get briggs off commentary...

never heard that one before, but I'll be using it a bit I think :yep

I know of 'banana' being used as a derogatory term amongst Asians, as in 'yellow on the outside, white on the inside" when referring to Asians who have become westernised and thereby 'sold out' in the eyes of the ones casting the insult.

I've also heard 'coconut' being used by an Aboriginal as an insult to another Aboriginal who has 'sold out' to whites. Again 'brown on the outside, white on the inside'.

****ing Mundine was in the paper not so long ago calling Tallis and Walford 'coconuts' because he reckoned they weren't open or proud enough of their Aboriginal heritage in their playing days.

Actually, it was after Tahu walked out of SOO camp because of Johns' comments about Inglis. Funny how now it's Tahu who's been accused of using a racist term towards someone else. Doesn't have quite the same hoopla surrounding it, I guess his act was of lesser racism because it was black-on-black

 

PS - I guess it's better Briggs is back commentating rather than being in someone's corner :yep

 

How about, suspension until proven guilty or innocent?

The allegations are serious enough to warrant a suspension, sort of like a normal employment situation where if there is an allegation of misconduct the employee can be stood down pending an investigation. If the employee is found innocent of the misconduct, he is paid whatever wages would have been owed to him had he worked. If the employee is found guilty he isn't paid for the period of the suspension and further disciplinary action is taken.

AFL & NRL players are often suspended pending investigation if they are alleged to have committed a serious wrong or brought the game into disrepute. Briggs' situation should be no different.

As for the coconut comment, Briggs didn't say "this guy's head is as hard as a coconut", rather he said "these coconuts have hard heads". Briggs was referring to Juniors race and used a term that is considered disparaging when made by a white person. There is no excuse for it and an apology should be made.

 

I might agree with this, except why should he be suspended from commentating, when the alleged offense was committed whilst boxing?

Perhaps, but not everyone sees it the same.

 

Just because you accept racism doesn't mean that it's not racist, making a generalisation about a race IS racism. You saying things like white men can't jump just shows how backwards you are.

 

i like junior and am a fan but hes being too precious.he called Taylor a fighter i hate'a fake Christian'so hes fine with religious villification but not racial villification.cant have it both ways.

 

:hey:hey

 

Is it backwards?

Just the other month some disp**** teacher from Victoria attempted to ban the song 'Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree', because it had the word 'Gay' in it.
PC gone to far....

Is this the type of society you want to be part of?

 

You all need to take a flying **** at a rolling donut - if you're quick you might be able to do it with a Krispy Kreme before they go bankrupt :deal

 

Come on man, you can't see the connection? Seriously?

 

Like JT was after Fa'alogo thumped him down the stairs at the Forresters on their Mad Monday?

 

atsch
Er yeh, of course there's the obvious connection, but why should they be connected in the sense of disciplinary action?

BTW, I just had a look at the tape and Briggs exact words were -

This content is protected

 

Well, probably for the same reason Brett Stewart lost his 'Face of League' privilege after being accused of sexually assaulting that girl that proved to be bull****...

If you 've done anything to bring your sport into disrepute, usually you're not allowed to be involved in it in any way until you've been cleared.

That's why Tiger Woods made that bull**** public apology after being srpung ****ing ugly waittresses etc...

Put it this way - why would Briggs have been chosen to commentate on Sunday? Because he knows his **** and is a name in the sport, right? So, right now his name is tarnished due to the Green fiasco, so why would administration of the sport want it to be associated with that sort of negativity?

 

Dunno, I guess they're looking at it as innocent until proven guilty, and I have to say, I see that way too.
I just don't see what all the fuss is.