News Collingwood News & Media

[Mollythedolly]

Have you read the report? It makes it very clear that addressing the past is a central part of moving forward - which is what the report is all about - looking to the past to improve the future.

Have you read the report?

 

[sr36]

Have you read the report?

Yes

Things like this are right throughout the report and not just in the recommendations section. :

It is sometimes easier to say that things will be different going forward than to look back at the mistakes of the past. But real change cannot occur without addressing the issues that have been raised in the past and remain unresolved.

 

[Mollythedolly]

Have you read the report? It makes it very clear that addressing the past is a central part of moving forward - which is what the report is all about - looking to the past to improve the future.

Your obsession with the past is a little over the top. Show me where in the initial post you initially responded to (below) I suggest the past was irrelevant or should/would be ignored?

Do we know if they’ve been approached to sign off on progress? Have they been fully briefed? Given the report was written to specifically address systemic processes and response mechanisms, is there a need to get individual responses? Especially given the quality of the panels working through the report implementation. Is there a suggestion that they’re not up to it and we therefore need additional oversight?

All I’ve said is that the Do Better report was specifically tasked to review the protocols and processes that were in place at the time of those instances, and whether they were adequate. The terms of reference clearly spell that out. If they weren’t looking at specific past issues, or if there weren’t past issues then there’d be no need to undertake the review. I’m not sure how much more obvious that linkage needs to be before a poster can just accept it. The report at no time intended to redress any of those past instances.

Happy for you to highlight where the report specifically addresses a specific instance, what actions have been taken, and the outcomes of the intervention given that that was its goal as you insist.

Moving forward, the recommendations (as you included) clearly articulate the path.

1 Develop a process of truth telling
2 Develop a strategy to address and reconcile past acts.

Rather than my reading of the report being an issue, your lack of understanding of how these processes work within large bureaucracies has come to the fore.

The club has been working toward this for a long time. The establishment of a reconciliation action plan, the appointment of Jodie Sizer and Debbie Lovett, all stepping stones. An audit of processes next. Only now that the right people are in place and there can be confidence in protocols and processes, can the club move forward to redresses past sins.

 

[JuniorB]

Your obsession with the past is a little over the top. Show me where in the initial post you initially responded to (below) I suggest the past was irrelevant or should/would be ignored?



All I’ve said is that the Do Better report was specifically tasked to review the protocols and processes that were in place at the time of those instances, and whether they were adequate. The terms of reference clearly spell that out. If they weren’t looking at specific past issues, or if there weren’t past issues then there’d be no need to undertake the review. I’m not sure how much more obvious that linkage needs to be before a poster can just accept it. The report at no time intended to redress any of those past instances.

Happy for you to highlight where the report specifically addresses a specific instance, what actions have been taken, and the outcomes of the intervention given your insistence that that was its goal as you insist.

Moving forward, the recommendations (as you included) clearly articulate the path.

1 Develop a process of truth telling
2 Develop a strategy to address and reconcile past acts.

Rather than my reading of the report being an issue, your lack of understanding of how these processes work within large bureaucracies has come to the fore.

The club has been working toward this for a long time. The establishment of a reconciliation action plan, the appointment of Jodie Sizer and Debbie Lovett, all stepping stones. An audit of processes next. Only now that the right people are in place and there can be confidence in protocols and processes, can the club move forward to redresses past sins.

Getting the highly respected Nev Jetta is another step in the right direction.

 

[Mollythedolly]

How do you become a part of an Expert Group on anti-racism?

Have some expertise?

 

[Mollythedolly]

Getting the highly respected Nev Jetta is another step in the right direction.

Retention of Daniel Wells at the club as well.

 

[sr36]

Your obsession with the past is a little over the top. Show me where in the initial post you initially responded to (below) I suggest the past was irrelevant or should/would be ignored?

I'm not obsessed with the past at all. I'm just pointing out that directly addressing and reconciling the past isn't a tack on to the report, like you seem to have suggested several times. It's a central idea in the report. The report views it as central to moving forward and doing better. Most current theory also has it as of central importance to reconciliation and creating a space that is and feels safe and thus where systemic disadvantage is removed.

I never said you thought the past was irrelevant. The was the line that made me quote you and respond and point out that getting individual responses and addressing the past is highly recommended. I interpreted it as suggesting that getting individual responses to address past racism as not being within the scope of the report, when it very clearly is.

Given the report was written to specifically address systemic processes and response mechanisms, is there a need to get individual responses?

Rather than my reading of the report being an issue, your lack of understanding of how these processes work within large bureaucracies has come to the fore.

The club has been working toward this for a long time. The establishment of a reconciliation action plan, the appointment of Jodie Sizer and Debbie Lovett, all stepping stones. An audit of processes next. Only now that the right people are in place and there can be confidence in protocols and processes, can the club move forward to redresses past sins.

Collingwood isn't a large bureaucracy. They knew that Leon Davis was likely to be one of the cases of individuals who experienced racism that was mentioned briefly in the report. Eddie made that very clear when he talked about the process beginning 22 years ago. And according to Leon, Collingwood hadn't contacted him 12 months after the report was leaked. You might think that's an appropriate time frame for a company with 250 or so employees to make contact. I don't. I think it's really poor. Not to mention that they needed a report to tell them that they should address racism experienced by a former employee.

You've got three central figures unhappy with the pies response since the report, maybe it's all HL's fault, I suspect a fair bit of it is, but Collingwood aren't looking squeaky clean in their response to the report to me. Which is really disappointing, as they needed to be.

Former Collingwood player Leon Davis: 'We don't want our kids to have to go through the bullshit'

Drafted as an excited teenager, the First Nations man was stunned and isolated by racist bullying. ‘I don’t take any pleasure from Eddie stepping down,’ he says today. ‘The issues have not gone away’

www.theguardian.com

 

[Mollythedolly]

I'm not obsessed with the past at all. I'm just pointing out that directly addressing and reconciling the past isn't a tack on to the report, like you seem to have suggested several times. It's a central idea in the report. The report views it as central to moving forward and doing better. Most current theory also has it as of central importance to reconciliation and creating a space that is and feels safe and thus where systemic disadvantage is removed.

This was the line that made me quote you and respond and point out that getting individual responses and addressing the past is highly recommended.

Given the report was written to specifically address systemic processes and response mechanisms, is there a need to get individual responses?



Collingwood isn't a large bureaucracy. They knew that Leon Davis was likely to be one of the cases of individuals who experienced racism that was mentioned briefly in the report. Eddie made that very clear when he talked about the process beginning 22 years ago. And according to Leon, Collingwood hadn't contacted him 12 months after the report was leaked. You might think that's an appropriate time frame for a company with 250 or so employees to make contact. I don't. I think it's really poor. Not to mention that they needed a report to tell them that they should address racism experienced by a former employee.

You've got three central figures unhappy with the pies response since the report, maybe it's all HL's fault, I suspect a fair bit of it is, but Collingwood aren't looking squeaky clean in their response to the report to me. Which is really disappointing, as they needed to be.

Former Collingwood player Leon Davis: 'We don't want our kids to have to go through the bullshit'

Drafted as an excited teenager, the First Nations man was stunned and isolated by racist bullying. ‘I don’t take any pleasure from Eddie stepping down,’ he says today. ‘The issues have not gone away’

www.theguardian.com

So all this carry on because you’ve invented something you think I’ve said or meant. Right.

And Collingwood as a NFP organization with north of 150 employees is very much a large bureaucracy.

I’ll leave it there.

 

[sr36]

So all this carry on because you’ve invented something you think I’ve said or meant. Right.

And Collingwood as a NFP organization with north of 150 employees is very much a large bureaucracy.

I’ll leave it there.

I haven't invented anything. As well as the original one above, here are a couple of your other quotes:


That’s [addressing the past] arisen as a consequence of the Do Better Report recommendations, not as a focus of the Do Better Report itself.

But the Do Better report wasn’t looking to remediate those past instances, it was looking at the system failures associated with each of those instances.


You didn't understand that addressing the past was central to the report - you do now. Glad to help.

 

[Mollythedolly]

I haven't invented anything. As well as the original one above, here are a couple of your other quotes:


That’s [addressing the past] arisen as a consequence of the Do Better Report recommendations, not as a focus of the Do Better Report itself.

But the Do Better report wasn’t looking to remediate those past instances, it was looking at the system failures associated with each of those instances.


You didn't understand that addressing the past was central to the report - you do now. Glad to help.

Still inventing I see. You hang in there.

 

[noideaatall]

Still inventing I see. You hang in there.

I have learnt a lot from both yours and sr36's posts. Wish you both wouldn't feel the need to keep taking swings. From your posts I get some reassurance that CFC is taking the time to do this right. sr36 mirrors my concern: how can it be the right approach when the people who have been hurt are still hurting. I find it really hard to believe/take that the club hasn't made contact with Leon Davis. His service to the club can't be questioned.

 

[JuniorB]

I'm not obsessed with the past at all. I'm just pointing out that directly addressing and reconciling the past isn't a tack on to the report, like you seem to have suggested several times. It's a central idea in the report. The report views it as central to moving forward and doing better. Most current theory also has it as of central importance to reconciliation and creating a space that is and feels safe and thus where systemic disadvantage is removed.

I never said you thought the past was irrelevant. The was the line that made me quote you and respond and point out that getting individual responses and addressing the past is highly recommended. I interpreted it as suggesting that getting individual responses to address past racism as not being within the scope of the report, when it very clearly is.

Given the report was written to specifically address systemic processes and response mechanisms, is there a need to get individual responses?



Collingwood isn't a large bureaucracy. They knew that Leon Davis was likely to be one of the cases of individuals who experienced racism that was mentioned briefly in the report. Eddie made that very clear when he talked about the process beginning 22 years ago. And according to Leon, Collingwood hadn't contacted him 12 months after the report was leaked. You might think that's an appropriate time frame for a company with 250 or so employees to make contact. I don't. I think it's really poor. Not to mention that they needed a report to tell them that they should address racism experienced by a former employee.

You've got three central figures unhappy with the pies response since the report, maybe it's all HL's fault, I suspect a fair bit of it is, but Collingwood aren't looking squeaky clean in their response to the report to me. Which is really disappointing, as they needed to be.

Former Collingwood player Leon Davis: 'We don't want our kids to have to go through the bullshit'

Drafted as an excited teenager, the First Nations man was stunned and isolated by racist bullying. ‘I don’t take any pleasure from Eddie stepping down,’ he says today. ‘The issues have not gone away’

www.theguardian.com

It's worth pointing out that this Guardian article is from February 2021, not long after the Do Better report was first leaked to the press.
We don't really know what has happened since then, specifically in relation to Leon.

 

[sr36]

It's worth pointing out that this Guardian article is from February 2021, not long after the Do Better report was first leaked to the press.
We don't really know what has happened since then, specifically in relation to Leon.

Good point. I thought it was more recent, but I still think it is really poor. How they could read that report (and I think much of it is a beat up where general poor practice is referred to as systemic racism) and not realise that it would open up some old wounds and thus get on the phone is beyond me.

 

[domus]

Getting the highly respected Nev Jetta is another step in the right direction.

Love Jetta.

 

[domus]

Have some expertise?

Happy to help the out if they wish to gain my services.

 

[Capital Magpie]

I keep visiting this thread hoping to read about Collingwood news and media. The last 10+ pages have all been about HL and whether the club is racist.

I'm bored with reading that sort of agonising and navel gazing. I suggest the mods should start a new thread called HL and is the club racist.

All such posts can reside in that thread while this thread can focus on general News and media about the club.

 

[Mollythedolly]

Happy to help the out if they wish to gain my services.

They haven’t called already?

 

[domus]

They haven’t called already?

I'm as bewildered as you.

 

[jmac70]

I have learnt a lot from both yours and sr36's posts. Wish you both wouldn't feel the need to keep taking swings. From your posts I get some reassurance that CFC is taking the time to do this right. sr36 mirrors my concern: how can it be the right approach when the people who have been hurt are still hurting. I find it really hard to believe/take that the club hasn't made contact with Leon Davis. His service to the club can't be questioned.

Yes, Leon must be involved for the truth telling to be authentic.

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

Thanks Chloe Molloy for the loyalty, maybe she's looking for a trade to Carlscum.....

Chloe Molloy 52

Sydney

Geelong

Brisbane Lions

Melbourne

Western Bulldogs

Hawthorn

St Kilda

Carlton

Port Adelaide

Last Week: 7

 

[Jen2310]

I noticed that. Come on Chloe, have a little faith.

 

[TradeDraft]

Thanks Chloe Molloy for the loyalty, maybe she's looking for a trade to Carlscum.....

Chloe Molloy 52

Sydney

Geelong

Brisbane Lions

Melbourne

Western Bulldogs

Hawthorn

St Kilda

Carlton

Port Adelaide

Last Week: 7

a Typo?

 

[lyfsux]

a Typo?

No typo Dave she tipped Freo last week

Maybe she's the real kiss of death tip the opposition and we win

 

[Sea fog]

Footy Feed: Moore on captaincy, criticism and life after footy

Sarah Olle goes one-on-one with Collingwood's Darcy Moore

www.afl.com.au

 

[Hotpiescoldbeers]

Does anyone know when collingwood training sessions will be before the dees game? My son and I will be flying in as he is auskicker of the round so will be in melbs for the tigers vs port game aswell as the demons game