Pocock Arrested

[fatprop]

So is the problem some a professional sportsman using his/her profile for political activism in itself or what this protest was about?

Or is it only OK if you agree with the sentiment?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

The problem is breaking the law.
I happen to agree with the sentiment.

 

[fatprop]

The problem is breaking the law.
I happen to agree with the sentiment.

Without protest and "breaking the law" many rights would never arrived to the oppressed minorities

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Without protest and "breaking the law" many rights would never arrived to the oppressed minorities

You can protest without breaking the law.
If enough people agree with you, you can change the law.
Taking the law into your own hands presupposes that those hands are smarter and better informed than all the other hands into which the law could be taken.
And i say this despite my admiration for anarchy.

 

[fatprop]

You can protest without breaking the law.
If enough people agree with you, you can change the law.
Taking the law into your own hands presupposes that those hands are smarter and better informed than all the other hands into which the law could be taken.
And i say this despite my admiration for anarchy.

But the evidence doesn't back that up, do you think without protest the Vietnam war would have stopped as quickly as it did? Would African Americans gained civil rights without active protest?

Personally I have little problem with peaceful protests and peaceful civil disobedience, even on matters that I may disagree on their wants, I see it as a healthy way to gain attention

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Guess it depends on your view of "peaceful".
I wouldn't have thought that the struggle for civil rights in the US peaceful.
Trespassing is not peaceful by my definition because if you have the right to trespass why shouldn't the land owner have the right to eject you using whatever process he/she or it thinks is appropriate? Shooting perhaps?
Would you deplore that - if so, why? If not then we operate on different value sets.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Guess it depends on your view of "peaceful".
I wouldn't have thought that the struggle for civil rights in the US peaceful.
Trespassing is not peaceful by my definition because if you have the right to trespass why shouldn't the land owner have the right to eject you using whatever process he/she or it thinks is appropriate? Shooting perhaps?
Would you deplore that - if so, why? If not then we operate on different value sets.

Its a state forest. We are the land owners

 

[Braveheart81]

I don't really see this as being an issue for either Pocock or the ARU after happening once.

I certainly don't think Pocock can chance it happening again though. Then it will become an issue.

Pocock is too public a figure and his public figure is too intrinsically linked with the ARU for his actions not to reflect on the ARU.

If it happens again it very much looks like the ARU promoting civil disobedience.

 

[Grandmaster Flash]

I mean we'd all rather he become a mouthpiece for CSG, shack up with Alan Jones, and sell his soul to the highest bidder but some people just aren't built that way. A crying shame.

Bizarrely The Parrot is actually anti-CSG, maybe the mining companies haven't kicked in enough advertising or comment on 2GB.

Good on Pocock for standing up for something he believes in, but he will have to tread a very fine line after this.

 

[vidiot]

Trespassing is not peaceful by my definition because if you have the right to trespass why shouldn't the land owner have the right to eject you using whatever process he/she or it thinks is appropriate? Shooting perhaps?
Would you deplore that - if so, why? If not then we operate on different value sets.

I'm generally not in favour of shooting people (unless perhaps it is the only way to prevent imminent and serious harm to others from their actions).

I'd prefer to play something soothing on my banjo.

 

[Froggy]

Don't really have a problem with Pocock's action, although protests that break the law can be a tricky thing.
So many protests that start out with a peacefull intent finish up escalating to property damage, and even violence. It becomes a matter of, which laws are we happy for people to break? Dangerous ground. If we have laws we are comfortable for people to break, we really should be changing the laws.
And those who quote the achievments of protests in the past, remember that many of them, Vietnam marches etc, were actually perfectly legal.
Again, I don't believe Pocock's actions should have any effect on his rugby career, but do have problems with 'break the law so long as I agree with the reason'. The ends justify the means can be a slippery slope, and has been used to justify all sorts of atrocities in the past.

 

[Ignoto]

Trespassing is not peaceful by my definition because if you have the right to trespass why shouldn't the land owner have the right to eject you using whatever process he/she or it thinks is appropriate? Shooting perhaps?
Would you deplore that - if so, why? If not then we operate on different value sets.

Thankfully over here there's a requirement of a reasonable response when it comes to trespassers. So you and the courts and parliament operate on different value sets so you'll probably want to re-asses your actions if someone ever walks on your front lawn.

 

[Bobby Sands]

Not sure what other type of conscience there is, but the answer is "No". I suspect that if you can't see for yourself why then no amount of explaining on my part will bring you to understanding, but I'll try - once.
Civil disobedience brings the game into disrepute.
he can go and earn money, if that's his motivation, in France or Japan and protest all he likes because he is not cloaked in Wallaby legitimacy.

What a poor excuse for a perspective. Did you grow up in a caravan? Leave the personal stuff out of it thanks - FP
You think David protesting against something as damaging as Coal in light of the recent G20 is anything but a positive look for the game? We are a laughing stock of a country in terms of our environmental aims. Other than Vic & SA - we are literally in a time warp.

I was actually tagged in this piece of news on another social forum by a friend who has absolutely no interest in rugby.

David ATTRACTS people to rugby, who otherwise wouldn't bat an eyelid.

 

[Braveheart81]

What a poor excuse for a perspective.

You think David protesting against something as damaging as Coal in light of the recent G20 is anything but a positive look for the game? We are a laughing stock of a country in terms of our environmental aims. Other than Vic & SA - we are literally in a time warp.

I was actually tagged in this piece of news on another social forum by a friend who has absolutely no interest in rugby.

David ATTRACTS people to rugby, who otherwise wouldn't bat an eyelid.

So take it a step further.

Does the ARU make a statement in relation to this? If so, what is the statement?

What happens if Pocock does the same thing again?

 

[fatprop]

Not sure what other type of conscience there is, but the answer is "No". I suspect that if you can't see for yourself why then no amount of explaining on my part will bring you to understanding, but I'll try - once.
Civil disobedience brings the game into disrepute.
he can go and earn money, if that's his motivation, in France or Japan and protest all he likes because he is not cloaked in Wallaby legitimacy.

Doesn't that depend on what is being protested?

To some his protest may have improved their outlook on rugby

 

[vidiot]

Unless Whitehaven Coal are wallaby sponsors, and we may be that desperate in the near future, the ARU will probably not be that worried about him engaging in a cause that resonates with so many punters.

 

[Bobby Sands]

Doesn't that depend on what is being protested?

To some his protest may have improved their outlook on rugby

Thank-you & edit duly noted.

 

[Bowside]

If he didn't get arrested I doubt many of us would have even heard about it.

So from that point of view I see it as a successful protest.

I think this would be on the bottom of page 487 of the list of 'problems' (if you could even call it that) facing rugby in Australia. And the ARU has trouble getting past the first page.

 

[Bobby Sands]

So take it a step further.

Does the ARU make a statement in relation to this? If so, what is the statement?

What happens if Pocock does the same thing again?

David was arrested supporting something that he believes in strongly, while we at the ARU do not condone such activity, we respect the rights of our players to stand-up for their beliefs. David will not be reprimanded for this.

Something like that will suffice.

I guess if he keeps doing it, more people will take an interest in rugby.

 

[Scrubber2050]

Most civilised country's live by The Rule of Law.

Laws are passed by Legislators and enforced by the relevant police or DPP, dependant upon the severity of the "crime"

Pocock has deliberately used his high profile to bring publicity to the cause.

He should be dealt with, firstly by the Courts, then because he has brought the game into disrepute severly punished by the Brumbies and the ARU.

Personally, its a storm in a teacup but imagine a high profile player coming out and publicly supporting his private views on femanism, abortion, homosexual rights, gun laws etc.

Supporting those views is one thing but doing a deliberate criminal act is totally another.