Raiders player signing speculation 2021

bonehead · Post by **bonehead** » March 14, 2021, 8:09 am

Folau left league for afl, left afl for rugby, got sacked from rugby for misbehaviour.

Why on earth should league be the one to take a black eye for this Muppet?

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

Boomercm · Post by **Boomercm** » March 14, 2021, 10:13 am

bonehead wrote: ↑March 14, 2021, 8:09 am Folau left league for afl, left afl for rugby, got sacked from rugby for misbehaviour.

Why on earth should league be the one to take a black eye for this Muppet?

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

Agree with you with regards to league and Raiders - personally I don't want them taking the black eye.

And it is game day Rd 1 so I will refrain from further comment for now. I'm too pumped

gangrenous · Post by **gangrenous** » March 14, 2021, 11:51 am

Boomercm wrote: harsh take. Everyone knows that some old school religious people have silly views. It is not a surprise to anyone. So I think the idea that he has done harm to others is fiction.

Let’s test this idea. Name 3 other contemporary Australian role models that kids would be likely to idolise who have repeatedly condemned homosexuality using their public platform.

I’ll wait.

Coastalraider · Post by **Coastalraider** » March 14, 2021, 2:33 pm

gangrenous wrote: ↑March 14, 2021, 11:51 am
Boomercm wrote: harsh take. Everyone knows that some old school religious people have silly views. It is not a surprise to anyone. So I think the idea that he has done harm to others is fiction.
Let’s test this idea. Name 3 other contemporary Australian role models that kids would be likely to idolise who have repeatedly condemned homosexuality using their public platform.

I’ll wait.

Spot in Gangers, in addition, let’s see if we can name an Australian Muslim athlete using his social media platform to spread their belief that’s anyone who cheats on their partner should be stoned to death. Would that be acceptable to the rugby league public or is it only Christianity we are tolerable of?

Belcher#1 · Post by **Belcher#1** » March 18, 2021, 2:58 pm

with Papenhuyzen off contract at the end of 2022 and expected to receive $1mill a season, do the raiders have a play at him?

There are some big roster decisions the club will have to make that year; Williams will be looking to get paid, will Hodgson, Whitehead and Croker play on, Starling, Sutton, CHN, Horsburgh off-contract.
With a talent like Papenhuyzen I think you do what ever is needed to make the cap space for him. A potential spine with Paps, Wighton, Williams and possibly Starling looks dynamite on paper.

MrPosh · Post by **MrPosh** » March 19, 2021, 2:29 am

I doubt he'll leave Melbourne.

Assuming he does stay, I'd make a play for Nicho Hynes, who looks a very good player.

Botman · Post by **Botman** » March 19, 2021, 8:58 am

Belcher#1 wrote: ↑March 18, 2021, 2:58 pm with Papenhuyzen off contract at the end of 2022 and expected to receive $1mill a season, do the raiders have a play at him?

There are some big roster decisions the club will have to make that year; Williams will be looking to get paid, will Hodgson, Whitehead and Croker play on, Starling, Sutton, CHN, Horsburgh off-contract.
With a talent like Papenhuyzen I think you do what ever is needed to make the cap space for him. A potential spine with Paps, Wighton, Williams and possibly Starling looks dynamite on paper.

If you're going to back the truck up and sacrifice depth for an out and out super star, thats the sort of player the raiders should do it for
A young ball playing fullback, with angle breaking speed.

I dont think we'd make a move, and i dont think he'll leave Melbourne any time soon, but if the club did have a run at him, i'd be on board with it.

simo · Post by **simo** » March 19, 2021, 9:10 am

if we could make the $ work then its an obvious sign him up. worst case, you make melb pay a little more for him

yurithe1 · Post by **yurithe1** » March 19, 2021, 10:28 am

simo wrote: ↑March 19, 2021, 9:10 am if we could make the $ work then its an obvious sign him up. worst case, you make melb pay a little more for him

I read this interview with him the other day. He's reluctant to leave Melbourne for Sydney.

“But I don’t know if I could see myself back in Sydney, I haven’t given it any thought,” Papenhuyzen said. “I saw what Munster said, but he wouldn’t know what is happening tomorrow let alone the future. My management have spoken to the Storm about extensions. There’s nothing definite yet.”

That remark about Munster cracked me up.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/the-80 ... 57b48.html

Boomercm · Post by **Boomercm** » March 21, 2021, 8:24 am

Coastalraider wrote: ↑March 14, 2021, 2:33 pm
gangrenous wrote: ↑March 14, 2021, 11:51 am
Boomercm wrote: harsh take. Everyone knows that some old school religious people have silly views. It is not a surprise to anyone. So I think the idea that he has done harm to others is fiction.
Let’s test this idea. Name 3 other contemporary Australian role models that kids would be likely to idolise who have repeatedly condemned homosexuality using their public platform.

I’ll wait.
Spot in Gangers, in addition, let’s see if we can name an Australian Muslim athlete using his social media platform to spread their belief that’s anyone who cheats on their partner should be stoned to death. Would that be acceptable to the rugby league public or is it only Christianity we are tolerable of?

Firstly, naming 3 other 'role models' does not test the idea that Folau harmed anyone. There's no logical connection between those two things.

Secondly, Folau did not specifically condemn homosexuals - he posted a long list of 'sins' that we have all heard before, of which almost everybody was guilty of one. The highlighting of homosexuality above other 'sins' in his stupid meme was done by the media and the outraged twitterati mob. Why did he not cause harm to all of those sinners mentioned? Why just homsexuals?

Thirdly, Folau's meme said all these sinners (i.e., everyone) would go to hell - not that they should be 'stoned to death' or otherwise targeted in this life. There's a big difference there - because one is inciting violence and the other is a fairytale place we go to high five Satan after we die.

Lastly, we can perhaps use your Muslim example to test whether any real harm was done. Do you believe that if a Muslim athlete posted about stoning for cheating partners... that young people everywhere that had cheated on a girlfriend at some point would be harmed? I find this almost impossible to believe. At best, it might affect a young Mulsim person that had cheated on his partner. So perhaps there is an argument that Folau harmed gay Christians. But this still doesn't explain why gay christians are harmed by the meme more than all of the other sinners.

Summary: this issue was hugely overblown by hype and emotion. Society would have been much better off using Folau as a teaching exercise for why religious beliefs are silly. Targeting the person and not the beliefs was an act of discrimination no better or worse than other forms of discrimination. He is not a bad person, he was just brought up to have silly beliefs.

Result: We now have a situation where people are championing active discrimination (i.e., he can't get a job) for expressing said silly religious beliefs. So the legal protections we designed (for very good reason) to protect minorities and the marginalised are being bypassed, while the majority cheers on. That is sort of fine for Folau (he's rich, who cares), but the principle of protecting the whoever is currently unpopular and not the majority is more important than any single example. It's a dangerous path imo and a level of discrimination that we have not seen for decades (thankfully).

Just my thoughts, appreciate others will disagree.

Seiffert82 · Post by **Seiffert82** » March 21, 2021, 8:44 am

Using such a situation to 'teach' others why their personal religious beliefs are 'silly' is just as offensive to people with religious beliefs as Folau's comments are to people who are offended by what Folau said.

In saying that, I'm sure all the gay Christians are glad people who are offended by Folau's beliefs are very willing to take up the fight for them.

Boomercm · Post by **Boomercm** » March 21, 2021, 9:47 am

I didn't mean to suggest we should try and teach Folau his beliefs are silly.

But we could have just used his Twitter posts to teach (young and other) people why certain religious beliefs are silly and antiquated. And if that offended him or other religious people so be it. He caused offense (not harm imo), so who cares if he gets offended in return (all the better). I just don't believe we should be taking his right to work away from him.

I'm also on record as saying I don't particularly want Canberra or even necessarily R.League to be the ones to stand up to the current mob. The costs are large and obvious (and that says something quite scary about this mob and the way they exercise their power, right?).

Seiffert82 · Post by **Seiffert82** » March 21, 2021, 10:52 am

I'm just saying that suggesting that those with religious beliefs need to be educated that their religion is 'silly' or about fairytails is just as offensive.

gangrenous · Post by **gangrenous** » March 21, 2021, 11:01 am

Boomercm wrote: Firstly, naming 3 other 'role models' does not test the idea that Folau harmed anyone. There's no logical connection between those two things.

Firstly you brought this in by saying everyone knows people with silly views. By being unable to answer my challenge it very clearly shows that these silly views are NOT generally shared in this fashion. In fact condemning people who try to share them in this fashion stops them being normalised and keeps them understood as silly views.

Second there is a logical connection because if we accept that these silly views are harmful (which surely you don’t dispute?) then having them spread by modern role models when they are otherwise not being shared in this fashion clearly increases harm.

Boomercm wrote: Secondly, Folau did not specifically condemn homosexuals - he posted a long list of 'sins' that we have all heard before, of which almost everybody was guilty of one. The highlighting of homosexuality above other 'sins' in his stupid meme was done by the media and the outraged twitterati mob. Why did he not cause harm to all of those sinners mentioned? Why just homsexuals?

Ok, so now prejudice is okay if you nestle it amongst other stupidity? Hitler should have killed some non-Jews as well and he’d have been okay.

There was greater harm to homosexuals because:
- Homosexuality is not a choice like the others
- Folau has a history of attacking homosexuality
- Homosexuality generally is at greater risk of persecution. I doubt many kids went to school the next week and went after their class mates because they are drunks.

Boomercm wrote: Thirdly, Folau's meme said all these sinners (i.e., everyone) would go to hell - not that they should be 'stoned to death' or otherwise targeted in this life. There's a big difference there - because one is inciting violence and the other is a fairytale place we go to high five Satan after we die.

To you it’s a fictional punishment. But Folau is putting out that he earnestly believes these acts deserve eternal torture. The obvious result of that attitude is downplaying any targeting in real life as deserved.

Summary - the standard you walk past is the standard you accept. Folau is a *swear word* and we shouldn’t walk past.

Boomercm · Post by **Boomercm** » March 21, 2021, 3:15 pm

Seiffert82 wrote: ↑March 21, 2021, 10:52 am I'm just saying that suggesting that those with religious beliefs need to be educated that their religion is 'silly' or about fairytails is just as offensive.

I was never suggesting that those with religious beliefs need to be re-educated in their beliefs. Apologies for that insinuation. I'm as liberal (in the classic sense of the word, not as in Liberal party) as they come and think people are entitled to whatever beliefs they want to have.

But if religious people express their beliefs publicly (like Folau did) then those beliefs are fair game imo. I'm not worried about offending him/them. IMO the views he expressed on homosexuality were silly and offensive, and I will happily share that publicly as required. On that I agree with Gangrenous - the standard you walk past is the standard you accept.

Unlike Gangrenous, I'm not likely to call religious people d*cks (I do not believe they intend to be offensive), and I won't applaud when we find ways to stop them working by circumnavigating anti-discrimination laws.

gangrenous · Post by **gangrenous** » March 21, 2021, 3:35 pm

Boomercm wrote: Unlike Gangrenous, I'm not likely to call religious people d*cks (I do not believe they intend to be offensive), and I won't applaud when we find ways to stop them working by circumnavigating anti-discrimination laws.

Steady on there soldier. That’s a lot of words you’re putting in MY mouth.

Israel Folau is a *word that slips through swear filter*. That’s very different from saying religious people are WTSTSF!

Israel Folau is not being discriminated against because of his religion. He’s free to believe what he chooses. As soon as his actions impinge upon others, he becomes fair game and THAT is why he can’t get a job.

gangrenous · Post by **gangrenous** » March 21, 2021, 3:40 pm

By the way, on this precise bit:

Boomercm wrote:I'm not likely to call religious people d*cks (I do not believe they intend to be offensive)

“Israel Folau said he knew before his social media post warning that homosexuals and other sinners would go to hell that it would be "offensive" and he would "absolutely" do it again.”

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/i-k ... 5328r.html

Seiffert82 · Post by **Seiffert82** » March 21, 2021, 5:06 pm

Boomercm wrote: ↑March 21, 2021, 3:15 pm
Seiffert82 wrote: ↑March 21, 2021, 10:52 am I'm just saying that suggesting that those with religious beliefs need to be educated that their religion is 'silly' or about fairytails is just as offensive.
I was never suggesting that those with religious beliefs need to be re-educated in their beliefs. Apologies for that insinuation. I'm as liberal (in the classic sense of the word, not as in Liberal party) as they come and think people are entitled to whatever beliefs they want to have.

But if religious people express their beliefs publicly (like Folau did) then those beliefs are fair game imo. I'm not worried about offending him/them. IMO the views he expressed on homosexuality were silly and offensive, and I will happily share that publicly as required. On that I agree with Gangrenous - the standard you walk past is the standard you accept.

Unlike Gangrenous, I'm not likely to call religious people d*cks (I do not believe they intend to be offensive), and I won't applaud when we find ways to stop them working by circumnavigating anti-discrimination laws.

Fair enough.

Just to be clear, I also thought what Folau said was entirely unnecessary. I have no idea what he is trying to achieve.

I just find it quite ironic that a number of people hate on Folau for being offensive and bigoted, but in doing so they use what he said to have a crack at everyone who believe in religious "fairytails". It's all a bit bigoted on both sides.

Anyway, that's all I want to say.

Rick · Post by **Rick** » March 21, 2021, 6:09 pm

So..... Who are we signing....

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sid · Post by **Sid** » March 21, 2021, 7:19 pm

Duffty

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

Rick · Post by **Rick** » March 21, 2021, 7:23 pm

Sid wrote:Duffty

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

For Sutton?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bonehead · Post by **bonehead** » March 21, 2021, 7:36 pm

Rick wrote:
Sid wrote:Duffty

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
For Sutton?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

don't be silly, For Jack

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

Blues87 · Post by **Blues87** » March 23, 2021, 2:43 pm

Bring Leilua back to Canberra!

Raiders666 · Post by **Raiders666** » March 23, 2021, 2:59 pm

Blues87 wrote: ↑March 23, 2021, 2:43 pm Bring Leilua back to Canberra!

ummm no

julian87 · Post by **julian87** » March 23, 2021, 3:16 pm

Seiffert82 wrote: ↑March 21, 2021, 8:44 am Using such a situation to 'teach' others why their personal religious beliefs are 'silly' is just as offensive to people with religious beliefs as Folau's comments are to people who are offended by what Folau said.

I’m not dipping into that argument.

But you really can’t compare religion with something like homosexuality. Religion should be questioned. Homosexuality shouldn’t.

Seiffert82 · Post by **Seiffert82** » March 23, 2021, 9:04 pm

julian87 wrote: ↑March 23, 2021, 3:16 pm
Seiffert82 wrote: ↑March 21, 2021, 8:44 am Using such a situation to 'teach' others why their personal religious beliefs are 'silly' is just as offensive to people with religious beliefs as Folau's comments are to people who are offended by what Folau said.
I’m not dipping into that argument.

But you really can’t compare religion with something like homosexuality. Religion should be questioned. Homosexuality shouldn’t.

Everyone is entitled to question whatever they like.

I'm just saying that using one person's extreme opinion as the basis for lecturing an entire group of people about their general beliefs may be a bit misguided.

I also find the outrage on this matter from vehemently anti-religious people somewhat ironic, particularly when they target a whole group of society with the same brush as they do Folau. Who are we offended on behalf of? Gay Christians, Jews and Muslims? Gay people in general? Gay people who don't believe in God?

Anyway, the Raiders are never going to sign Folau for obvious reasons.

Canberra Milk · Post by **Canberra Milk** » March 31, 2021, 8:27 pm

Papenhuyzen for a million, yes please. Take my money

Great attitude, great skillset, great player

Would need to be ruthless in culling some current players including CNK, but he's someone well worth it

hrundi89 · Post by **hrundi89** » April 1, 2021, 1:01 pm

https://www.lgbtiqhealth.org.au/statistics

Ruben Daley · Post by **Ruben Daley** » April 2, 2021, 1:44 pm

Canberra Milk wrote: ↑March 31, 2021, 8:27 pm Papenhuyzen for a million, yes please. Take my money

Great attitude, great skillset, great player

Would need to be ruthless in culling some current players including CNK, but he's someone well worth it

I love Papenhuzen too but there is no way he's worth it. We've got to remember that CNK is a really strong fullback who we've got for really cheap. The guy is on $330K for the next two seasons after this one!

I know which way I'd go between:

Papenhuyzen $1M + someone else valued at $150K, i.e. a squad filler

OR

CNK $330K + someone else valued at $820K, i.e. rep level player

Consider CNK and one of these guys:

Tino - $700K
Luai - $700K
Paulo - $700K
Addo-Carr $550K
Haas - $500K

We'd have $120K to $320K above their current contracts to entice those players.

I'll take CNK + Addo-Carr + $270K to spare please.

(Salaries sourced from: https://www.zerotackle.com/rugby-league ... d-players/)

Raiders666 · Post by **Raiders666** » April 2, 2021, 4:29 pm

I've got Lil Papi over any of those above combinations. CNK has completely lost his attacking mojo he had in his first year with us

Jado639 · Post by **Jado639** » April 2, 2021, 6:07 pm

Canberra Milk wrote:Papenhuyzen for a million, yes please. Take my money

Great attitude, great skillset, great player

Would need to be ruthless in culling some current players including CNK, but he's someone well worth it

I'm not a fan of the million dollar deals. Even though pap is one that's probably worth the money. I think Ricky's got the right approach to the cap spreading the quality rather than putting all money and pressure on one player. The million dollar deals have destroyed a lot of clubs.
Titans broncs cowboys St George bulldogs and manly are just a few clubs that have their caps all out of whack due to the big money deals. All it takes is a serious injury and the club is stuffed for the long term.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

Canberra Milk · Post by **Canberra Milk** » April 2, 2021, 7:43 pm

I would take Lil Papi and a fence post over any of those combinations. CNK is a solid defensive all-rounder fullback. You can't compare to Paps. The only question is whether his form over the last couple of years is sustainable. I think it is

Roosters and Storm are the dominant teams of recent times and they always have million dollar players. They just have the right ones

Canberra Milk · Post by **Canberra Milk** » April 2, 2021, 7:45 pm

First half hat trick omg take my money, a million? 2 million!!

Canberra Milk · Post by **Canberra Milk** » April 2, 2021, 7:48 pm

Edit, first half 4 trick

Raiders666 · Post by **Raiders666** » April 2, 2021, 7:55 pm

How good is he