News Review into racism at Collingwood

[sr36]

It should take all of about 5 seconds to figure out proud isn’t the word you should use.

Not for our Ed. Funniest thing was that in his resignation speech he spoke about how he planned to begin the speech. But then at the last moment, probably in 5 seconds, he decided to go with proud.

 

[Pie eyed]

I don’t think the club expected all the findings, or at least the severity. There is no doubt the club sat on the findings longer than needed, and were embarrassed by the leak. Ed’s attempt to spin the report as a positive tainted the club’s credibility.

I think we will repair that over time as we implement the recommendations. I still believe an official club apology is warranted.

Have you read the review?
Exactly what I would have expected and as far as severity goes I thought it was very,very subdued.

 

[60 Yards Out]

No company ever does and for good reason - needs to be digested and fully understood, and they need to work out how to respond so that the President of the company doesn't stand up and say proud.

This is exactly right. My theory about what happened is that the Board was sideswiped by the report, couldn't work out / agree on how to respond and then procrastinated over it. Someone leaked it out of frustration and to force the club's hand -- given the report would have had a very limited distribution, the most likely leakers are the authors.

 

[jmac70]

Have you read the review?
Exactly what I would have expected and as far as severity goes I thought it was very,very subdued.

Yes, I have.

 

[regpies]

Anyone who hasn't read this should. Davis articulates the issues the club has had with racism with maturity and strength.

It's distressing to read the racism that Davis endured to play for us our club. The way it isolated him. The strength of character to work through it and stand up to it.

It's amazing to think of the career he had in the face of that when it would have been easier to walk away.

I think critically he touches on the importance of acknowledging whats happened with racism at the club. Without that we can't properly heal. In his view we haven't acknowledged this with him. For those in here who argue we have, that it's time to move on, we can't until we do that properly. That makes it an ongoing problem at the club.

Is anyone still burying their head in the sand after reading that?

Pretty sad reading that an indigenous player was treated like that. Especially a guy who gave the club such great service and fans so many great moments during his career.

Very odd he wasn’t interviewed as part of the review. The club should consider itself lucky he wasn’t otherwise it would’ve made for even worse reading.

 

[regpies]

萍乡衔孛物流有限公司

That’s one of the worst websites I’ve ever seen. Amateur hour.

In his rant he said he gave Pendles two books about leadership. I wonder if he gave him these two books.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

Pretty sad reading that an indigenous player was treated like that. Especially a guy who gave the club such great service and fans so many great moments during his career.

Very odd he wasn’t interviewed as part of the review. The club should consider itself lucky he wasn’t otherwise it would’ve made for even worse reading.

Does he say he wasn't interviewed? Surely as one of our few prominent indigenous stars of this century he was interviewed! If not, the writers of the report have missed the bleeding obvious in their research. Let's also keep in mind that Leon is no doubt referring largely to experiences in his earlier playing years and he retired in 2011. I would very much like to hear of players experiences post 2010 - with one notable exception.

 

[sr36]

Does he say he wasn't interviewed? Surely as one of our few prominent indigenous stars of this century he was interviewed! If not, the writers of the report have missed the bleeding obvious in their research. Let's also keep in mind that Leon is no doubt referring largely to experiences in his earlier playing years and he retired in 2011. I would very much like to hear of players experiences post 2010 - with one notable exception.

It wasn't a broad review. They looked at our responses to known racial issues that the club was involved in. Leon wasn't relevant to what was reviewed.

 

[Gone Critical]

It wasn't a broad review. They looked at our responses to known racial issues that the club was involved in. Leon wasn't relevant to what was reviewed.

The article doesn’t say he wasn’t interviewed. He was rightly upset the club didn’t contact him after the release. I suspect he was interviewed, it’s hard to believe the authors wouldn’t have wanted to speak to him.

 

[Billys Back]

Its what happens when their was a racist president in charge

Mick Malthouse in self preservation mode....
Again most of things occurred on his watch, but ‘nothing to see here’??!!!

 

[Markfs]

Mick Malthouse in self preservation mode....
Again most of things occurred on his watch, but ‘nothing to see here’??!!!

evidently the racism startted at the end of 2011. Before that there was a period of about 10 years when there was no racism. Unfortunately, before that there was racism again. In fact, the only period where there was no racism at collingwood was during the malthouse years.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

The article doesn’t say he wasn’t interviewed. He was rightly upset the club didn’t contact him after the release. I suspect he was interviewed, it’s hard to believe the authors wouldn’t have wanted to speak to him.

If they didn't speak to him and Krakouer, the report's views on the last 20 years would be pretty much worthless.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I don’t think any single person is to blame. H gave himself the name, some people used it. Was it wrong, yes. But there was no malice.

Soz for the late reply Jmac, this bit is very very important. The intent.

Fair enough, some of those 'kids' calling HL by the nickname he afforded himself was wrong and they probably knew it, but as you speculate fairly there may have been no malice and neither HL or those players expected a different and highly sensationalized perspective much later on after the term of affection name calling racism occurred.

And this is what really grates me about victim hood, the most important bit, intent is rarely considered. The minute any one person unintentionally commits racism or discrimination they're branded as a bad person with no recourse.

Terms like 'unconscious bias' get thrown around in abundance but the two words seem antithetical. Bias gives the very impression of intent and victim seekers intend to use it that way, where as unconscious is completely unaware.

 

[Gone Critical]

I took a different inference from Leon's words. I viewed him as feeling ostracised by the incident and the fact that it wasn't really dealt with. Not that he was ostracised for speaking up. It might seem a petty difference and no difference for
the victim. But I'd view the actions of the club very differently. One is incompetence or ignorance. The other is much much worse.

Must say I didn’t get that feel. Sounds like he felt ostracised for speaking out, upsetting the team ethos. He said it didn’t last long but I took it as the reason was speaking out and it meant he didn’t complain to admin again rather tried to solve issues himself via educating directly.

That’s pretty shocking

 

[jackcass]

Do you think that they would have handled it differently between those comments from Bucks and now. To me its not really about racial issues, it's how they handled every negative story that hit the press, right up to Treloar being traded.

I think they always tread a very fine line, and it's rare that they ever dump on the player in question. I certainly think they handled the H situation better post those comments from Bucks.

 

[sr36]

Must say I didn’t get that feel. Sounds like he felt ostracised for speaking out, upsetting the team ethos. He said it didn’t last long but I took it as the reason was speaking out and it meant he didn’t complain to admin again rather tried to solve issues himself via educating directly.

That’s pretty shocking

I think him being ostracised for it is extremely likely. However I do think the journo editing in the word incident was odd, as the statement didn't need a clarification. Plus considering HLs claims, surely the journo would have drilled down on that comment to get a direct quote about speaking out. But maybe I'm giving the journo too much credit.

But I agree that Leon talking about handling later incidents directly one on one points strongly to your interpretation.

it sounds appallingly handled - no attempt at mediation, no idea how to deal with conflict. Or discipline bad behaviour

 

[sr36]

The article doesn’t say he wasn’t interviewed. He was rightly upset the club didn’t contact him after the release. I suspect he was interviewed, it’s hard to believe the authors wouldn’t have wanted to speak to him.

They weren't looking for incidents of direct racism - just how Collingwood responded to known racial incidents. I think I read that they only interviewed 30 people for the known issues going back to Robbie Muir. I'm not sure how much his voice would have added to what they were reviewing. He wasn't involved in the incidents they reviewed, nor was he part of the response. I think if Leon had've made the list, they'd be still interviewing.

 

[Gone Critical]

Maybe but Leo

They weren't looking for incidents of direct racism - just how Collingwood responded to known racial incidents. I think I read that they only interviewed 30 people for the known issues going back to Robbie Muir. I'm not sure how much his voice would have added to what they were reviewing. He wasn't involved in the incidents they reviewed, nor was he part of the response. I think if Leon had've made the list, they'd be still interviewing.

Maybe but Leon has alwys had a bit of a link in with the Heretier discussion. I didn't take the report as only looking at the 5-6 incidents they reported anyway, I thought it was more general than that and was looking at the mechanisms the club had in place to provide an inclusive environment with facility to manage issues in a balanced fair way. Leon could certainly have spoken to that.

 

[Billys Back]

Maybe but Leo

Maybe but Leon has alwys had a bit of a link in with the Heretier discussion. I didn't take the report as only looking at the 5-6 incidents they reported anyway, I thought it was more general than that and was looking at the mechanisms the club had in place to provide an inclusive environment with facility to manage issues in a balanced fair way. Leon could certainly have spoken to that.

I would have thought part of the process would have been to interview past and present players (particularly indigenous) to and understanding of the challenges they felt and how things fell down. In Leon’s example, I thought it was important to understand how he went about confronting these issues and what a player in his position would have been more comfortable in doing.
I suppose the club already largely knew the areas for improvement even before the report was released. Maybe it’s the next step in formulating a process/policy whereby players like Leon will be interviewed. I like the fact Daniel Wells is part of the committee that will be responsible for this.

 

[Gone Critical]

Wells would be likely to have been interviewed also. He gives the contrast of having experienced 2 AFL clubs

In relation to that I know Daniel and his wife and saw her at a VFL match during his second season. One of the things she said was Wells loved Collingwood, said nothing against North but people at Collingwood had been fantastic and they were rapt with how they had been taken in. A positive and maybe speaks to us getting better over time given this is after Leons and Heretiers time at the club.

 

[Capital Magpie]

I read that Cameron Cloke, who was a team mate of HLs for 4 years and who was very close to him, has said that he NEVER heard that offensive nickname used by or about HL in all that time.

Suggests to me that the supposed nickname has been fabricated by HL to suit his current agenda.

 

[Gone Critical]

I read that Cameron Cloke, who was a team mate of HLs for 4 years and who was very close to him, has said that he NEVER heard that offensive nickname used by or about HL in all that time.

Suggests to me that the supposed nickname has been fabricated by HL to suit his current agenda.

Cmon. Fabricated means made up. There is no doubt the nickname was used. Argue context but it wasnt fabricated.

 

[Capital Magpie]

Cmon. Fabricated means made up. There is no doubt the nickname was used. Argue context but it wasnt fabricated.

OK fabricated is perhaps the wrong word. Exaggerated might have been better.
However if Cameron Cloke is to be believed, it undoubtedly weakens HLs case that the term was used freely in his time at the club.
Cameron says that he and HL were best mates when they were at the club together. Surely if that is true Cameron would have heard the nickname used??

 

[Gone Critical]

OK fabricated is perhaps the wrong word. Exaggerated might have been better.
However if Cameron Cloke is to be believed, it undoubtedly weakens HLs case that the term was used freely in his time at the club.
Cameron says that he and HL were best mates when they were at the club together. Surely if that is true Cameron would have heard the nickname used??

That makes more sense. It was used bur as Clokes statement and the messaging by club leaders that they never heard it it may have been used by a clique within the club. At a guess i think he was close with the rat pack boys earlier days at the club and it seems like they could have used the name without really worrying to much but maybe had enough awareness not to use it outside the group. They also would have been the cool kids of the playing group and as such the ones you had to play up to a bit if you wanted to be included in their circle

This is speculation by me but a possible explanation as to why this name could have been used in a closed sense

 

[sr36]

Maybe but Leo

Maybe but Leon has alwys had a bit of a link in with the Heretier discussion. I didn't take the report as only looking at the 5-6 incidents they reported anyway, I thought it was more general than that and was looking at the mechanisms the club had in place to provide an inclusive environment with facility to manage issues in a balanced fair way. Leon could certainly have spoken to that.

If you're interviewing everyone who had a bit of a link to HL discussions by having publicly commented, your interview list would be big. I don't think Leon's name would have been on the primary list, but when interviewing people about how racist issues were dealt with, his name may have popped up and been added to the list.

My perspective on this comes from having had a high school pastoral background. Having been part of the reviewing writing/copying of policies and having sat in on mediation sessions and handed out consequences. From a school's perspective, in terms of policy, your looking at two main goals - prevention and reaction to incidents. That's what I'm assuming was reviewed. When you're coming up with or copying a policy, half the policy - the reaction part - is an assumption that there will be some racial incidents. Schools aren't at fault for racist incidents that occur unless the previous reactions have been poor and enabled it- no preventative education no matter how good is going to stop it completely. Incidents occurring is on the individuals involved and often not the school. The school is at fault if their preventative education is substandard or tokenistic and they're at fault if their reaction to incidents is below par and it can often make the matter worse in terms of outcome for the victim and in terms of future prevention. It sounds like this was the case with the response to Leon's incident and the Pies in general. In terms of the Leon case, above all else it sounds like we needed a good counsellor that could run a mediation session well. It sounds like we wouldn't have any idea about mediation and reconciliation of grievances and done anything to ensure the claimant wasn't received as a dobber.

I'm assuming that the response to racism review was a review of our preventative education as well as what was done to respond when issues arose. Reviewing the education part might involve interviews with players - but there's no reason why it would be an indigenous player that was interviewed. My understanding is that the reaction part was reviewed based solely on the incidents that were already known - as investigating or looking for incidents wasn't part of the scope of the review. I don't see why Leon would have been addeed to an interview list unless it was because his name was mentioned in relation to how we responded to an unlisted issue of racism, which it obviously could have been.