By Ant Rogenous
To a bold crusader for truth, justice and the neoconservative way like Tim Blair, a lie is a lie is a lie … unless, of course, it relates to something he’s fond of.
Earlier this year he excused the Australian Grand Prix Corporation’s flagrant fudging of crowd numbers at the Melbourne event because, well, Timmeh likes fast cars and feels there’s very little difference between attendance figures of 300,000 and 400,000.
Today, our man of unwavering integrity and intellectual honesty agrees heartily with Peter Gebhardt’s absurd argument that there was nothing wrong with Collingwood footballer Heath Shaw’s lie about teammate Alan Didak’s involvement in a recent drink-driving incident, because it was just a case of mates looking after each other.
Why does he agree? Well, two possibilites spring to mind.
First, Gebhardt — in a truly shameless analogy — invokes Teh Anzac Spirit, most likely engorging Blair’s jingoistic sense of national pride.
Second, Timmeh is a diehard Magpies supporter — and Shaw and Didak’s suspension for the rest of the season could very well hurt Collingwood’s chances of staying in the hunt for the finals.
Silly me: here I was thinking moral relativism was the preserve of Teh Left.
30 Comments
7 August, 2008 at 9:25 pm
timmy is a pies fan. frankly i’m surprised he was able to read gebhardts article let alone write about it.
but in fairness his readers turned on him for agreeing with the article, out of 48 comments so far only 2 or 3 agree with his take on the issue. more evidence i suppose that timmy is outta touch and increasingly irrelevant.
8 August, 2008 at 12:34 am
Gebhardt – The Nob:
“If young people, to use the colloquialism, ’stuff up’, we would do well to remember that we have done likewise, and without the magnification of media moguls.”
Aah…I may have stuffed up somewhat in my youth…but, hey, I wasn’t being paid $400,000 to tow the company line.
8 August, 2008 at 3:41 am
Eddie made some rather odd comments on The Footy Show to Sam tonight about what he thinks about the culture of drinking at Collingwood, watch the interview and then wait for Blair to go “I TOLD YOU SOO”
8 August, 2008 at 10:15 am
timmy has a thread about sam today and how 9 should sack him and does a plug for nitv’s footy show. i remember reading a column timmy wrote about marngrook FS once and to give credit it was pretty good. what was even more amazing it was the first thing i’ve seen on his blog where the commenters were civilised – no shit about blacks or crap sarcky comments.
see tim. when you write proper meaningful stuff you get more meaningful output from your readers.
8 August, 2008 at 11:07 am
Blair is a massive hypocrite?
In other breaking news, grass grows better in daylight.
8 August, 2008 at 4:28 pm
I was hoping that Blair would call by and defend his logic. I guess he likes Jeremy more than Ant.
8 August, 2008 at 10:56 pm
And by “likes” you mean “is kookoo over”, amirite.
9 August, 2008 at 7:44 am
“Timmeh is a diehard Magpies supporter”
Explains a lot…
10 August, 2008 at 8:21 pm
“Aah…I may have stuffed up somewhat in my youth…but, hey, I wasn’t being paid $400,000 to tow the company line.”
So at what price then does a young man lose the right to stuff up?
And these guys aren’t getting paid $400,000 to split atoms, they play footy. So some will stuff up, no matter how much they get paid.
Not terribly suprising Idlaviv that you dont get paid such money, as you need to be supremely talented or clever to earn such figures. You seem to be neither.
And where do you get off calling a retired County Court Judge a Nob just because you disagree with what he wrote? And where do you get off spelling Knob with no K, and is this further evidence of why your salary doesn’t match your own self opinion?
10 August, 2008 at 8:57 pm
“at what price does a young man lose the right to stuff up?”
shaw got well pissed at nearly 3 times the legal BAC limit. he chose to get behind the wheel of his car and drive. he didn’t kill anyone thank god, but i’d say his ‘right’ to drink drive is well dispensed with, wouldn’t you?
answer me something: would you be so quick to defend shaw’s behaviour if it were perpetrated by a nobody hoon youth? would timmy? would gebhardt?
Idlaviv nails it: suddenly the $400K pa salary is relevant…..
10 August, 2008 at 9:06 pm
IS Andrew Bolt a liar?
10 August, 2008 at 9:12 pm
I’m not defending Shaw’s behaviour, rather the insinuation that because he earns so much money he is therefore less likely to make foolish decisions like drink drining and lying. Idlaviv’s argument is borne out of jealousy:
I made mistakes as a youth just like Shaw, but I didn’t earn $400K. So ill criticize him. Ridiculous.
Confessions, if the offence was committed by a nobody hoon nobody would be writing about it. Think about it. Shaw isn’t well known because of his pay packet, but because he is a very talented Collingwood footballer. The pay packet is relevant only to those who wished they earned a fraction of his wage, and to the consideration that he should not be out drinking at such a crucial time of the season whilst handing his hand out for his wages.
Admit it boys – you’re jealous of Shaw’s salary.
In the immortal words of Derek Smalls – “I envy us.”
Thinkaboutdat.
10 August, 2008 at 9:24 pm
“Admit it boys – you’re jealous of Shaw’s salary”
actually i’m not a boy. jealous of shaw’s salary? not really when i consider what he has to go through in order to earn it. i’m quite happy being a nobody. :-)
“if the offence was committed by a nobody hoon nobody would be writing about it”
that’s exactly my point, and least of all by a retired judge whose job was to uphold the law! that timmy and his judge friend chose to try to defend the behaviour of this footballer, putting it down to some wild youth factor has everything to do with shaw being well known, not least because he is a high earner with the magpies. as i inferred, if he were a nobody, we’d simply write off the behaviour as tsk tsk dreadfully irresponsible hoon youths who should be thrown in jail.
but i’m pleased that your not defending shaw’s indiscretions. what if he’d killed an innocent person? shudder.
10 August, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Why do you use binoculars to watch a computer screen? Many brands of glasses are pretty cheap now guys. Even retarded lefties should be able to save up enough dole money to buy a pair. Heck, you can even have my granny’s old pair.
10 August, 2008 at 11:05 pm
why do you verbal diahorrea as a screen name? even righties can surely use their brains(?) to think of a relevant…useful….informative….interesting name for themselves?
heck, you can even use my gran’s ol screen name.
LOL!!!!
10 August, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Confessions (sorry about the gender mix-up. ), I agree with your last point. Who wouldn’t?
Anyway, it’s not the link to Shaw’s fame that I find offensive. It’s linking his salary to his behaviour that I find distasteful. I mean, if he didn’t want the fame and exposure that came with being an AFL star, I’d say deal with it or do something else. But to say, as Idlaviv did, that because his salary is $400k his indiscretions are more blameworthy that someone on Idlaviv’s wage is lazy and I’d hazard a guess inspired by utter jealousy.
“if he were a nobody, we’d simply write off the behaviour as tsk tsk dreadfully irresponsible hoon youths who should be thrown in jail.”
Jail? Come on. I wont defend Tim Blair’s position because I disagree with it, but the point Peter Gebhardt makes is not about Heath Shaw. It is about all young people, argued using the example of Heath Shaw. It isn’t defending him as such, but is trying to illuminate the issue to stop the precise views your above quote demonstrates. Had Heath Shaw not stuffed up, we wouldn’t be talking about it and Gebhartd has used the opportunity to talk about an issue about which he is passionate and (as a former Judge) knowledgable. As a Judge, his role is to uphold the law, but he can’t just make glib judgments like your quote above. He must consider all the relevant factors, weigh them and come to a decision. Some of the relevant factors will paint Heath Shaw and his ilk in a better light, and must be given appropriate weight. That is what he is saying.
But, of course, he disagrees with Tim Blair, so he must be wrong. What site is this again?
10 August, 2008 at 11:09 pm
But, of course, he disagrees with Tim Blair…
Sorry, he agrees with Tim Blair.
10 August, 2008 at 11:32 pm
“But to say, as Idlaviv did, that because his salary is $400k his indiscretions are more blameworthy that someone on Idlaviv’s wage is lazy and I’d hazard a guess inspired by utter jealousy”
call me mellowed by a sevenhill semillon, but this seems to be exactly the argument timmy and his mentor are taking. ‘blame the youth factor’ cause it’s a rabble-raiser collingwood star. but if it were anyone else….? not so forgiving.
as to the other issue, we might have to agree to disagree. my view is because this was a high profile footballer there is a leniency given. and to be fair we’ve seen the same sort of crap with the NRL, cricket in recent years as well with my beloved blues where we’ve had issues at the level of president! wtf?! gebhardt’s comments may well come back to bite him once shaw faces criminal charges. and how is that going to look from the perspective of retired judge? at the very least timmy has not been strategic in who he chooses to publicly support and agree with.
but regardless of this website intent, i’ve given praise where it’s due including to our timmy, but the fact remains: one high profile, high paid footballer = pls forgive, he’s just a boy. any other bastard = drink drive bloody idiot you could of killed somebody.
11 August, 2008 at 9:54 am
The salary has nothing to do with it. There are some rules with football players:
1. You do not have to be smart to play footy (look at the likes of Willy Mason in NRL);
2. You are going to be in the media spotlight more;
3. like it or not you are a role model for kids.
The issue with the whole affair is that they lied. They lied to their team mates and to the club that has supported them. Didak has a long history of doing the wrong thing and was on very thin ice after being out with the guy who shot the people in Melbourne’s CBD. He had serious constraints put on his contract stating that if he got into trouble he would be sacked.
It was only a week or two ago that he had those constraints removed. If he is stupid enough to get into a car with a drunk driver (Remeber Darren Millane???) then he deserves to be sacked.
11 August, 2008 at 11:18 am
Geezus KDaics…
Take an KOxycontin and don’t get your KConfederate Kflag in such a Ktwist. I put some ‘K’s’ in for you so as to prevent you busting a valve. Sorry I had the audacity to leave a K out of ‘Nob’. I’ll go hand myself in at the local cop-house.
You know it’s very easy to reread what I wrote:
Aah…I may have stuffed up somewhat in my youth…but, hey, I wasn’t being paid $400,000 to tow the company line.
So before you charge at your imagined Collingwood-hatin’ windmill take particular note of the word ‘being’ Lancelot. And ‘towing the company line’ is the contract Didak signed to play for, not only Collingwood, but for the AFL. Both parties have separate player guidelines that the ‘KNOB’ agreed to. So Debhardt’s …we would do well to remember that we have done likewise… is utter trite.
Your incessant hypothetical rant on my income is absurd. Your love of the Pies has clouded your judgment and left you holding your jousting stick by the pointy end…
12 August, 2008 at 9:44 pm
why is Jeremy Sear so ugly?
12 August, 2008 at 10:02 pm
why is Jeremy Sear so ugly?
It’s permanent moderation for you now, fuckwit. Well done. But I’ll leave your comment up so no one is left wondering why.
14 August, 2008 at 2:20 pm
timmy unleashes his bleating sheep onto someone today only to be told he’s released them into the wrong paddock. here he is villifying a commenter from some other blog:
“Lancet mathematician Marilyn Shepherd blames “whingers”…..”Marilyn—rarely an hour goes by that she isn’t shrieking and shouting somewhere—ends with a gymnastic suggestion…”
only to be told by that it isn’t the same person he thinks it is. but does tim do the gentlemanly thing and apologise for his error, or show remorse in any way for attacking that person? of course not, just a simple:
“UPDATE. I’ve mixed up my Marilyns. Commenters clarify.”
of course he’s always the first person to shriek and have tanties whenever he thinks somebody is slandering him. gutless creep.
http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/accept_everyone/#commentsmore
14 August, 2008 at 2:28 pm
only to be told by that it isn’t the same person he thinks it is. but does tim do the gentlemanly thing and apologise for his error, or show remorse in any way for attacking that person? of course not, just a simple:
And you are milking that self righteous mock outrage for all it’s worth, aren’t you confessions.
14 August, 2008 at 2:35 pm
so you think its acceptable do you rad? or are you just disagreeing with me because….that’s what you do?
btw please learn to recognise the difference between mock and real outrage. mock outrage is what tim does when he goes all antsy over people criticising him, a public figure. real outrage is when i get pissed with public figures like him publicly ridiculing what ordinary joe blows like this marilyn person contribute to blogs. you can see the difference can’t you?
14 August, 2008 at 2:43 pm
so you think its acceptable do you rad? or are you just disagreeing with me because….that’s what you do?
Tim made a mistake and has owned up to it. It is not the first time a blogger has made a mistake and fessed up.
I get the impression that you are using this as an excuse to stick the boot into Tim, just for the sake of it.
14 August, 2008 at 2:45 pm
add to above:
and using that ordinary joe blow as a whipping boy for commenters – have a look at the comments. hardly anyone knocking her for the position she takes on immigration, but because she’s a “known loon”, “lunacy”.
14 August, 2008 at 3:00 pm
rad i’m not above crediting tim when he does do good work. look earlier on this thread for an example. this personal attack stuff however is a particularly unsavoury aspect of blair’s writing and while i’m cool with him criticising say ant or jeremy or some other blogger for writing stuff about him i don’t think having an entire thread dedicated to mocking the personal opinion of an everyday person is a particularly professional activity for someone who self-identifies as a journalist. nor is it a becoming character trait for a man of his age. so in that context, yes i would expect an apology when he realises the mistake he make.
14 August, 2008 at 3:20 pm
He mightn’t be saying it Confessions but I’d be certain the gutless coward would be cringing inside.
And I wouldn’t bother giving Mighty Matt/Rad any response. We learnt long ago to ignore and skip his endless mind-numbing bleatings.
14 August, 2008 at 4:46 pm
blah blah blah–you are as ignorant as a sack of arses–but at least an arse has some function in life.
Comments are closed.