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

 

[western royboy]

He should have not named the coaches in his initial article for a start.

They are named in the report

 

[The Warlord]

They are named in the report

So?

People keep treating this report like its come from a Royal Commission or integrity agency.

The report has no legal standing.

It a short document compiled by a consultant employed by Hawthorn.

The report is a collection of unsubstantiated statements with no attempt made to verify the claims or offer those names the right of response.

Egan makes this very clear.

 

[western royboy]

So?

People keep treating this report like its come from a Royal Commission or integrity agency.

The report has no legal standing.

It a short document compiled by a consultant employed by Hawthorn.

The report is a collection of unsubstantiated statements with no attempt made to verify the claims or offer those names the right of response.

Egan makes this very clear.

He has reported the story

 

[The Warlord]

He has reported the story

Very poorly, and leading to an adversarial situation that's almost certainly leading to poor outcomes for those who trusted him.

And "reporting the story" means jack, its not a get out of jail free card.

Look at the amount of work Louise Milligan did for example.

 

[gouki88]

Very poorly, and leading to an adversarial situation that's almost certainly leading to poor outcomes for those who trusted him.

And "reporting the story" means jack, its not a get out of jail free card.

Look at the amount of work Louise Milligan did for example.

Your insistence on the poor quality of the report is boring, and reeks of being bitter.

 

[sr36]

You really don’t get it, no matter how much it’s explained to you. They knew they were part of an ongoing investigation when they went to the media. This has accelerated the process and made it very public. People have been suggesting, perhaps logically, that they went to the AFL to force their hand. Now people are claiming they’re ”sick” of it. Or worried it’s being rushed, which I don’t buy for a second.

As another poster put it, this is head hurting stuff. They have their chance to substantiate their claims to a panel that appears culturally sensitive and has been given independence from the AFL. They are being encouraged to take it.

They made it clear that they don't want to participate into an inquiry into the matter, but not an AFL one. The AFL then announced an inquiry into the matter, with AFL decided terms and timeline. Their main sticking point seems to be the timeline. Why are they obliged to adhere to an AFL imposed timeline to hear the matter?

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

I think if anyone believes that this AFL inquiry will be the end of this story, they're delusional.

 

[sr36]

Believe me it makes a difference.

Things were so bad compared to now, and they ain't all that great right now. I used to go fruit picking in the Riverina in the late 80s and early 90s and I'd stop by the camp on the river and ask where the dangerous cops were then not work or camp in those areas. You don't need to do that now. Its not a potential threat to your life the way it was.

People still die in custody but there's alot less outright murders in custody.

There's a definite correlation between the visibility of aboriginal players and the way indigenous Australian issues have become something mainstream Australia cares about. Other things too. Music for example - that song solid rock and Midnight Oil actually exposing people on the East Coast to Warumpi Band. The Bicentennial.

Sport built a bridge that simply wasn't there. It might not have been perfect, far from it but without Riolis, Krakouers, Cables, Winmars, Kicketts ...

I think it was Micheal Long who was kept out of a club in St Kilda while the rest of the Essendon side was allowed in. It was cactus and there was outrage in white society. I remember being shocked by that because I genuinely didn't think people gave a * ( especially Essendon people, I'd been to Windy Hill in the 80s.). And credit to Essendon, who I usually hate, cos they arced up about it and made a stand.

That was years before his mediation with Monkhurst.

Yep. Indigenous participation in the AFL has had a really positive impact for race relations. The AFL industry cops a lot of crap for the incidents that have occurred, but those incidents have been about broader society's attitudes and behaviour which have been exposed and produced society changing empathy by them occurring to high profile, admired and respected athletes and men.

 

[mcnulty]

They made it clear that they don't want to participate into an inquiry into the matter, but not an AFL one. The AFL then announced an inquiry into the matter, with AFL decided terms and timeline. Their main sticking point seems to be the timeline. Why are they obliged to adhere to an AFL imposed timeline to hear the matter?

Ok mate we’re going in circles. They’ve been given no less time than those they’ve accused. More in fact, as the coaches didn’t have access to the report until after it was dropped by the media. Comparisons with court times are irrelevant as they are largely due to capacity constraints due to an overburdened system. The AFL has constituted a special investigation which is independent, adjudicated by people with cultural sensitivity and will be scrutinised by a watchful media. Seems entirely fair to me.

The “don’t have time” angle looks entirely like legal manoeuvring to me. Which is entirely their prerogative, but I simply don’t buy it.

Anyway you’re a good poster and seem like a reasonable bloke, so I’m going to leave it there. We’ll have to agree to disagree. Not quite sure how I got quite so sucked into this thread (not why people think, I’m about the most ambivalent Hawks fan imaginable- been to the Hawks board a handful of times), but time for me to bow out. May justice be served.

 

[The Warlord]

Your insistence on the poor quality of the report is boring, and reeks of being bitter.

Your quasi religious faith in the abilities of a journalist who's only contribution to this since his original article is to defame an AFL club president and then humiliatingly apologise for his ugly and aggressive behaviour is frankly bizarre. You don't have to reply to me you know.

 

[gouki88]

Your quasi religious faith in the abilities of a journalist who's only contribution to this since his original article is to defame an AFL club president and then humiliatingly apologise for his ugly and aggressive behaviour is frankly bizarre. You don't have to reply to me you know.

Keep it coming!! Totally an impartial take on his journalism, nothing to see here

 

[Forward Press]

Your quasi religious faith in the abilities of a journalist who's only contribution to this since his original article is to defame an AFL club president and then humiliatingly apologise for his ugly and aggressive behaviour is frankly bizarre. You don't have to reply to me you know.

We get it - Dr Hood is a family friend.

It's not relevant to the accuracy or veracity of the allegations made in Jackson's article, though.

 

[The Warlord]

They made it clear that they don't want to participate into an inquiry into the matter, but not an AFL one. The AFL then announced an inquiry into the matter, with AFL decided terms and timeline. Their main sticking point seems to be the timeline. Why are they obliged to adhere to an AFL imposed timeline to hear the matter?

That's fine and is their prerogative and I encourage them to go to the Yoo-Rook Commission which has offered its services.

But they can't then demand the AFL do stuff like stop the accused from coaching if they're not going to engage with it.

That's an untenable approach.

 

[The Warlord]

We get it - Dr Hood is a family friend.

It's not relevant to the accuracy or veracity of the allegations made in Jackson's article, though.

Indeed - and Jackson made only the barest of attempts to verify those allegations.

Glad we agree.

 

[Forward Press]

Indeed - and Jackson made only the barest of attempts to verify those allegations.

Glad we agree.

Like I said, hopelessly compromised and biased. You are now parroting misinformation repeatedly in defence of your club and friend. Good work.

Glad we agree.

 

[sr36]

Ok mate we’re going in circles. They’ve been given no less time than those they’ve accused. More in fact, as the coaches didn’t have access to the report until after it was dropped by the media. Comparisons with court times are irrelevant as they are largely due to capacity constraints due to an overburdened system. The AFL has constituted a special investigation which is independent, adjudicated by people with cultural sensitivity and will be scrutinised by a watchful media. Seems entirely fair to me.

The “don’t have time” angle looks entirely like legal manoeuvring to me. Which is entirely their prerogative, but I simply don’t buy it.

Anyway you’re a good poster and seem like a reasonable bloke, so I’m going to leave it there. We’ll have to agree to disagree. Not quite sure how I got quite so sucked into this thread (not why people think, I’m about the most ambivalent Hawks fan imaginable- been to the Hawks board a handful of times), but time for me to bow out. May justice be served.

I'm hoping they do participate and it's a quick clean inquiry with clear findings which result in clear statements from the AFL and consequences if appropriate so Brisbane and North can get on with their preseason with some certainty. The only real point of difference is that we have different views regarding the obligations of the accuser.

 

[The Warlord]

Like I said, hopelessly compromised and biased. You are now parroting misinformation repeatedly in defence of your club and friend. Good work.

Glad we agree.

MisInFoRmAtIoN lol.

The fervour on this thread with which people are willing to take unverified anonymous allegations and use them to enact serious real life consquences indicates to me that nobody posting here should ever serve on a jury.

They should also be very wary of roaming wallet inspectors.

 

[Osho]

I'm cynical, but not that cynical. I don't think they're aiming for a white wash, but I think their priority isn't justice, it's having it done and dusted before preseason goes full scale straight after XMAS.

I was struck by your earlier analogical reference to the Cambodian revolution, in which escapees from camps told horrific stories and why wouldn't one believe them? I don't think this is an attitude of a cynic.

Many of the most vocal cynics at that time were left wing academics. They wanted verification first. The left has often been cynical of the folk they claim to represent. Some extremely well known and respected folk took this stance. Ironically, the US government often believed the 1st hand reports, and some of the academics thought that the stories were US propaganda.

I was entrenched in the left at that time, I remember being confused by the doubters.

My grand father spent many of the 2nd world war years interred in a Victorian camp due to his prior nationality, whilst his son was off in New Guinea fighting the Japanese. How odd. So much cynicism on the one hand, but not on the other.

Though being consistently noncynical, evenhandedly, is very difficult and we can always be cynical towards a group and not another. Humans give us many reasons to lose trust. That's how the cynics win, they make it a crime for us to think differently, and to apply good will freely.

 

[sr36]

That's fine and is their prerogative and I encourage them to go to the Yoo-Rook Commission which has offered its services.

But they can't then demand the AFL do stuff like stop the accused from coaching if they're not going to engage with it.

That's an untenable approach.

They can't stop the accused from coaching. I think only Nth, Brissy or the AFL can do that.

They can make an appeal to emotion for the coaches to remain stood down, which they've already done. That appeal is likely to be taken up by others, and Nth, Brissy and the AFL will decide what they do. It's been leaked that the intention is for the coaches to start soon, I'm guessing that is to help gauge sentiment regarding the matter. And I suspect the AFL inquiry timeline is a compromise regarding start dates.

 

[Gralin]

0 for 2. About par for you.

So you do understand power dynamics and you aren't defending Clarkson and Fagan and Burt?

 

[Gralin]

So?

People keep treating this report like its come from a Royal Commission or integrity agency.

The report has no legal standing.

It a short document compiled by a consultant employed by Hawthorn.

The report is a collection of unsubstantiated statements with no attempt made to verify the claims or offer those names the right of response.

Egan makes this very clear.

So you're building up to its all lies yeah?

 

[The Warlord]

They can't stop the accused from coaching. I think only Nth, Brissy or the AFL can do that.

They can make an appeal to emotion for the coaches to remain stood down, which they've already done. That appeal is likely to be taken up by others, and Nth, Brissy and the AFL will decide what they do. It's been leaked that the intention is for the coaches to start soon, I'm guessing that is to help gauge sentiment regarding the matter. And I suspect the AFL inquiry timeline is a compromise regarding start dates.

And people can make - and are making - similar appeals to emotion that the coaches must be allowed to return/take up their posts.

The worst of worlds for this was for it to end up in adversarial lawyers at ten paces scenario, but here we are.

 

[The Warlord]

So you're building up to its all lies yeah?

No, I've said repeatedly I believe the folks in the Egan report are telling the truth and that the events described occurred.

I just don't accept their version as the complete unadulterated truth, especially when those named haven't been given a genuine response to address the allegations, which they haven't.

I want them tested by Victoria's specialist indigenous truth telling Yoo-Rook Commission, which has offered its services.

I appear to take these allegations far more seriously that those who are happy to accept a single article by a journalist who has gone on to defame an AFL club President.

Makes me wonder how many people here are genuine about wanting this properly investigated and resolved, and how many just want to troll on BigFooty by weaponising the distressing allegations made to Egan and subsequently repeated to Jackson.

Certainly plenty of Essendon supporters are doing that.

Speaking of power imbalances, I'm increasingly uncomfortable with having a Super Moderator coming in and out of the thread firing one line pot shots like the above at me, the kind that would get me in trouble if the situation were reversed.

Especially when its obvious you're not actually reading my posts.

 

[sr36]

I was struck by your earlier analogical reference to the Cambodian revolution, in which escapees from camps told horrific stories and why wouldn't one believe them? I don't think this is an attitude of a cynic.

Many of the most vocal cynics at that time were left wing academics. They wanted verification first. The left has often been cynical of the folk they claim to represent. Some extremely well known and respected folk took this stance. Ironically, the US government often believed the 1st hand reports, and some of the academics thought that the stories were US propaganda.

I was entrenched in the left at that time, I remember being confused by the doubters.

My grand father spent many of the 2nd world war years interred in a Victorian camp due to his prior nationality, whilst his son was off in New Guinea fighting the Japanese. How odd. So much cynicism on the one hand, but not on the other.

Though being consistently noncynical, evenhandedly, is very difficult and we can always be cynical towards a group and not another. Humans give us many reasons to lose trust. That's how the cynics win, they make it a crime for us to think differently, and to apply good will freely.

THe Khmer Rouge was a left wing uprising. Many on the left had been very quick in accepting the legitimacy of the Khmer Rouge and had congratulated them on taking power and thus had egg on their face regarding the atrocities. And more generally, atrocities that occurred under socialist regimes have been very damaging to the left side of politics. The right wanted it to be true as it benefitted them and the left wanted it to be false as it harmed their cause. There's a tendency to doubt things that damage or don't align with interests or previously held or stated ideas, which is why we see increased representation of views from particular supporter bases on issues such as this current aFL scandal . My cynicism suggests that when there is a vested interest in one side of the story, we need to look more closely at that individuals cynicism towards the other side of the story, as often that opinion isn't based on evidence, but rather on what they want to have occurred.

 

[Gralin]

No, I've said repeatedly I believe the folks in the Egan report are telling the truth and that the events described occurred.

I just don't accept their version as the complete unadulterated truth, especially when those named haven't been given a genuine response to address the allegations, which they haven't.

I want them tested by Victoria's specialist indigenous truth telling Yoo-Rook Commission, which has offered its services.

I appear to take these allegations far more seriously that those who are happy to accept a single article by a journalist who has gone on to defame an AFL club President.

Makes me wonder how many people here are genuine about wanting this properly investigated and resolved, and how many just want to troll on BigFooty by weaponising the distressing allegations made to Egan and subsequently repeated to Jackson.

Certainly plenty of Essendon supporters are doing that.

Speaking of power imbalances, I'm increasingly uncomfortable with having a Super Moderator coming in and out of the thread firing one line pot shots like the above at me, the kind that would get me in trouble if the situation were reversed.

Especially when its obvious you're not actually reading my posts.

Its obvious you have nothing new or useful to say you just keep going in circles.

They're telling the truth but not telling the truth.

You think it happened but not as reported, the article was bad journalism because you don't like it.

You're also now claiming victim status again.

Yawn