Are footballers role models?

[neil]

Are AFL players role models?
What evidence supports the argument?
Why do journalist speak shit by claiming they are?

It took me less than an hour using the internet to discover that players are NOT role models.
This indicated that any journalist who claims they are is lying. Has failed to do any research.
And is a lying piece of shit.

The actual research shows little if any effect of sportsmen as role models on children.
Opinion pieces state the opposite.
Basically if you have an agenda then footballers are role models if you do research then they are not.

Parents are childrens major influence NOT footballers. It is an inditement on the standard of Australian journalists that they continue to justify any invasion of privacy,
any attack on reputation, any smear campaign with the fallacious claim that footballers are role models.


The Research and its conclusions.

"It was immediately evident that there is very little academic or industry-based
evidence to support the anecdotally proposed causal link between role
models and sports participation"

http://fulltext.ausport.gov.au/fulltext/2002/vic/role_model.pdf

"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."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100421191410.htm

"There is a stereotype that male athletes in contact sports are more sexually aggressive in their attitudes and their normative behaviour than other athletes and non-athletes, but recent research does not

support this belief."

"There is scant evidence on the degree to which sporting heroes’ negative behaviour influences fan behaviour."

"Most young people are able to determine what is right or wrong in the behaviour of admired sports personalities, and would not emulate abusive behaviours in order to be like them."

http://www.psychology.org.au/publications/inpsych/popular/sporting/

"Evaluation data suggested that although the teachers and young people did report an immediate positive reaction to the activities, there was limited evidence of a wider impact on young people's behaviour,

school attendance or self-esteem."

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ964186&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ964186

"Despite concerns that high-profile sportspeople are bad role models; new research has found that the behaviours of some of our sports stars have little bearing on Australian binge-drinking culture."

http://www.sciencealert.com.au/news/20102304-20884.html

"Children develop as the result of many experiences and relationships. Adults help kids learn, overcome obstacles, and understand that positive values can be lived each day. Whether you are a parent,

grandparent, aunt, uncle, teacher, civic leader, clergy member, sports coach, after-school program leader, or a person who just happens into a child's life, you have the ability to inspire!"

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-moment-youth/201202/how-change-teenagers-life

More

http://www.thesportjournal.org/article/media-sports-stars-and-adolescents-statistical-analysis-mediated-sports-heroes-based-self-co

http://www.academia.edu/604330/Role_Models_for_Young_People_What_makes_an_effective_role_model_program_A_report_to_the_National_Youth_Affairs_Research_Scheme

Not entirely in argreement

"A child who watches acts of violence committed by thieves, murderers, or sadists in films or on TV knows that society disapproves of these acts. The child who watches sports knows that athletes' acts of

violence are approved of. It makes sense that sports violence would serve as an important role model for children who tend to be well adjusted socially, while illegal violence on the screen would tend to

have a greater influence on the behaviour of children who are more psychologically damaged and/or feel more alienated from society."

http://www.peace.ca/sports.htm

" 42 percent named a parent or relative, 39 percent named a figure known primarily through the media, and 19 percent named a non-familial known individual. The most popular role models were parents (22

percent), sports figures (18 percent), siblings (10 percent) and singers (10 percent)."

http://www.ph.ucla.edu/pr/newsitem012802.html

[Brenny]

Unfortunately, kids look up to them and as such are classified as role models.

Kids should be looking up to the nurses and the doctors who save lives, but unfortunately this isn't the case.

As such, AFL footballers are role models.

What you said is truth for any normal adult human being, I'd agree with you, they are not role models.

But to little 8yo johnny, who plays tackers and wants to be like Jobe Watson good luck shooting him in the leg and telling him he isn't allowed to look up to him and be like him.

The research can say all that it wants, but whoever is the douche that is going to spoil little Johnnys hopes and dreams is a dick.

Yes parents should be educating them and many do, but good luck segregating Johnny from life and his friends so he isn't infulenced by his peers and so on.

[mudlark]

NO!!! And why should they be? They just want to play footy and if they don't conform to all the do gooders,stiff.

[John Wren]

footballers are not role models. however, like everyone else, they are not above the law or belong to a society that has immunity from the law and the consequences of their decisions.

[Piethagoras' Theorem]

I find it difficult to believe that someone who is not in direct contact with a child can be their role model. In a limited sense, they could be, assuming the kid aspires to be a top level footballer but surely not as citizens. There's just so much more happening in their day to day lives. Parents, teachers, uncles, aunties, brothers and sisters etc are people that kids are greater influenced by, because of the close connection.

[David]

Fantastic post Neil, and an excellent catalogue of research there. It really is time this myth were comprehensively put to bed, and I think that post more or less achieves that.

Brenny, you still don't get it. Little Johnny admires Jobe Watson as a footballer. The football field is the place upon which his admiration is built, and if he signs his autograph after training or appears on Before the Game, that remains the context in which LJ understands him.

I don't know if little kids read the Herald Sun — I certainly hope not! — but let's say LJ does, and his hero is caught on camera snorting cocaine. What do you think is the most likely conclusion he will take from this?

a) LJ realises that his hero is capable of doing bad things. He is crushed and transfers his affections elsewhere.
b) LJ is told that his hero is capable of doing bad things. He is confused but decides to believe the footballer is innocent of what he's been accused of.
c) He does not understand, so asks his parents. They take this as an opportunity to explain to him the dangers of drugs and human fallibility.
d) Little Johnny, all of 8 years old, concludes that because his hero snorts cocaine, he's going to do it too. This episode normalises drug use for him and he goes on to become a drug addict.

What do you think would happen? If you picked d), you either know nothing about children or you're a total moron. a), b) and c) are all infinitely more likely and all relatively harmless results. None of them provide a good reason for regulating football players' private lives. Alas, the dominant discourse in the football media implies that d) is not only a realistic possibility, it's the most likely outcome. The entire 'role model' house of cards stands on it. Once we acknowledge that the idea is patently absurd we can no longer afford it any credibility.

Frankiboy gets it spot on. To say footballers are 'role models' is to claim that they are substitute parent figures. They're role models in the same sense that Superman or 007 are. It's quite a bit like saying the guy who plays Captain Kirk needs to conduct himself impeccably off the set lest he corrupt young kids. That's how insane this is.

Brenny, your post really infantilises children and describes them in a highly patronising manner. Perhaps if you were a little younger you'd remember what it was like to be 8 years old and idolise a footballer. I do.

[Brenny]

Fact is they are not role models, as you and others have said, that's fact.

Also fact, as you pointed out Johnny wants to be a footballer like him, true.

But guess what, the world doesn't work like that. Unless there is a uprising of people against media and the government things will not change. Ever.

In the world where I live, Gail Kelly makes A$10m a year, the rich get richer and social line between rich and poor is greater than ever.

Also in the world where I live, as unfortunate as it is, Dane Swan is a role model as unfortunate as that is. The media find stories against him and Caroline Wilson has told Collingwood to sack him.

Also in my world Eddie Betts a few years back was caught smoking on a booze cruise with Robinson and some Garlett kid, as talented as he is, was not picked up as he is seen as poison and clubs don't want that image.

I appreciate where everybody is coming from all these fronts and I also appreciate, and agree, that its not always right.

Fact is, education on role models start at home. If a parent allows their little Johnny to have Jobe Watson as a role model (quite rightly on the field as you said), and Jobe then goes an gets caught putting a needle in his arm its up to the parent to educate little Johnny on that.

A parent can't be around Johnny 24hrs a day and its not up to schools to 'babysit' kids so Johnny WILL hear about it and an impressionable 8yo will think its ok... UNLESS his PARENTS educate him.

If I had a kid who wasn't the top of his class or not the brightest kid in the world, I'd gladly, any day of the week, tell him to have Nick Maxwell as a role model.

Somebody who was told he will never make it as a footballer. Port, Geelong all said he will never make it. Through hard work and determination Nick then has become a premiership captain. I'd show him videos of Maxwell at home doing his ice thingy then being at the club at 6:30 for rehab even him coming into the club weeks early as captain to start training with the new blokes.

I'd also gladly have my kid look up to Jobe Watson. Somebody who was almost cut from Essendon then who approached his dad who put him onto trainers to get him where he is now. Brownlow Medalist captain of the Essendon Football Club.

Any of those two, wouldn't hesitate.

I guess where I'm getting at is, there are footballers who can be positive role models, but there are others like Swan, Fevola and I'm sure others, who I wouldn't call a role model at all.

Edit: Yes your D is on the far end of extreme with the 'go on to be a drug addict', but with a brother 10yrs younger than I who played football for 10yrs from Tackers to under 17's I've seen it happen. they DO think its ok and they DO ask questions... But **** me dead, doesn't mean they ARE going to be a drug addict.


Also, when I was 8yrs old I was looking up to the likes of Peter Brock, Dick Johnson and Ayrton Senna. Then I started to look up to Michael Schumacer when he was at Benneton. Good thing was back in 1991/1992/1993 the news wasn't as bad as it is now... As in I never gave a crap about football. I went with dad but I never understood what was going on. Worst part was watching Pamelas tits juggling up at down as she ran on Baywatch.

Though, Darrens death I did ask questions as a 7yo (he was buried on my B-Day) and I was told what he did was wrong and so on. I didn't understand what happened all I knew was he passed on and got told he did a very bad thing.

Also, I'll tell you who I idolised back when I was 8yo. I used to sit down with my nan and watch reruns of Emergency. I used to idolise a character named Roy. I don't remember if he was a paramedic or a firemen, but I used to dress up as a firemen and run around the back and save my stuffed toys from trees and pretend push bike crashes. So much so did I idolise Roy, that for a good 6 months my name was 'Roy'. I wouldn't respond to anything else. All because he saved people and I wanted to save people too.

Maybe I was a bit different to the norm.

[David]

I broadly agree with most of what you've written above except for this bit:

[stui magpie]

Footballers have celebrity status and like all celebrities use their positive image to earn money endorsing products.

If we accept that this works then we accept that they can influence peoples behaviour both positive and negative. Some would call that being a role model.

[think positive]

[neil]

[stui magpie]

Contribution doesn't equal cause.

If you can accept that a footballer can be a positive influence you must accept that they can have a negative one.

Theres any number of budding young footballers using drugs. Did cousins cause any of them to start? highly doubtful. Did the fact that he was able to win a browlow while using drugs influence any of them to think that if it didn't hurt him it Wouldn't hurt them? Highly likely.

[David]

Stui, I think there's one big flaw in your argument: footballers do not actually have much in the way of influence. Like celebrities, their appearance in ads is far less about 'positive influence' than brand recognition. For example, I specifically remember 'Is Don Is Good' sausages because of John Barnes. John Barnes would not make me eat sausages — I doubt I'd take his advice on anything! — but his appearance leads me to remember the brand which in turn leads me to be unconsciously biased toward it when I'm choosing which sausages to buy. That's the main purpose of this kind of advertising.

If there were actually any merit to the role model argument — that is, that footballers' off-field decisionmaking can have a manifestly negative impact on the choices of impressionable tots — then the far more logical solution would be to: a) restrict reportage of footballers' private lives as a matter of public well-being, or b) slap a 15+ rating on The Herald Sun and advise that children don't read it. If media providers are fair dinkum about this, let's see them put their money where their mouth is!

[stui magpie]

The flaw in your argument is that im not talking about little kids.

You have used Cousins as an example in arguments about drugs to prove that drugs dont have a negative impact on football performance. If only one 15 year old follows that logic hes had a negative influence.

[David]

The role model argument actually depends upon the concept of little kids being led astray. Why? Because most people accept that adults and older teenagers are capable of making their own decisions.

Think about this: we no longer have a blanket film censorship system or book bannings. As long as it doesn't break the law, those over the age of 18 are permitted to consume what they like. I'm not sure where 'reading about footballers doing naughty things' fits in with that, but you get the gist.

Your argument is that footballers might have a negative impact on their peers. With respect, that's a different topic. Footballers may well be role models to their teammates in the same way that all friends or co-workers might be. But that puts every single one of us on the same plane; it doesn't support the view that footballers need to be held to a higher level of accountability than the rest of the population. That's the real issue at hand here.

(By the way, sorry for not directly addressing your Cousins hypothetical. My view on that is that it's simply a natural reflection on human fallibility. Some other kid/teenager might look at Amy Winehouse and realise that you can be a popular, successful singer with a debilitating drug addiction. As with Cousins, the reverse is also true: their very public battles with drug use — in Winehouse's case, fatal — serve as a warning. Such is life!)