NO TROLLS Hawthorn Racism Review - Sensitive issues discussed.

[Wosh]

Don’t use this thread as an opportunity to troll North or any other clubs, you’ll be removed from the discussion. Stick to the topic and please keep it civil and respectful to those involved. Keep personal arguements out of this thread.
Help moderators by not quoting obvious trolls and use the report button, please and thank you.

If you feel upset or need to talk you can call either Beyond Blue on 1300 22 4636 or Lifeline on 13 11 14 at any time.

- Crisis support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders 13YARN (13 92 76) 13YARN - Call 13 92 76 | 24 /7

This is a serious topic, please treat it as such.

Videos, statements etc in the OP here:

NO TROLLS - Hawthorn Racism Review - Sensitive issues discussed.

Don’t use this thread as an opportunity to troll North or any other clubs, you’ll be removed from the discussion. Stick to the topic and please keep it civil and respectful to those involved. Keep personal arguements out of this thread. Help moderators by not quoting obvious trolls and use the...

www.bigfooty.com

Link to Hawthorn Statement. - Link to ABC Sports article. - Leaked Report

 

[Altum Volantes]

Who says it has to be one article?

Good journos like Mick McKenzie, Adelade Ferguston and Kate McClymont spread their stuff over days, weeks and months.

McKenzie will usually do a big 60 Minutes on his yarns, along with the Age/SMH stuff.

Where's Rusty's 4 Corners?

Where's his follow ups?

Its one and done for a reason - he didn't do the work.

Or ... maybe he did and found stuff that didn't suit his narrative.

Mate.

It’s ok.

You don’t need to keep trashing the journo endlessly. It’s incredibly tedious and repetitive now.

Your desperate club will still hire Clarkson, ‘convicted’ racist or misunderstood micro-manager.

He’ll be your coach and you’ll probably win more games of footy.

 

[The 747]

The net is going to get larger, not smaller. We've just got three names of individuals who took direct action and whose names were known by the accusers.

"Recommendations as to whether any persons who engaged in, were involved in and/or were aware of any inappropriate conduct should, in the view of the investigation panel, be subject to disciplinary action..."

Keeping it real I doubt that mate. The AFL will want a small net, the AFL will get a small net IMO.

 

[blackshadow]

Majority of story features usually are a one of.

Just because there is not a second story does not mean it is any less. He DID the work and you are yet to show ANY shortcomings with his article.
You are so blinkered with hate of Jackson you just cant see the reality.

None so blind as those who don’t want to see.

Many shortcomings to Rusty’s article/methodology have been pointed out by people with long-term experience in the media environment but you just dismiss them out of hand.

 

[BomberManU]

I wonder what the North supporters thoughts on Clarkson's predicament would be if he'd taken the Essendon job.

 

[Makeshift Park]

Thanks!

I wonder how many poasting on here have actually read Egan's report.

I know right. Its only right there in the sticky post at the very top of each page of this thread.

 

[Del191229]

Why don't you just believe what the Indigenous players and partners and the assistant coach are saying .

I believe the players and their partners, said that heaps of times.

The assistant coach sounds like someone having a sook because they didn't end up like Simmo or Bevo or Dimma.

But if their material can corroborate in detail the allegations made, fine.

But I reckon you believe the Tiges are a good chance at a flag next year with Hopper and Taranto hey.

 

[blackshadow]

I wonder what the North supporters thoughts on Clarkson's predicament would be if he'd taken the Essendon job.

I’d be laughing that Essendon had been dragged into Hawthorn’s mess but I’d still see the major shortcomings in the article that broke the story and realise that all that exists at the moment are unsubstantiated allegations where the accused haven’t had a proper right of reply.

 

[Del191229]

The degree to which some of the North supporters in this thread have become invested the defence of a coach who to date has done nothing for them is insightful as to how desperate for success they have become. You are not representing your club in a favourable light.

Meanwhile has anything actually happened with the investigation or are the AFL still continuing with the do nothing for long enough and it will go away strategy. I did hear that Clarkson and Fagan, while still subject to allegations of abuse, will be allowed to commence / continue their roles where they will have further opportunities to interact with vulnerable people.

It sounds like the AFL has got their safeguarding standards firmly in place. Safeguarding their mates that is. Is it any wonder the complainants don't trust the AFL with this.

He belted that Carlton bloke after their scumbag President taunted us the night before.

 

[Del191229]

But your ready to hang Jackson based alone on your assumptions???

What?

I want Jackson hanged?

Where have I ever said anything like that?

 

[Del191229]

I’d be laughing that Essendon had been dragged into Hawthorn’s mess but I’d still see the major shortcomings in the article that broke the story and realise that all that exists at the moment are unsubstantiated allegations where the accused haven’t had a proper right of reply.

Agree, its not an open and shut case like the Essendon doping affair where they were unmasked initially by very serious law enforcement, then admitted an injecting program, before the bloke responsible for the injecting program admitted using a banned substance an actual high quality journalists. Situations are so different as to be laughable.

 

[BomberManU]

I’d be laughing that Essendon had been dragged into Hawthorn’s mess but I’d still see the major shortcomings in the article that broke the story and realise that all that exists at the moment are unsubstantiated allegations where the accused haven’t had a proper right of reply.

Oh, I highly doubt it.

 

[sr36]

Who says it has to be one article?

Good journos like Mick McKenzie, Adelade Ferguston and Kate McClymont spread their stuff over days, weeks and months.

McKenzie will usually do a big 60 Minutes on his yarns, along with the Age/SMH stuff.

Where's Rusty's 4 Corners?

Where's his follow ups?

Its one and done for a reason - he didn't do the work.

Or ... maybe he did and found stuff that didn't suit his narrative.

He's a niche journalist who specialises in telling victim's stories. That's all he's done. He didn't try to do more. It is not the entire story from all angles and doesn't attempt to be.

He didn't self publish. He clearly had enough evidence for ABC lawyers to tick off publication. Sure, there's a possibility that he got the story wrong and so too did his editors and so too have the lawyers. But you're suggesting that he hasn't done enough research and your suggestion is based on zero evidence.

Based on your expectations, victims would never have their stories told, except at the end of a trial.

 

[Del191229]

Mate.

It’s ok.

You don’t need to keep trashing the journo endlessly. It’s incredibly tedious and repetitive now.

Your desperate club will still hire Clarkson, ‘convicted’ racist or misunderstood micro-manager.

He’ll be your coach and you’ll probably win more games of footy.

You'll still be coached by someone who was right there through all of it and openly admitted to racist recruitment policies.

 

[BomberManU]

Agree, its not an open and shut case like the Essendon doping affair where they were unmasked initially by very serious law enforcement, then admitted an injecting program, before the bloke responsible for the injecting program admitted using a banned substance an actual high quality journalists. Situations are so different as to be laughable.

Strange reply, seeing as no one was comparing the two situations.

 

[Del191229]

He's a niche journalist who specialises in telling victim's stories. That's all he's done. He didn't try to do more. It is not the entire story from all angles and doesn't attempt to be.

Finally ... you get it.

 

[sr36]

Keeping it real I doubt that mate. The AFL will want a small net, the AFL will get a small net IMO.

I think there's too many external eyes on this one.

 

[Del191229]

Strange reply, seeing as no one was comparing the two situations.

Yeah, you'll find more than a few have

 

[Altum Volantes]

You'll still be coached by someone who was right there through all of it and openly admitted to racist recruitment policies.

I’m sorry, do you have something to say about the actual accusations being levelled at these men?

You aren’t just obsessing over perceived issues with the journalistic process?

How unusual.

 

[Tyberious Funk]

He’s crossed the line and become their advocate and cheerleader. He is not an objective journalist in this case.

A North Melbourne supporter in the Hawthorn Racism discussion, accusing someone of not being objective...

Oh, the irony.

 

[Makeshift Park]

Based on your expectations, victims would never have their stories told, except at the end of a trial.

I've read about a third of this whole thread and I haven't seen a single poster suggest the victims shouldn't have had their stories told.

The question we keep circling back to is whether there was enough corroboration to justify naming Clarkson, Fagan and Burt as part of this important process of telling their stories.

 

[sr36]

Finally ... you get.

I've gotten that all along.

It's people on your side of the conversation who seem to think this article was supposed to be the be all and end all of the story.

It's purely and simply an account of some recruits perceptions of their time at Hawthorn, which focussed on some pretty terrible things that they believe occured.

I can't believe there are people who think that story is one that shouldn't be told and are attacking the journalist for telling it.

 

[boncer34]

I've read about a third of this whole thread and I haven't seen a single poster suggest the victims shouldn't have had their stories told.

The question we keep circling back to is whether there was enough corroboration to justify naming Clarkson, Fagan and Burt as part of this important process of telling their stories.

Agreed. Instead of Clarkson he should've just said "Senior coaching figure." Nobody could've broken the code.

 

[Del191229]

I've gotten that all along.

It's people on your side of the conversation who seem to think this article was supposed to be the be all and end all of the story.

It's purely and simply an account of some recruits perceptions of their time at Hawthorn, which focussed on some pretty terrible things that they believe occured.

I can't believe there are people who think that story is one that shouldn't be told and are attacking the journalist for telling it.

Purely and simply.

 

[sr36]

I've read about a third of this whole thread and I haven't seen a single poster suggest the victims shouldn't have had their stories told.

The question we keep circling back to is whether there was enough corroboration to justify naming Clarkson, Fagan and Burt as part of this important process of telling their stories.

All we know is that there was enough evidence to satisfy the journalist, his editors and the ABC lawyers. we also know there's enough evidence for an inquiry to have been pulled together bloody quickly. Yet we have all these people sitting around saying - he's a shit journalist because we, who aren't privvy to all of the evidence - some of which is probably unprintable - haven't seen all of the evidence. It's ridiculous.

 

[sr36]

Purely and simply.

Yes. The stories ramifications may be larger than that, but that's all the story is - an account of some very personal experiences. The rest will come out by other journos, or get repressed, but a journalist has done no wrong if they focus on the angle of the victim and tell their perspective - as long as it's true.