I think we are on totally different pages then.
Pride at his indigenous heritage and celebration at having scored a goal.
Ignore it. We see athletes perform all manner of victory celebrations all the time - taking their shirts off, performing acrobatics, boxing with the penalty flag, Jorge Lorenzo's astronaut routine, the highly-orchestrsted comedy bits that make highlight reels, and so on and so forth. None of them are subject to the treatment Goodes gets - even in matches with fierce rivalry and strong fanbases, like the Wanderers and the Red and Black Bloc versus Sydney FC and the Cove - but as soon as Goodes introduces his indigenous heritage to his victory routine, it's suddenly fair game.
There is a difference when you celebrate right infront of the opposing teams fanbase, you will get booed when you do it but it isn't anything real negative. It is just a normal reaction when the opponent rubs their success in your face. Goodes took it too personally because of how he was celebrating (even though it wouldn't make a difference to be booing if he didn't do the indigenous celebration) and made a fuss which led us to here.
Only if you assume that they're deliberately being antagonistic. Do you know where all of thise Collingwood supporters sit? Behind the Collingwood goals. So what is Goodes supposed to do - stop play to run to the opposing end of the pitch to celebrate, then run back to position so play can resume?
And booing him because of his indigenous heritage is not within reason.
There is no fine line between Goodes and Kyrgios. Given what Kyrgios did to Wawrinka, there is a Berlin Wall between him and Goodes.
I teach in a school with some pretty high academic outcomes, so students rarely complain about any of the staff.
No, there's a whole pattern of behind-the-scenes stuff that I do before deciding a course of action. Students may get the benefit of the doubt for isolated incidents, but that doesn't mean that the incidents go ignored or unaddressed. Because over time, a pattern starts to emerge. And in the case of Adam Goodes, that pattern was established eighteen months ago when Collingwood supporters booed him every time he scored - and Goodes wasn't doing his war dance. The latest incidents are just an extension of that.
The Victim isn't always innocent but
I won't deny that there is some people who boo who are racist but that isn't anything new.
If a woman is assaulted and then blamed for it, it's a form of sexism. If an indigenous person is abused abd then blamed for it, it is racism. RESHIRAM5 abandoned the stance that his criticism of Goodes was justified, and blatantly stated that he brought it on himself. He blamed the victim, and is therefore racist.
I fail to see how you can justify it has having "no reference to race", given that the situation he blamed Goodes for repeatedly putting himself into was a celebration of his indigenous heritage and therefore intrinsically linked to race.
Oh, I do grasp the difference. And in this case, I am fully convinced that Goodes has not been abused "for acting like a douche", but because of his indigenous background.
I'm not talking about How he Celebrated but Who he was Celebrating to. As you can see him purposely going up and antagonising the opposing fans. I'm not saying you can or cannot antagonize the crowd but not expecting to be Booed is very ignorant.
It doesn't happen in any other sport. I have been to plenty of Wanderers games and I have never heard it. There might be isolated incidents of it, sure, but do you know how many people need to be booing for it to be audible? Lots.
From someone who watches WWE, I can tell you that it happens and mostly happens when the guy is seen as either overrated or a douche to some people
Obviously but it doesn't make it any different than any sport when it comes to the fans.
A little bit True, the "actors" have to make sure that they are entertaining to the audience so they get pushed higher and main event things by the WWE but like other sports WWE can make poor decisions on who to promote
I don't even know how people wanted Abbot in power, in the first place.
Because they lost confidence in Labor following the carbon tax (though bear in mind when he was in opposition, he blocked an Emissions Trading Scheme, knowing that it would force Gillard to introduce the carbon tax). That was Abbott's fundamental error; he assumed that people voted for him because they wanted a Liberal government when they really voted for him because he was the lesser evil. Too much of his political energy has been spent demonising his opponents, which might be effective in the short term, but is unsustainable in the long. His government has the single worst track record for passing legislation in our history, and he has achieved nothing of note since repealing the carbon tax. Under his watch, we abuse asylum seekers, target the Muslim community as a threat to national security, force the weak and vulnerable to shoulder the burden of the budget while the rich get generous offsets, abuse the Royal Commission system to target political opponents, insist that Coal Is The Only Future, have had a speaker who was blatantly and brazenly biased, and have pissed the likes of Indonesia and Russia for no good reason. And all the while we get the catch phrases of "we're a good, responsible government" and "it's Labor's fault!" rammed down our throats at every opportunity. It probably doesn't help that the cabinet is full of the most unlikeable personalities in Morrison, Pyne, Dutton and Bronwyn Bishop.
