Do we have a duty of care ?
-
Burtonwoodclaret
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:35 pm
- Been Liked: 105 times
- Has Liked: 4 times
Do we have a duty of care ?
Aaron Lennon's suffering has brought the question of stress and mental illness in sports people once again to the fore. We Burnley supporters have been aware of this through Clarke Carlisle's courageous acknowledgement of his own struggles. The expectations that surround players are enormous. Whilst the rewards can be great, the cost in terms of mental illness and personal problems can also be very great. There is a great deal that Clubs can do and indeed do to support players who are experiencing deep emotional stress and confusion. Organisations like "Sporting Chance" and " State of mind" are well supported by the PFA and other sporting bodies and are well used. Clubs have welfare officers and chaplains who give time to players as people. But what about us, the fans ? Do we have a duty of care for the players who entertain us and sometimes frustrate us? Or are we free from any such responsibility ? Boards like this are read by players as well as social media like twitter and facebook. Do we need to think a bit more before we make disrespectful and strong critical comments about players ? We call ourselves "supporters" . Do we give enough support an encouragement on boards like this. Reading the Aaron Lennon thread, it would seem we do. There are so many genuine expressions of care and understanding on that thread. However at other times it would seem that some players get mercilessly picked on.
-
cricketfieldclarets
- Posts: 21464
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:59 pm
- Been Liked: 8585 times
- Has Liked: 11285 times
Re: Do we have a duty of care ?
I think fans and people in general always should have some duty of care. But at the same time, people realise that the internet in the main is anonymous usernames who say things they wouldn't in 'real life'. That said people are still saying things they believe.
Its nice to be nice and what is annoying these days is that no matter what the story, especially on social media and comment sections is that the inevitable always happens. Tit for tat arguments, point scoring and eventually bitching and bickering back and forth usually over a topic totally unrelated to the post in general.
Comment sections on news stories in particular. It can be a really good, positive piece of news. Maybe someone rich and famous had donated money to charity or done something else worthwhile. Yet people will still look for negative and criticise.
As a professional player or someone in the limelight I would try and remain as anonymous as I could. Easier said than done. But even then people still have something to say.
The internet has given everyone a soapbox to voice their opinions. Some of the things that used to be said about Luke Chadwick (appearance), Clarke Carlisle (psychological issues), Joey Barton (his past) and even Ian Wright (his opinions) to name just a few ex clarets can be pretty nasty to read.
On the terraces I think (unless its criminal - racism for example) things should allowed to remain as intimidating as possible. Part of the job for the opposition is to deal with hostility from the opposition on and off the field. But beyond that people should think a lot more about their actions.
The problem is because the internet is still relatively new, people weren't educated about how to behave in that environment - only how to behave in the true social sense.
Its nice to be nice and what is annoying these days is that no matter what the story, especially on social media and comment sections is that the inevitable always happens. Tit for tat arguments, point scoring and eventually bitching and bickering back and forth usually over a topic totally unrelated to the post in general.
Comment sections on news stories in particular. It can be a really good, positive piece of news. Maybe someone rich and famous had donated money to charity or done something else worthwhile. Yet people will still look for negative and criticise.
As a professional player or someone in the limelight I would try and remain as anonymous as I could. Easier said than done. But even then people still have something to say.
The internet has given everyone a soapbox to voice their opinions. Some of the things that used to be said about Luke Chadwick (appearance), Clarke Carlisle (psychological issues), Joey Barton (his past) and even Ian Wright (his opinions) to name just a few ex clarets can be pretty nasty to read.
On the terraces I think (unless its criminal - racism for example) things should allowed to remain as intimidating as possible. Part of the job for the opposition is to deal with hostility from the opposition on and off the field. But beyond that people should think a lot more about their actions.
The problem is because the internet is still relatively new, people weren't educated about how to behave in that environment - only how to behave in the true social sense.