Funny about this - Eagles won't sack Kerr

Talk on the national game

Postby Psyber » Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:22 pm

Adelaide Hawk wrote: ...That's a fair point, but I guess the obvious answer here would be that, as most people wouldn't know where you work, you are not bringing your employer into disrepute...

True, but there is my point that anyone who does these things makes it clear to his employer that he is irresponsible enough to drink drive and aggressive enough or impulsive enough to get into a fight, so the employer has to consider whether he can trust that employee to represent his company in case of future irresponsible or impulsive behaviour in some other situation that may damage the company. That is prudent business practice.
User avatar
Psyber
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12247
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:43 pm
Location: Now back in the Adelaide Hills.
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 405 times
Grassroots Team: Hahndorf

Postby Adelaide Hawk » Tue Mar 06, 2007 6:25 am

Psyber wrote:
Adelaide Hawk wrote: ...That's a fair point, but I guess the obvious answer here would be that, as most people wouldn't know where you work, you are not bringing your employer into disrepute...

True, but there is my point that anyone who does these things makes it clear to his employer that he is irresponsible enough to drink drive and aggressive enough or impulsive enough to get into a fight, so the employer has to consider whether he can trust that employee to represent his company in case of future irresponsible or impulsive behaviour in some other situation that may damage the company. That is prudent business practice.


My point is taking a different tangent to yours. Of course employers want to believe their staff are responsible, that really goes without saying. What I am saying is if Sam Schwartz from Blacks Shoes is involved in a domestic incident, the public aren't likely to pick up the paper and ask, "What's going on down at Blacks Shoes? Their employees are a rabble".

However, when we see headlines of yet another incident involving an AFL player (and there have been far too many), people are asking what in hell is wrong with AFL footballers, etc. The AFL would not be pleased that embassadors to their game continue to let them down.
User avatar
Adelaide Hawk
Coach
 
 
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:52 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Postby Hondo » Tue Mar 06, 2007 8:10 am

I haven't read the entire debate here ... but it sounds like the standard argument when a high profile person does something wrong in their personal lives. Some say, "it's in their personal lives so leave them alone ..... if I got in a fight on the weekend my employer wouldn't even know let alone care ..."

Point is that you can't compare high profile employees like AFL players earning $200Km to $800K per year with us normal workers. The link between an AFL player and his employer is so obvious and intrinsic that they do have to exercise a higher degree of responsibility to protect their employer's reputation.

It's not just AFL players mind you it's anyone highly paid with a high profile - eg, the Channel 9 Board wouldn't be too thrilled if Eddie turned up in the gutter one morning saying "oh I had a big night". To half quote spiderman, "with high remuneration and high profile comes great responsibility". It's just life and if some players can't handle it there are plenty of alternative (lower paying) football leagues to have a kick and a catch (and a drink or 100) in.
User avatar
Hondo
Coach
 
 
Posts: 7927
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Glandore, Adelaide
Has liked: 70 times
Been liked: 32 times

Postby Adelaide Hawk » Tue Mar 06, 2007 12:43 pm

hondo71 wrote:I haven't read the entire debate here ... but it sounds like the standard argument when a high profile person does something wrong in their personal lives. Some say, "it's in their personal lives so leave them alone ..... if I got in a fight on the weekend my employer wouldn't even know let alone care ..."

Point is that you can't compare high profile employees like AFL players earning $200Km to $800K per year with us normal workers. The link between an AFL player and his employer is so obvious and intrinsic that they do have to exercise a higher degree of responsibility to protect their employer's reputation.

It's not just AFL players mind you it's anyone highly paid with a high profile - eg, the Channel 9 Board wouldn't be too thrilled if Eddie turned up in the gutter one morning saying "oh I had a big night". To half quote spiderman, "with high remuneration and high profile comes great responsibility". It's just life and if some players can't handle it there are plenty of alternative (lower paying) football leagues to have a kick and a catch (and a drink or 100) in.


Well said hondo71. That's the message I've been trying to convey, although not so eloquently as your good self.
User avatar
Adelaide Hawk
Coach
 
 
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:52 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Previous

Board index   Football  AFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 14 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |