Mullin and McClean "shared their thoughts on the monarchy"

[the_holt_dragon]

Originally Posted by fezbob

Isn't it a reference to a chant about a teammate? Are the players not allowed to let their hair down and have fun in Vegas after successive seasons of intense pressure?

On the one hand, we want them to let their guard down and be vulnerable on the documentary but then they can't have a voice of their own.

I am sure the club will have a social media policy so suspect this fits within that policy. I agree that for the documentary they have a voice, but there will always be limits to that. I think for example many of us would be uncomfortable if they were tweeting about sending immigrants to Rwanda. I personally think it’s better if the players stay out of politics. I just think the profile of the club puts it in a no win situation.

[Wiltshire_Red]

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but when you are admired by many, including lots of youngsters then you really need to think before going public.

[fezbob]

Originally Posted by the_holt_dragon

I am sure the club will have a social media policy so suspect this fits within that policy. I agree that for the documentary they have a voice, but there will always be limits to that. I think for example many of us would be uncomfortable if they were tweeting about sending immigrants to Rwanda. I personally think it’s better if the players stay out of politics. I just think the profile of the club puts it in a no win situation.

I can understand that point of view from a pragmatic perspective. It's just interesting that Mullin is one of the players who people have taken to as a person via the documentary, as well as a player. To what extent can you ask him to bare his soul for the documentary but then be silent on social media?

To put it another way, would he be on the top banner of the Mail website if he played for another club? I think our profile can be a negative as well as a positive for players and I'm just mindful of the impact that level of scrutiny must have.

[Iggy Pop]

Originally Posted by Philcounty1883

There was a Wrexham fan on our messageboard last week telling us how the plane money could have been better spent.

I saw that one Phil. You (I take it that you're the Philcounty1883 on there) got into an argument with him, saying that Rob McElhenney's money could be better spent and then the moderator on your message board called the Wrexham fan a weirdo and promptly banned him, just for saying that the plane money could have been spent on something else.
Looks like the mods on your message board are a lot less lenient than ours.

[windjc]

Originally Posted by Iggy Pop

I saw that one Phil. You (I take it that you're the Philcounty1883 on there) got into an argument with him, saying that Rob McElhenney's money could be better spent and then the moderator on your message board called the Wrexham fan a weirdo and promptly banned him, just for saying that the plane money could have been spent on something else.
Looks like the mods on your message board are a lot less lenient than ours.

Banned? The irony is rich here.

[the_holt_dragon]

Originally Posted by fezbob

I can understand that point of view from a pragmatic perspective. It's just interesting that Mullin is one of the players who people have taken to as a person via the documentary, as well as a player. To what extent can you ask him to bare his soul for the documentary but then be silent on social media?

To put it another way, would he be on the top banner of the Mail website if he played for another club? I think our profile can be a negative as well as a positive for players and I'm just mindful of the impact that level of scrutiny must have.

I think his popularity from the documentary comes from his personality and also the stuff with Albie and not his politics. I think in these situations there is a danger of fans saying players can say what they want, as long it is stuff that I agree with. I think that’s going down a dangerous road as we have fans who think different things so who can be judge and jury.

My view is players can start talking about the monarchy, then why can’t they talk about Middle East politics, immigration, gender ideology and all types of divisive subjects. I therefore think it’s best just to avoid these subjects and use your profile to promote things like Mullin does with Autism.

[Hometown Unicorn]

Originally Posted by Emu D

Media training for the players and what should and should not be put out in the public domain should be a priority.

Agreed, pause training completely until they've done a course. This is far more important than what happens on the field.

[BuffaloBill]

I can't stand royalty either and if someone asks me about the subject I tell them so, they may not agree with me but I've a right to say it last time I heard. We in Wales and Ireland have had to put up with derogatory comments for years but it's all a bit of fun we keep getting told so a few comments about royalty and it seems a treasonable offence to the newspapers who carry these stories like Mullins boots nobody cares and will soon be forgotten history.

[RedAdmiral]

Originally Posted by BuffaloBill

I can't stand royalty either and if someone asks me about the subject I tell them so, they may not agree with me but I've a right to say it last time I heard. We in Wales and Ireland have had to put up with derogatory comments for years but it's all a bit of fun we keep getting told so a few comments about royalty and it seems a treasonable offence to the newspapers who carry these stories like Mullins boots nobody cares and will soon be forgotten history.

Which will be wrapped around tomorrow's fish and chips.