Mick. We can hear what you say but you can't, or refuse to, hear anything anyone else is saying.