Complaint of racial abuse in Roosters v Broncos

[Vlad59]

'All those types of words are used': Leniu says racial slurs are common, as Thurston hits out at ban

Spencer Leniu says racial slurs are common among players of diverse backgrounds, as NRL legend Johnathan Thurston hits out at Leniu's eight week ban.

www.abc.net.au

Leniu decides to bring the game into further disrepute claiming racial slurs are common. Thurston states he should have got a 12 week suspension. I’m with Thurston. As for Leniu, just shut up, take your medicine and learn.

 

[Woody90]

Umm this could be worded a lot better. It reads like you believe AFL players should be racially abused.

you know that’s not what I meant.

 

[Vlad59]

Ok. Well what you are raising here are social issues, which is a different topic. I was talking about legal issues. I'm happy to talk about social issues . Let's look at facts. Are indigenous people second class citizens or sub human? The answer to that is no! It's as simple as that. So why does a simple word ie "monkey" trigger this response in them? It must be because somewhere in their psyche they are not entirely convinced of being equal with others. Aha! We've stumbled on the root cause. They need to fix that hole in their psyche so that a simple word doesn't hurt them anymore.

You are a sick ignorant little puppy

 

[Vlad59]

you know that’s not what I meant.

Good luck arguing with this know all

 

[Nutz]

The question I answered was "what would happen if a white person got called a monkey" or something like that.

I just gave an example of exactly that happening. I'm aware it's due to red hair which is why it is mostly limited to white people.

Don't get upset mate, it was the wrong example that's all, but I know what you meant.
The main issue here is name calling.
Australia historically are name callers by nature. It was developed from being oppressed by British rule since the first settlement where resentment had a lot to do with it.
Convicts to Australia had arrived with their own "Flash Language" which had a lot of insults to it to talk behind authorities back and to get away with it so to speak.
If someone called you a Danna: human or other excrement, you would obviously be totally offended. People these days wouldn't know what it meant, which is a good thing
As it got relaxed over time jibes became an Aussie thing... friendly gests.
But it can go too far.
Even sledging in cricket/sport can be borderline offensive.
Name calling or being branded as you alluded to goes both ways or even between two similar ethnic groups.
The answer is...be nice and don't brand people.

 

[Woody90]

Yeah so Pearce was hard done by.

I agree Leniu needed to be punished but saying he has destroyed all the work in inclusiveness the NRL has done the last 10 years is hyperbolic garbage.

Like f**k me, he used a slur on the field, a bad one sure but he hasn't lead a lynch mob in the street.

I don’t think Pearce was hard done by. I was arguing your point that that’s no way Leniu deserved the same length suspension. You’d no doubt feel differently if you supported a different team.

No not a lynch mob in the street but take a look at social media since this has kicked off. Thousands of comments from people saying they’re standing with Leniu and that Ezra (or worse indigenous people in general) is a soft cock for speaking up about racism. No Leniu isn’t responsible for the shit other people have posted or said, but if he doesn’t racially abuse another player and then carry on like a f**kwit after this doesn’t happen.

Fair punishment. The NRL had no choice. Like I said could have been longer.

 

[Bazal]

Players no doubt say derogatory things to each other all the time during play. It's accepted. It's the psychological warfare that goes on during play. Society and the game have taken a stand that within these parameters you can't say anything racist or homophobic or anything against someone's religion.

The question is whether calling someone a monkey is racist and you can't prove that it is. A monkey is simply a member of the animal kingdom. It's no different than calling someone a horse or a fish or a seal.

The only person who knows whether it was intended to be racist is Spencer Leniu. We can't hook his brain up to a computer to see what he was thinking, so all you can do is ask him. He said emphatically that he didn't mean it to be racist. So we have to believe him. We've got no proof to the contrary. Therefore he should have been found innocent.

Now really what should happen is for the Roosters to sue the judiciary for defamation of character because they are calling Leniu a liar without any proof.

Wow. This post is dumb enough to have been made in the Eels forum.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Your last two posts have been excellent.

Most of my schooling years, I lived in two rural areas. Area 1 was pretty much as right wing as it gets. No person of colour in sight. I am a person of colour and did make some friends there. But, there was very much a "that dark guy is diff" feel with quite a few of the kids there. The town pretty much had that same attitude.

I moved to Area 2 which was a poorer rural area but much better in terms of how people treated people of colour. I enjoyed life there a lot more. The interesting thing is over time, Area 1 has received an absolute influx of dark-skinned people from various backgrounds which I think the long-time locals of that area would probably be absolutely hating.

Over my lifetime, I agree with you that institution-wise, Australia has moved forwards in leaps and bounds from the 80s. It may not seem like it, but I do believe as a result, some people would have moved with the times and adopted minor to major improvements in their attitudes towards race. Last week has certainly shown us that there is still a way to go in travelling down that road. I applaud the NRL for taking the steps they did this week to show its players that being a racist just does not fly if you want to continue to be part of the sport. It won't filter down to everybody in the wider community....but it will filter down to some that we need to be better to each other.

Are you sure it was your skin that people in area 1 looked at you differently and not your mustard pants?

 

[Thatwasnthighref]

'All those types of words are used': Leniu says racial slurs are common, as Thurston hits out at ban

Spencer Leniu says racial slurs are common among players of diverse backgrounds, as NRL legend Johnathan Thurston hits out at Leniu's eight week ban.

www.abc.net.au

Leniu decides to bring the game into further disrepute claiming racial slurs are common. Thurston states he should have got a 12 week suspension. I’m with Thurston. As for Leniu, just shut up, take your medicine and learn.

Did you read the article or just the headline? It simply quoted what he stated at the judiciary. Whether right or wrong he's entitled to present his case.

As for the cultural education the Roosters are rolling out for their club, it appears the NRL counsel could do with some himself. I'd imagine knowing a person's correct name and ethnicity would be a good start for understanding someone's culture.

 

[Vlad59]

Did you read the article or just the headline? It simply quoted what he stated at the judiciary. Whether right or wrong he's entitled to present his case.

As for the cultural education the Roosters are rolling out for their club, it appears the NRL counsel could do with some himself. I'd imagine knowing a person's correct name and ethnicity would be a good start for understanding someone's culture.

Yes I read the article and I think a defence that taints the whole game is a piss poor effort and rather than mitigation, it is excuse making.

 

[Thatwasnthighref]

Yes I read the article and I think a defence that taints the whole game is a piss poor effort and rather than mitigation, it is excuse making.

If it's true - which is a matter of opinion of course, but has been corroborated to some extent by another player - then it's not excuse making, it's simply stating facts.

And it's shining a light on something that needs to be highlighted if we want it to stop. No matter how ugly it may seem.

 

[Iamback]

Yes I read the article and I think a defence that taints the whole game is a piss poor effort and rather than mitigation, it is excuse making.

Not if it is true but, Another player who has had limited interaction with Leinu.

Who is from a complete different area then Leinu, Hell isn't even Samoan.

Has confirmed the same story, With zero to gain from doing so

 

[Vlad59]

If it's true - which is a matter of opinion of course, but has been corroborated to some extent by another player - then it's not excuse making, it's simply stating facts.

And it's shining a light on something that needs to be highlighted if we want it to stop. No matter how ugly it may seem.

So the place to take a stand after calling a player a monkey is at the tribunal? Self interest mate.

 

[Captain Apollo]

'All those types of words are used': Leniu says racial slurs are common, as Thurston hits out at ban

Spencer Leniu says racial slurs are common among players of diverse backgrounds, as NRL legend Johnathan Thurston hits out at Leniu's eight week ban.

www.abc.net.au

Leniu decides to bring the game into further disrepute claiming racial slurs are common. Thurston states he should have got a 12 week suspension. I’m with Thurston. As for Leniu, just shut up, take your medicine and learn.

You going to tell this player to shut up too? He's not Leniu and doesn't really know him, but he makes a point that it is more common than people want to acknowledge -

‘Called coconut many times’: Manly star’s shock defence of Leniu after monster ban

‘Called coconut many times’: Manly star’s shock defence of Leniu after monster ban

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[Thatwasnthighref]

So the place to take a stand after calling a player a monkey is at the tribunal? Self interest mate.

Presenting facts - as everyone sees them - is the very essence of any judiciary process.

You may not like it but unless you're suggesting someone accused of something doesnt have the right to present their case, you're stuck with it.

 

[Vlad59]

Presenting facts - as everyone sees them - is the very essence of any judiciary process.

You may not like it but unless you're suggesting someone accused of something doesnt have the right to present their case, you're stuck with it.

Thanks for this advice. I appeared in Commonwealth Tribunals for 20 years so yes I get it. And what I get is this. He’s tried to mitigate his claim by stating that this offence happens regularly by others. That is not a fact as you call it. It’s a piss poor attempt at excuse making. In doing so he has potentially maligned the reputation of other players as a defence for his own actions. At no stage did I suggest he should not present a case. Don’t make stuff up. What I’m suggesting is that he do so without throwing mud at others who cannot respond. Every other player is implicated by his statement. If you think that is a reasonable thing to do then that’s fine.

 

[Bazal]

Thanks for this advice. I appeared in Commonwealth Tribunals for 20 years so yes I get it. And what I get is this. He’s tried to mitigate his claim by stating that this offence happens regularly by others. That is not a fact as you call it. It’s a piss poor attempt at excuse making. In doing so he has potentially maligned the reputation of other players as a defence for his own actions. At no stage did I suggest he should not present a case. Do don’t make stuff up. What I’m suggesting is that he do so without throwing mud at others who cannot respond. Every other player is implicated by his statement. If you think that is a reasonable thing to do then that’s fine.

Oh? Which ones? I currently work for a Commonwealth tribunal. Obvs won't say which on here given how much shitposting I do

But whether it's something agree with, Leniu's comments are a pretty standard addition here. It actually does go to mitigation in many cases too. But that will be a function of each jurisdiction.

 

[Vlad59]

Oh? Which ones? I currently work for a Commonwealth tribunal. Obvs won't say which on here given how much shitposting I do

But whether it's something agree with, Leniu's comments are a pretty standard addition here. It actually does go to mitigation in many cases too. But that will be a function of each jurisdiction.

I’m retired from that work. AAT, Human Rights Commission. Worked at the old SSAT (which was a joke). At the AAT I was in the Social Security Division. Great days and great work. finished up early 2000s.

 

[soc123_au]

So the place to take a stand after calling a player a monkey is at the tribunal? Self interest mate.

So you are saying Spencer has never copped that kind of abuse on the footy field? I dont see it as an excuse, but it does go some way in making sense of how he initially reacted when the complaint against him was made.

 

[Thatwasnthighref]

Thanks for this advice. I appeared in Commonwealth Tribunals for 20 years so yes I get it. And what I get is this. He’s tried to mitigate his claim by stating that this offence happens regularly by others. That is not a fact as you call it. It’s a piss poor attempt at excuse making. In doing so he has potentially maligned the reputation of other players as a defence for his own actions. At no stage did I suggest he should not present a case. Do don’t make stuff up. What I’m suggesting is that he do so without throwing mud at others who cannot respond. Every other player is implicated by his statement. If you think that is a reasonable thing to do then that’s fine.

In the context of a judicial hearing, yes it is reasonable. In fact its expected. May not like it or agree with it, but that doesnt make it unreasonable. If you've appeared in proceedings before you'd know defence counsels do exactly this when arguing proportionality.