 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Nash Rising
Joined: 27 Nov 2011
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| neil wrote: | | Nash Rising wrote: |
Whether footballers like it or not kids and teens will try to emulate those they see as their 'hero's'.
If a footballer likes to go out and get pissed and fight 'some' of their hero worshipers will think it is ok to do exactly the same.
Sure the footballer is not asking to be a role model, but that doesn't change that many of their followers will see them as exactly that.
Footballers due to their status have a degree of power, with that power comes responsibility, even if they don't like it. |
Link says otherwise
"The loutish and drunken behaviour of some of our sporting heroes -- routinely reported in the media -- has little or no effect on the drinking habits of young people, new research has found."
"Our research shows that young people, both sporting participants and non-sporting participants, don't appear to be influenced by the drinking habits of high-profile sportspeople as depicted in the mass media."
"Young people's own drinking was instead strongly related to the overestimation of their friends' drinking and, in sportspeople only, to sport-specific cultural habits, such as the drinking with competitors after games."
"But there is much stronger evidence for a relationship between alcohol-industry sponsorship, advertising and marketing within sport and hazardous drinking among young people than there is for the influence of sports stars drinking."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100421191410.htm
This was in the original post
Also
"Media companies are increasingly targeting adolescents with TV shows that feature violence, alcohol and drugs. An interdisciplinary research project with researchers from the University of Gothenburg, Sweden, and colleagues from the UK is looking closer at how society and other actors should react to the link between young people's media habits and their alcohol consumption."
"There is a well-documented link between watching programmes that show alcohol, such as TV reality shows, and increased drinking"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111010075458.htm
If you disagree can you provide some evidence rather than just opinion? |
Yes I understand what is being professed by those studies, its just that my life experience disagrees with it |
|
|
|
 |
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Brenny wrote: | I think I've got a better grasp on the angle that Neil is coming from.
Accepted.
Should we then be splitting the term 'Role Model' into two then.
Off Field: They are not role models, just simply people who play football.
On Field: They can be positive role models... work ethic, confidence, hard work, keeping healthy and so on? Surely on this side of it they can encourage kids (pre teen and teens) to work hard to reach their goals. |
I think that's a fair summation, although we still risk overestimating the 'positive' side (as the Ausport study indicates). Nonetheless, it's good to establish that the child tends to understands the footballer as footballer first and foremost.
Another question we need to be asking is how much the role model paradigm — even if there were any truth in it — justifies regulating the off-field lives of footballers. Wouldn't it make more sense for our society to focus on further regulating the behaviour of parents? Or are these simply 'solutions' to a problem that doesn't exist?
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
September Zeros
Joined: 04 Oct 2012
Location: Behind you
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Brenny wrote: | I think I've got a better grasp on the angle that Neil is coming from.
Accepted.
Should we then be splitting the term 'Role Model' into two then.
Off Field: They are not role models, just simply people who play football.
On Field: They can be positive role models... work ethic, confidence, hard work, keeping healthy and so on? Surely on this side of it they can encourage kids (pre teen and teens) to work hard to reach their goals.
Or should we all together just scrap the whole idea of 'Role Model' and even 'Hero' and just see them as people who play sport? |
Some nice questions raised and I like the focus on off field and on field because I think it's a critical separation that needs to be made.
And Neil first thing that pops up on my google search is this link:
http://www.livestrong.com/article/374758-why-do-athletes-make-good-role-models/
Be the Journal of adolescent health flimsy or not its what comes up before i even start looking. But im not going to sit here and present a case for the affirmative because i dont care about the topic enough to provide a thorough background. I only care about the fact that people felt comfotable shooting down anyone who opposed the presented arguments because they felt they had presented enough research to put the question to bed. My point was merely that you can't just present arguments for the negative and dismiss or leave out all those for the affirmative and then say "there its proven". You can't just dismiss people's point of view on the basis of that.
_________________
No Pressure, No Diamonds
They used to be a happy team at hawthorn.
________________ |
|
|
|
|
September Zeros
Joined: 04 Oct 2012
Location: Behind you
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | Brenny wrote: | I think I've got a better grasp on the angle that Neil is coming from.
Accepted.
Should we then be splitting the term 'Role Model' into two then.
Off Field: They are not role models, just simply people who play football.
On Field: They can be positive role models... work ethic, confidence, hard work, keeping healthy and so on? Surely on this side of it they can encourage kids (pre teen and teens) to work hard to reach their goals. |
Another question we need to be asking is how much the role model paradigm — even if there were any truth in it — justifies regulating the off-field lives of footballers. Wouldn't it make more sense for our society to focus on further regulating the behaviour of parents? Or are these simply 'solutions' to a problem that doesn't exist? |
Good questions David... My feel is from a business point of view they simply can't afford to completely ignore the off field lives of a footballer as unfair as it may be to the footballer. As I've said before when they sign up they accept that business model, if they don't like it they shouldn't sign up. But i don't think the role model paradigm is any justification for regulating off field lives of footballers. As I believe if they are role models at all, they are on field role models and it stops there. Better regulating parent behaviour would be much more effective but difficult in my opinion to execute.
_________________
No Pressure, No Diamonds
They used to be a happy team at hawthorn.
________________ |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| September Zeros wrote: | | Brenny wrote: | I think I've got a better grasp on the angle that Neil is coming from.
Accepted.
Should we then be splitting the term 'Role Model' into two then.
Off Field: They are not role models, just simply people who play football.
On Field: They can be positive role models... work ethic, confidence, hard work, keeping healthy and so on? Surely on this side of it they can encourage kids (pre teen and teens) to work hard to reach their goals.
Or should we all together just scrap the whole idea of 'Role Model' and even 'Hero' and just see them as people who play sport? |
Some nice questions raised and I like the focus on off field and on field because I think it's a critical separation that needs to be made.
And Neil first thing that pops up on my google search is this link:
http://www.livestrong.com/article/374758-why-do-athletes-make-good-role-models/
Be the Journal of adolescent health flimsy or not its what comes up before i even start looking. But im not going to sit here and present a case for the affirmative because i dont care about the topic enough to provide a thorough background. I only care about the fact that people felt comfotable shooting down anyone who opposed the presented arguments because they felt they had presented enough research to put the question to bed. My point was merely that you can't just present arguments for the negative and dismiss or leave out all those for the affirmative and then say "there its proven". You can't just dismiss people's point of view on the basis of that. |
SZ, Neil provided a variety of studies, some of which offered conflicting results. My understanding is that some of the papers (such as the one you provided, and one in Neil's OP) conflate 'local' role models with 'distant' role models — clearly, it should be obvious to anyone with an interest in developmental psychology that a parent/teacher/peer is a very different kind of role model to an athlete or movie star. One is in a constant stage of interaction and has a relationship with the child; the other is an idealised figure that has no interaction and no relationship with the child. It goes without saying that the former has a very real socialising influence on the development of the child's views and behaviour; the latter, as this thread demonstrates, negligible.
It makes sense, doesn't it? The athlete is treated like a hero because he first fulfills an idealised role — to be specific, 'great athlete' — and secondly can have whatever the child considers to be positive attributes (great guy, cool, popular with women) projected onto him. If he happens to be exposed as a drug addict or rapist or violent criminal, it's far more likely that the child will either transfer his admiration elsewhere or simply continue in a state of denial by maintaining his hero's innocence. Given the child doesn't live in a culture which glorifies these attributes, it's highly unlikely that his hero's transgressions will override the contradictory messages coming from the genuinely influential people (parents, siblings, friends, teachers) around him.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
neil 
Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Location: Queensland
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| September Zeros wrote: |
And Neil first thing that pops up on my google search is this link:
http://www.livestrong.com/article/374758-why-do-athletes-make-good-role-models/
Be the Journal of adolescent health flimsy or not its what comes up before i even start looking. But im not going to sit here and present a case for the affirmative because i dont care about the topic enough to provide a thorough background. I only care about the fact that people felt comfotable shooting down anyone who opposed the presented arguments because they felt they had presented enough research to put the question to bed. My point was merely that you can't just present arguments for the negative and dismiss or leave out all those for the affirmative and then say "there its proven". You can't just dismiss people's point of view on the basis of that. |
Livestrong is Lance Armstrongs creation
You know the steroid cheat who has lied constantly for twenty years about performance enhancing drugs. The man who will end up in jail for perjury over his denials about drugs.
The multimillionaire who forced all his teammates to take drugs and lie about it.
This is your evidence to support sportsmen are role models?
I am not dismissing people point of view I am saying prove it. Provide evidence.
I have not been able to find credible sources that support the premise that sportmen are role models. I have asked those that claim sportsmen are role models to back up opinion with some facts.
_________________
Carlscum 120 years being cheating scum |
|
|
|
|
Brenny
Joined: 05 Apr 2011
Location: Westpac Centre
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Neil answered it. Deleted.
Last edited by Brenny on Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:44 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
neil
Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Location: Queensland
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Brenny wrote: | I think I've got a better grasp on the angle that Neil is coming from.
Accepted.
Should we then be splitting the term 'Role Model' into two then.
Off Field: They are not role models, just simply people who play football.
On Field: They can be positive role models... work ethic, confidence, hard work, keeping healthy and so on? Surely on this side of it they can encourage kids (pre teen and teens) to work hard to reach their goals.
Or should we all together just scrap the whole idea of 'Role Model' and even 'Hero' and just see them as people who play sport? |
Yes the evidence supports your view kids seek to emulate sportsmen and womens achievements. Although it seems more complicated than just that. Selection seems to be based on identifying with an individual sportstar based on shared characteristics. Like similar backgrounds, ethnicity, overcoming similar obstacles etc.
_________________
Carlscum 120 years being cheating scum |
|
|
|
|
neil
Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Location: Queensland
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Brenny wrote: |
One off field, which you have proven doesn't exist and On Field, which I can't find any evidence to support or disprove. As in a teen looks up to Chris Judd's on field success and looks up to his hard work and bla bla bla... or is it just a case of he is Chris Judd who plays football and kids/teens shouldn't look at them as role models, even on the field. |
I cannot find any evidence that supports or disproves onfield role models either. I vaguely remember seeing something but cannot find the link.
Gave up looking when Google threw up Nicks role model debate as a reference 
_________________
Carlscum 120 years being cheating scum |
|
|
|
|
September Zeros
Joined: 04 Oct 2012
Location: Behind you
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Yeah it does make perfect sense.
You put that very nicely David and I 100% agree but your leaving out that that sporting star, that idol, that hero .....may still be the sole reason a child strives for excellence in that very same field. Not mum not dad, not teacher smith or minister jimmy but that hero.
I feel some here are answering the question of whether poorly behaving footballers cause kids to grow up with poor behaviour whilst others are answering the questions of whether great players cause kids to want to grow up to be great players themselves, and we're throwing the term role model around referring to both.
IMO While kids try to emulate their heroes on field performance, kick goals like them, take marks like them and wear their number on their backs then i believe the term "role model" can be still be applied quite specifically to their on field performance. Doesn't mean they are responsible for that kid taking drugs or drink driving, that wasn't the question raised in the thread topic, but they may have impacted that kids drive to want to be an afl star without being a significant other or in a constant state of interaction. Lance Armstrong may have been the catalyst for many a child to start cycling. Just because he is now a drug cheat and those kids no longer admire him wouldn't change the fact that he was the reason they began cycling.
Why do we have to get bogged down in psyco-social discussions about players taking drugs and off field impacts etc etc......the thread topic was "are footballers role models"
I still maintain they are ......in very specific confines regarding football. In every other sense. No they are not. And a few of you have pointed out the reasons why not quite nicely.
_________________
No Pressure, No Diamonds
They used to be a happy team at hawthorn.
________________ |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Thanks SZ. I think it's relevant to discuss the off-field stuff because that's the context in which the role model argument is most used. Jobe Watson inspiring kids to play football isn't a controversial idea; indeed — as much as Neil gives us reason to look at even that skeptically — most people would have little need to argue against it. The other angle is more contentious because it underpins the idea that footballers should be held to a higher level of personal accountability compared to the rest of the population. As indefensible as that concept is, the frustrating thing is that it remains the dominant paradigm. Even players themselves cite it as a valid justification for their own punishment. It's a shame more football journalists don't make it a topic of critical discussion.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Underdog
Joined: 02 May 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Yes Footballers are role models & its very easy to prove
How many young players that get recruited say that they base their game on a certain player ?
Jamie Elliot last year came out & said he based his game on Tiprat Milne Hard at the ball etc
End of story |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
It's that clear on-field/off-field divide again, Underdog. Do you think Elliott models his behaviour towards women on Milne as well?
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
John Wren 
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
|
|
|
|
September Zeros
Joined: 04 Oct 2012
Location: Behind you
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | Thanks SZ. I think it's relevant to discuss the off-field stuff because that's the context in which the role model argument is most used. Jobe Watson inspiring kids to play football isn't a controversial idea; indeed — as much as Neil gives us reason to look at even that skeptically — most people would have little need to argue against it. The other angle is more contentious because it underpins the idea that footballers should be held to a higher level of personal accountability compared to the rest of the population. As indefensible as that concept is, the frustrating thing is that it remains the dominant paradigm. Even players themselves cite it as a valid justification for their own punishment. It's a shame more football journalists don't make it a topic of critical discussion. |
Good point.
_________________
No Pressure, No Diamonds
They used to be a happy team at hawthorn.
________________ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
