NO TROLLS Hawthorn Racism Review - Sensitive issues discussed. Part 2

[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

Process Plan - https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/do...erms-of-Reference-and-Process-Plan-FINAL-.pdf


DO NOT QUOTE THREADS FROM OTHER BOARDS

 

[Forward Press]

How did he know which players to contact, and what subjects to raise.

Or were they waiting for his call?

1. Players, their partners and families were interviewed as part of the review by Egan following Cyril Rioli's comments
2. Egan gives final report to Hawthorn, and Hawthorn refer to AFL Integrity Unit, as they should have done in matters like this
3. AFL advise Hawthorn and/or Egan they are not yet taking action, will inform them of updates in timeline of investigation by Integrity Unit
4. Hawthorn and/or Egan inform players of intention to investigate further after the Grand Final (or whatever timeframe was stipulated), and that the contents of the report will not be made public
4(a). Russell Jackson by this point had already interviewed the people concerned, and may or may not have been aware of Integrity Unit having possession of the report by this time, but is certainly aware the people were interviewed for the Egan report
5. Players contact Russell Jackson about outcome, give go ahead to make public because of perception of AFL sweeping it under the rug

Occam's Razor - this seems the simplest way to explain the timeline of events. Anything else veers into shooting the messenger or some grand conspiracy to white-ant North/Brisbane/Hawthorn.

 

[Del191229]

That's the point which is missed by some. If the stories are remotely true, there is no total mitigation. It doesn't matter if they're not racist. It doesn't matter if the players were off the rails or not. It doesn't matter about the intentions of the players. Even if there's a fair bit of mayo on the stories, the stories are of well and truly crossing the line into inappropriate intrusion into personal lives of players.

If that's the scope of it then Collingwood's micro managing of JdG is coming under the microscope, as is every club.

I've always said this is a story about potential coercive control rather than race

Hey Strapping Young Lad maybe we do need that thread title change after all

 

[the big lebowski]

https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/document/2022/10/20/ec26c687-76c6-4f64-b88a-bde3592df7ba/221020-Terms-of-Reference-and-Process-Plan-FINAL-.pdf

So it seems like the individuals have to make statements by the 11th of November to participate.

That gives them just 18 days to decide whether to participate and if so how and what evidence is presented to a panel.

The 'dissemination' of evidence to other participants by the 18th. (doesn't state whether it's all other submission or only those that relate to the individual involved).

Right of reply to be made by the 2nd of December. (So two weeks to answer all claims).

With a final submission by the 6th of December.

It starts with accusations then replies and an assessment.

If it's to be finished by Christmas, as the AFL has dictated, then the panel will have just shy of three weeks to decide whether all the evidence is admissible (that is, whether the panel will accept it) and decide upon the weight of that evidence (that is, how much importance the panel will give to it in reaching its decision).

As it will be a game of 'says you' and then a report, I think all sides will lose from such a rushed approach.

Except maybe Gil and the AFL.

I think the last part is way off the mark. The original terms of reference had an apology from the accused and admission of guilt built into it.

What percentage chance do you put on a jury of 50% indigenous activists finding no racism/inappropriate conduct took place.

There’s a greater chance Jeff Kennett is installed as the minister for indigenous affairs.

People can rest assured the outcome of this was determined the day the abc article came out.

 

[Del191229]

It would be extremely rare for young Aboriginal people to seek out the press. Most would be hiding from it.

They have been assured by people they trust that Jackson is ok and trustworthy then?

I remember when Lindsay Thomas arrived at North, he couldn't look Laidley or his team mates in the eye.

By the end of his career with us he was bossing press conferences like he was Bill Clinton

 

[Makeshift Park]

1. Players, their partners and families were interviewed as part of the review by Egan following Cyril Rioli's comments
2. Egan gives final report to Hawthorn, and Hawthorn refer to AFL Integrity Unit, as they should have done in matters like this
3. AFL advise Hawthorn and/or Egan they are not yet taking action, will inform them of updates in timeline of investigation by Integrity Unit
4. Hawthorn and/or Egan inform players of intention to investigate further after the Grand Final (or whatever timeframe was stipulated), and that the contents of the report will not be made public
4(a). Russell Jackson by this point had already interviewed the people concerned, and may or may not have been aware of Integrity Unit having possession of the report by this time, but is certainly aware the people were interviewed for the Egan report
5. Players contact Russell Jackson about outcome, give go ahead to make public because of perception of AFL sweeping it under the rug

Occam's Razor - this seems the simplest way to explain the timeline of events. Anything else veers into shooting the messenger or some grand conspiracy to white-ant North/Brisbane/Hawthorn.

I'd go even simpler.

The President's letter to members

The official AFL website of the Hawthorn Football Club

www.hawthornfc.com.au

April 6: Jeff Kennett writes to Hawthorn supporters, committing the club to:

...conducting further inquiries to see if there might have been other incidents affecting our past First Nations players.

At that point, or at any point onwards, if I was an investigative sport journalist, I'd start cold-calling all Hawthorn's FN players since Cyril started playing in 2008.

 

[Del191229]

1. Players, their partners and families were interviewed as part of the review by Egan following Cyril Rioli's comments
2. Egan gives final report to Hawthorn, and Hawthorn refer to AFL Integrity Unit, as they should have done in matters like this
3. AFL advise Hawthorn and/or Egan they are not yet taking action, will inform them of updates in timeline of investigation by Integrity Unit
4. Hawthorn and/or Egan inform players of intention to investigate further after the Grand Final (or whatever timeframe was stipulated), and that the contents of the report will not be made public
4(a). Russell Jackson by this point had already interviewed the people concerned, and may or may not have been aware of Integrity Unit having possession of the report by this time, but is certainly aware the people were interviewed for the Egan report
5. Players contact Russell Jackson about outcome, give go ahead to make public because of perception of AFL sweeping it under the rug

Occam's Razor - this seems the simplest way to explain the timeline of events. Anything else veers into shooting the messenger or some grand conspiracy to white-ant North/Brisbane/Hawthorn.

Not sure old mate Occam did 4a type work.

 

[Del191229]

I'd go even simpler.

The President's letter to members

The official AFL website of the Hawthorn Football Club

www.hawthornfc.com.au

April 6: Jeff Kennett writes to Hawthorn supporters, committing the club to:



At that point, or at any point onwards, if I was an investigative sport journalist, I'd start cold-calling all Hawthorn's FN players since Cyril started playing in 2008.

And you'd get nowhere without a trusted and respected indigenous voice backing you in.

 

[Makeshift Park]

And you'd get nowhere without a trusted and respected indigenous voice backing you in.

Well someone trusted and respected backing you in

 

[South of the Yarra]

They have been assured by people they trust that Jackson is ok and trustworthy then?

I remember when Lindsay Thomas arrived at North, he couldn't look Laidley or his team mates in the eye.

By the end of his career with us he was bossing press conferences like he was Bill Clinton

Highly doubtful they would have. These are young men who had struggles. They were not going to the press.

 

[sr36]

If that's the scope of it then Collingwood's micro managing of JdG is coming under the microscope, as is every club.

I've always said this is a story about potential coercive control rather than race

Hey Strapping Young Lad maybe we do need that thread title change after all

I've brought up JDG a couple of times in reference to this. Not in relation to Collingwood micromanagement, but all that ridiculous chatter from Cornes that Collingwood shouldn't have "allowed" him to go on holiday during his time off. Heaps inside and outside the Industry seem to expect the clubs to overreach enormously. Ultimately, I think that will become the biggest shift in this whole story - a clearer line between work and private lives for AFL footballers.

 

[the big lebowski]

I've brought up JDG a couple of times in reference to this. Not in relation to Collingwood micromanagement, but all that ridiculous chatter from Cornes that Collingwood shouldn't have "allowed" him to go on holiday during his time off. Heaps inside and outside the Industry seem to expect the clubs to overreach enormously. Ultimately, I think that will become the biggest shift in this whole story - a clearer line between work and private lives for AFL footballers.

Excellent point. The hypocrisy in the media is yet again on full display.

I think it was one of the players partners that wrote about how she lived on the other side of town to Waverley, and described hawthorn thinking the area she and the player lived in was dangerous.

Can you imagine the uproar if something happened to the player, such as getting attacked etc.

“Why weren’t hawthorn looking after this vulnerable kid? They left him to live in a dangerous area on the other side of the city”

 

[Forward Press]

I'd go even simpler.

The President's letter to members

The official AFL website of the Hawthorn Football Club

www.hawthornfc.com.au

April 6: Jeff Kennett writes to Hawthorn supporters, committing the club to:



At that point, or at any point onwards, if I was an investigative sport journalist, I'd start cold-calling all Hawthorn's FN players since Cyril started playing in 2008.

Possibly, but it might be a waste of time as at that point, without the Phil Egan led yarning, the players may not have been forthcoming to anyone, much less some random ABC journalist cold-calling every indigenous player.

Not sure old mate Occam did 4a type work.

The ABC article stated ABC Sport conducted interviews with the players, if you think it is factually wrong that's your choice, but that's what I'm going on.

 

[Saucery]

I think the last part is way off the mark. The original terms of reference had an apology from the accused and admission of guilt built into it.

What percentage chance do you put on a jury of 50% indigenous activists finding no racism/inappropriate conduct took place.

There’s a greater chance Jeff Kennett is installed as the minister for indigenous affairs.

People can rest assured the outcome of this was determined the day the abc article came out.

1. An apology and an admission of guilt? So there is evidence of the accused admitting guilt? That's news to me? Lets get onto the sanctions then!

2. It's not a jury, it's a panel. Even in the event of civil litigation there won't be a jury.

3. Not sure what you are on about there, gone off on a tangent?

4. Sounding like a Murdoc press agent now.

Are you salty because of my calling you out on our board?

 

[the big lebowski]

1. An apology and an admission of guilt? So there is evidence of the accused admitting guilt? That's news to me?

2. It's not a jury, it's a panel. Even in the event of civil litigation there won't be a jury.

3. Not sure what you are on about there?

4. Sounding like a Murdoc press agent now.

Are you salty because of my calling you out on our board?

1- I’m not salty, I was just responding to you. It’s called a discussion, I thought that’s how message boards work.

2- I’m not allowed to talk to you on your board and now I’m not allowed to talk to you here. Can I discuss it anywhere lol?

Now back to the topic at hand, if I’m allowed

The original terms of reference were rejected by the accused because it had an apology built into it. As no allegation has actually been made at this point, and no investigation started, they quite rightly rejected it.

The point being, you stated that none of the parties are going to get what they want out of this investigation.

I think it’s pretty clear the players and their family will. Assuming they want money, validation something wrong was done to them, and punishment for the people they are accusing. They’ll be 3/3.

Do you think indigenous activists that will determine guilt are going to say there was no racism?

Hopefully I’ve met your conversation criteria and we can discuss things rationally. If not, feel free to “call me out” again.

 

[sr36]

Excellent point. The hypocrisy in the media is yet again on full display.

I'm not sure if it's hypocrisy or viewing this as being purely about race rather than the broader concept of inappropriate coercion of the player's private lives.

The whole notion that Collingwood should have had control over JDGs downtime was actually taken seriously and discussed by industry insiders as though it had an ounce of merit. Rather than being outed as Draconian unethical bullshit. It's an industry with issues regarding a sense of ownership over the employees who run out on the field.

It's that rubbish that can enable a group who that don't fell empowered become more likely to be coerced and coercers not feel like they are doing anything wrong - if that is what happened here.

 

[the big lebowski]

I'm not sure if it's hypocrisy or viewing this as being purely about race rather than the broader concept of inappropriate coercion of the player's private lives.

The whole notion that Collingwood should have had control over JDGs downtime was actually taken seriously and discussed by industry insiders as though it had an ounce of merit. Rather than being outed as Draconian unethical bullshit. It's an industry with issues regarding a sense of ownership over the employees who run out on the field.

Yeah I agree. I’m just saying that the same people that argued for Collingwood to control de goey will turn around and act aghast that an afl club would try and influence their players to be professional.

And they’d likely have had a go at hawthorn for not doing enough if an 18/19 year old from interstate got into trouble living on the other side of town in a rough area.

North recently forced zuhaar and Larkey to stop living together. And no one cares.

No one cared when rioli’s Mrs mentioned in Caro’s May article that hawthorn told indigenous players where to live. Not one media follow up. Different tune now.

 

[sr36]

Yeah I agree. I’m just saying that the same people that argued for Collingwood to control de goey will turn around and act aghast that an afl club would try and influence their players to be professional.

And they’d likely have had a go at hawthorn for not doing enough if an 18/19 year old from interstate got into trouble living on the other side of town in a rough area.

North recently forced zuhaar and Larkey to stop living together. And no one cares.

No one cared when rioli’s Mrs mentioned in Caro’s May article that hawthorn told indigenous players where to live. Not one media follow up. Different tune now.

I think the story will swing to that eventually. There's still a lot to play out.

 

[Saucery]

1- I’m not salty, I was just responding to you. It’s called a discussion, I thought that’s how message boards work.

2- I’m not allowed to talk to you on your board and now I’m not allowed to talk to you here. Can I discuss it anywhere lol?

Now back to the topic at hand, if I’m allowed

The original terms of reference were rejected by the accused because it had an apology built into it. As no allegation has actually been made at this point, and no investigation started, they quite rightly rejected it.

The point being, you stated that none of the parties are going to get what they want out of this investigation.

I think it’s pretty clear the players and their family will. Assuming they want money, validation something wrong was done to them, and punishment for the people they are accusing. They’ll be 3/3.

Do you think indigenous activists that will determine guilt are going to say there was no racism?

Hopefully I’ve met your conversation criteria and we can discuss things rationally. If not, feel free to “call me out” again.

"The original terms of reference were rejected by the accused because it had an apology built into it. As no allegation has actually been made at this point, and no investigation started, they quite rightly rejected it."

Had no idea of this, now you have expanded I completely agree. None should agree fault until court.

"The point being, you stated that none of the parties are going to get what they want out of this investigation. I think it’s pretty clear the players and their family will. Assuming they want money, validation something wrong was done to them, and punishment for the people they are accusing. They’ll be 3/3."

It's pretty clear the players and their family will? Thanks for enlightening us Nostradamus.

"Do you think indigenous activists that will determine guilt are going to say there was no racism?"

Well you seem to have made your mind up that the process is rigged.

Calling you out again.

I have not been biased in any of my comments, they included what is best for all concerned; except against Gil and the AFL.

 

[the big lebowski]

"The original terms of reference were rejected by the accused because it had an apology built into it. As no allegation has actually been made at this point, and no investigation started, they quite rightly rejected it."

Had no idea of this, now you have expanded I completely agree. None should agree fault until court.

"The point being, you stated that none of the parties are going to get what they want out of this investigation. I think it’s pretty clear the players and their family will. Assuming they want money, validation something wrong was done to them, and punishment for the people they are accusing. They’ll be 3/3."

It's pretty clear the players and their family will? Thanks for enlightening us Nostradamus.

"Do you think indigenous activists that will determine guilt are going to say there was no racism?"

Well you seem to have made your mind up that the process is rigged.

Calling you out again.

I have not been biased in any of my comments, they included what is best for all concerned; except against Gil and the AFL.

When you’ve been asked to admit guilt before the investigation has started, testimony is not even required in person and certainly can’t be challenged, public opinion has already been settled, and 50% of the panel that decides your fate are from a minority that you have been alleged to have harmed, I think I a pretty clear where this investigation is going.

But if you think this investigation won’t have any bias, that’s cool.

 

[Maddo11]

When you’ve been asked to admit guilt before the investigation has started, testimony is not even required in person and certainly can’t be challenged, public opinion has already been settled, and 50% of the panel that decides your fate are from a minority that you have been alleged to have harmed, I think I a pretty clear where this investigation is going.

But if you think this investigation won’t have any bias, that’s cool.

So it should be four indigenous elders instead?

Oh you probably would prefer it if it were four old white dudes.. they're totally unbiased right..

 

[South of the Yarra]

"The original terms of reference were rejected by the accused because it had an apology built into it. As no allegation has actually been made at this point, and no investigation started, they quite rightly rejected it."

Had no idea of this, now you have expanded I completely agree. None should agree fault until court.

"The point being, you stated that none of the parties are going to get what they want out of this investigation. I think it’s pretty clear the players and their family will. Assuming they want money, validation something wrong was done to them, and punishment for the people they are accusing. They’ll be 3/3."

It's pretty clear the players and their family will? Thanks for enlightening us Nostradamus.

"Do you think indigenous activists that will determine guilt are going to say there was no racism?"

Well you seem to have made your mind up that the process is rigged.

Calling you out again.

I have not been biased in any of my comments, they included what is best for all concerned; except against Gil and the AFL.

Please tell me what is best for the young Aboriginal men concerned?

 

[JackOutback]

And you'd get nowhere without a trusted and respected indigenous voice backing you in.

I thought you said you were a journalist at one point. You never went fishing for stories? Cold calling can get you in the door, you don't need a written introduction to ask someone for an interview.

 

[Saucery]

When you’ve been asked to admit guilt before the investigation has started, testimony is not even required in person and certainly can’t be challenged, public opinion has already been settled, and 50% of the panel that decides your fate are from a minority that you have been alleged to have harmed, I think I a pretty clear where this investigation is going.

But if you think this investigation won’t have any bias, that’s cool.

I acknowledged that acknowledging guilt before due process is just stupid, but can you please present a reference or article which confirms this happened? I can't find one.

Your obvious attempts to smear the make-up of this inquiry, even before it has occurred, are redundant. It's not the make up of the panel that's in question here in terms of bias, but the AFL's rush and limited scope which open this up to the AFL (Gil) tossing anyone under the bus that will protect their brand.

 

[Saucery]

Please tell me what is best for the young Aboriginal men concerned?

Civil action.

 

[South of the Yarra]

When you’ve been asked to admit guilt before the investigation has started, testimony is not even required in person and certainly can’t be challenged, public opinion has already been settled, and 50% of the panel that decides your fate are from a minority that you have been alleged to have harmed, I think I a pretty clear where this investigation is going.

But if you think this investigation won’t have any bias, that’s cool.

Imagine if you were that minority and 100 % of the panel you were up against in employment, business, justice, government, sport education etc demeaned you and hated you and saw you as a subculture and race.