The Demise of Skilzburra

As I am about to go to Japan, the decision made by action sports does not effect me. However, it does affect me. I liked Skilzbura. I liked how we said "skilz" as we warmed up before a game. I liked that we were a mix of cultural histories, vocations and political opinions. But most of all I liked the bloody big trophy we won at the end of last season, even if it was for coming second after being red carded out of the final. We *were* rough and rude, though. We lacked discipline and skill. If I were Mr. Micheal McLeod, Director- Funtech Pty Ltd, I guess I would have done the same thing. What about the Doncaster league? We haven't been kicked out of that one yet, have we?

Who the hell is Funtech?
Is that the name of a gay rave or what?
I'm sure that a move to Doncaster would result in a similar outcome for Bad-eggs-burra

I like gay raves- I do not like Funtech.

I am deeply distressed by what the author of the correspondence describes as the “elimination of behavior that transgresses out behavioral guidelines and hinders out progress towards providing a reputable indoor soccer competition.” The decision is clearly aimed at weeding out the men in shorts and leaving the boys in tutu's. It is a classic example of modern male-homo-feminist attitudes being enforced throughout most team sports in the modern world today. Men are build for combat and our team sports are a reflection of this. Speed, agility, superior fitness, cunning and intimidation are all integral components stacked to compile the kernel of the game.

It appears Action Sports has succom to the deluded notion that the Gladiatorial origins of male contact team sport are outdated and primitive. In fact our team sports and the stadiums in which they are hosted would not exist in their current form without the great Gladiatorial clashes and Colosseum's of the past. We have already exchanged our swords, mallets and mace for an air filled bladder covered in varying shapes of coloured animal hide. We now wear sets of coloured jerseys to differentiate between teams instead of allowing religious, social and continental sovereignty issues to determine opposition. Sides are now devoid of all prejudice with each participant an individual in his own right with the freedom to do, feel and think what they please. Are we to let our game be diluted to the point where players are penalised for frowning at the opposition? This group of sadly misguided individuals must not be given the green light to further erode team sports any further!

If this decision is met with a distinct lack of strong protest the fundamental ingredients necessary to sustain the integrity of not just the game but our manhood will deteriorate to an unimaginable level. We will be left with a indoor sports Colosseum's that host rehearsals for the Mardi Gra parade. You might also note that although the Mardi Gra as an event that appears to be completely non contact, might I point out that the debouch acts that follow behind closed doors are completely brutal and often draw blood.

Clearly this whole affair is the product of deluded attitudes adopted by a collective often found with spandex hot pants, shaved legs, waxed balls and lisps. Collectively their motivation is to prevent their precious metrosexual appearance being marred by nothing more than the grass stains on their knees earned while “bonding” with other like minded individuals. A fast paced game with a little competitive contact and intimidation is far to difficult to contemplate when all you are used to is cuddling up to your best mate dressed in spandex. (puk)

After our “friends” have finished diluting our beloved game what is left? table tennis wearing nothing but hot pink g-strings hoisted up to our nipples while battering our eyelids at each other? However even in this arena Steve G would still start a riot!

Until next time

The Manimal

I agree that the dilution of ideas and behaviours that transgress cultural constructions are against the notion of a free and open society.

These constructs could be unfettered by patriarchal notions of permission and exclusion. I would extend this theory to include much behaviour that is considered 'alternative,' whether said behaviour is abusive *or* sexual in nature.

However, I think you ('Manimal') became misguided in the above diatribe "'softness" in attributing these constructs to some form of masculinity or sexuality specific biology. It is this error that does not take into consideration the performative role of gender and sexual activity, instead attributing binary oppositions and value judgements to these behaviours, with one notion taking precedence over the 'Other'.

Similarly, the homophobic content of two of the above posts are interesting in terms of expressing current Australian socio-politic and humorous in an adolescent kind of witless mock, but overall they are hurtful and therefore “necessarily unnecessary”.

I must admit I enjoyed the metaphor about "compiling the kernel of the game," although I *dis-agree* completely with its meaning.

** Two Stars Manimal (one for effort and one for the metaphor)

I must apoligise for anybody who may stumble apon this forum and subject themselves to this drivel.
My head hurts a little

Do not apologise Tom. I think it is great that this forum has degenerated into a bombastic display of over-articulation.

I feel like I have been smacked out with the Oxford Dic. bound in the shape of a baseball bat :)

Until next time

The Manimal