Hawthorn and Essendon rivalry

[matey]

Zzzzzzzzz.
You did, clarko didn’t.
What was the amount hawthorn paid to the players and wives ?

Yes there was a settlement before the courts between the parties involved. That is our legal system …… but at the end of the day and way before this process in it’s findings after an 8 month extensive investigation the AFL integrity unit would have dealt with the club or its officials if it was warranted. Circles again!

 

[windyhill]

Yes there was a settlement before the courts between the parties involved. That is our legal system …… but at the end of the day and way before this process in it’s findings after an 8 month extensive investigation the AFL integrity unit would have dealt with the club or its officials if it was warranted. Circles again!

2-3 mill apparently.

 

[matey]

2-3 mill apparently.

Embarrassing with the confidentiality involved in settlements . Did you get that amt from Bay 13

 

[windyhill]

Embarrassing with the confidentiality involved in settlements . Did you get that amt from Bay 13

So what would your estimate be ?

 

[Cyclops]

Hawthorn still in the "most racist club" trifecta with us and Adelaide.

Id like to boast we are doing something about it but the stain is pretty bad.

Hawthorn ran a dodgy in house inquiry designed to fail. Gowers is a decent human being but the shadow of Jeff fouls the club.

Embarrassing with the confidentiality involved in settlements . Did you get that amt from Bay 13

Lawyers keak like sieves.

Dunno if you recall the murder of Darcy Wettinghall, the famous Corredale sheep breeder down Geelong way.

I knew of him through my in laws who are farmers.Within 12 hours of him being killed a lawyer I know told me and a room full of people about Mr Wettinghallls HIV positive status, and various crime scene details.

Confidentiality ain't that confidential.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

The racism mess was one persons perception of a conversation vs another’s

Boy oh boy

 

[Steven Tyler]

Does anyone other than Hawthorn supporters themselves actually care about Hawthorn?

Why would any other clubs supporters care about Hawthorn?

 

[Guardian Hawk]

I don't think rivalry or club allegiance should see us as supporters being dismissive of the findings of the racism enquiry at Hawthorn.

Yes, I understand that there were a number of concurrent First Nations players that did not experience racism, that the AFL investigated and found "no adverse findings" and that (like nearly all modern experiences of racism) there is an element of interpretation or experience that may vary between individuals.

However, like all forms of harassment, intent is largely irrelevant. The fact remains that these players (and their partners) experienced it as racism. They have a fractured connection with the club they represented as a result. More broadly than this enquiry, there is also no denying that people representing Hawthorn have displayed inappropriate attitudes, comments and approaches to First Nations players and people in its history.

As the club have acknowledged, there is further learning to be done and proactive processes to enact to better ensure the cultural safety of our First Nations representatives. The same goes for the AFL, broader footy landscape and the general public as a whole.

I do commend the club for undertaking the process and being transparent about its findings. I also appreciate that a fairly comprehensive list of actions have or were already enacted to address the fundamental issue (recognising that learning in this space is continual). Like Collingwood's "Do Better" report, I recognise it is tough to face these internal truths or pretend it is an older (or 'other people') problem. Hopefully more clubs undertake a similar process, because as much as we like to point score between clubs (myself included), this is not a 'Hawthorn problem' and I dare say many, if not all, clubs would discover that internal attitudes have not been consistently appropriate/ideal, that the problem remains and that there is further work to be done.

 

[SSSSSS]

100% this.
83 started it, 84/85 ended it.
.Its carl then coll, hawthorn dearly want it to be them. (Much like dear old nth.melbourne)

I'd say most Hawthorn supporters would have Geelong at the top of the list of rivals. Greatest modern rivalry bar none and a bit of history to back it up.

Those born before the 90s would probably have Essendon at #2. Maybe some of the older heads might have North up there (bit before my time but quite a lot of big games played against each other in the 70s)?

Wouldn't be surprised if the younger cohort had Sydney at #2 after Buddy jumped ship and a couple of Grand Finals against each other.

I've got it at as;

Geelong
Essendon/Sydney (The Merrett saga brought it back into relevance, a good showing by the Swans in 2026 probably pips it again until Essendon start being relevant)

Collingwood/Carlton are fun games to attend but not necessarily rivals.

 

[Red Bull]

Lol at hawks supporters saying the AFL found “nothing to see here” in their racism “investigation”

The same AFL that found “nothing to see here” in their “investigation” into the efc doping scandal.

The same AFL that fined Melbourne for NOT tanking !!

The AFL “integrity” unit … please

 

[SSSSSS]

Lol at hawks supporters saying the AFL found “nothing to see here” in their racism “investigation”

The same AFL that found “nothing to see here” in their “investigation” into the efc doping scandal.

The same AFL that fined Melbourne for NOT tanking !!

The AFL “integrity” unit … please

Yeh good thing we didn't cheat the cap. That's where the moral line is drawn with the AFL.

The rebuild would have been hard work.

 

[Red Bull]

Yeh good thing we didn't cheat the cap. That's where the moral line is drawn with the AFL.

The rebuild would have been hard work.

Hawthorn didn’t cheat the cap you say …

Failing to improve a list each year can stall and set back a rebuild.
Attempting to snare the cult’s Captain was amateur hour stuff …

 

[ReturningHawk]

Hawthorn didn’t cheat the cap you say …

Failing to improve a list each year can stall and set back a rebuild.
Attempting to snare the cult’s Captain was amateur hour stuff …

View attachment 2508722

Red Bull, you are truly a Hawthorn legend. Last I heard we were still tanking, is that right?

 

[Red Bull]

Red Bull, you are truly a Hawthorn legend. Last I heard we were still tanking, is that right?

Never ever subscribed to that nonsense.
Hawthorn were just a rubbish team for a few years there with Clarkson and Kennett’s egos out of control.
Rebuilds are hard work and sleepy Mark isn’t helping …

 

[smish]

Welcome to East Germany

 

[ReturningHawk]

Never ever subscribed to that nonsense.
Hawthorn were just a rubbish team for a few years there with Clarkson and Kennett’s egos out of control.
Rebuilds are hard work and sleepy Mark isn’t helping …

View attachment 2509086

View attachment 2509087

If you want to see something truly laughable, you should read your own posting history about Hawthorn.

Bit of a doomed rebuild, wasn’t it? Not to mention the dingley horror show.

 

[theprospector]

Essendon don't have any rivals they are completely irrelevant. To have rivalries, you need to play in matches of consequence. They haven't done that in 30 odd years.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

I do commend the club for undertaking the process and being transparent about its findings. I also appreciate that a fairly comprehensive list of actions have or were already enacted to address the fundamental issue (recognising that learning in this space is continual). Like Collingwood's "Do Better" report, I recognise it is tough to face these internal truths or pretend it is an older (or 'other people') problem. Hopefully more clubs undertake a similar process, because as much as we like to point score between clubs (myself included), this is not a 'Hawthorn problem' and I dare say many, if not all, clubs would discover that internal attitudes have not been consistently appropriate/ideal, that the problem remains and that there is further work to be done.

It’s all well and good for Hawks supporters to fish for positives with regard to their club’s cultural safety review, but as a supporter of a rival club that was also severely affected by Hawthorn’s management of it, I do not share your sentiment.

I will concede that Hawthorn’s decision to undertake the review was underpinned by good intentions. If the review resulted in improvements to the lives of the players (their families) and Hawthorn’s culture then that’s great for them, but we also need to bring attention to the harm/damage that it caused.

IMO, it was a sad chapter in the history of our sport that brought the whole league into disrepute. And some (not all) of that harm can be attributed to Hawthorn’s handling of the review. What I take umbrage at is:

1. The cavalier attitude HFC had towards the review from the beginning and the ramifications that it could have on the players, former staff and entire AFL industry. Not enough safeguards in place to protect all stakeholders.
2. The original terms of reference of the review that were seemingly too narrow to adequately explore such an important issue holistically.
3. The hiring of Phil Egan to author the review, which was completed between May and August, 2022.
4. When the review participants first made serious allegations against the HFC and some of its former staff members, these adverse findings were not passed onto AFL Integrity for their input/support. The terms of the reference were also not changed to cater for these allegations. It’s unclear whether HFC did or did not have any knowledge of these decisions at the time.
5. It is clear that HFC received the completed review in August, 2022. They released a statement after the scandal went public saying that they immediately handed the review over to AFL Integrity upon receipt.
6. ABC made the allegations public via their reporting on 20th September. We know that ABC didn’t wait for responses from the accused before releasing their story, which to this day I still cannot believe. Despite this, there are important questions that (to my knowledge) remain unanswered and may never be. Who leaked info about the review and the allegations to Russell Jackson? And between August _ and September 20 - what was AFL Integrity doing to support the accusers, the accused, and the three footy clubs that were embroiled in the scandal
7. Hawthorn said it would be “disappointed” if sanctioned by the AFL for the way it handled the review. When points #1-4 are considered, I’m disappointed they weren’t.
8. I appreciate that legal advice probably dictated HFC’s decision making after the allegations were made public, but in my view, it would have been nice to see greater public displays of contrition. They released their first apology to the players as part of the Federal Court settlement (which was very carefully worded) and to this day they still haven’t publicly apologised to Clarkson, Fagan, Burt, North Melbourne or Brisbane for the severe torment and disruption that they caused to them, their families, and new employers (keeping in mind that the AFL-led review found those individuals had no case to answer).

I didn’t mind Hawthorn for most of my life, was pumped to see them get up in 08; however, since then we’ve seen dog shots from the unsociable Hawks, refusing to give Tasmania clear air with their own team by attempting to maintain a presence post-2028, Sam Mitchell having covert meetings with multiple rival club Captains, and the questionable handling and subsequent lack of contrition for the Binmada review.

Nowadays the Hawks are a big no from me for a North supporter to focus on the club other than Essendon in this thread is saying something!

 

[ReturningHawk]

It’s all well and good for Hawks supporters to fish for positives with regard to their club’s cultural safety review.

I don’t know of anyone who sees positives to come out of it. Everyone kind of looks worse. I’m not comfortable with any Hawks supporters who say the club handled everything well. I dream that one day the club will renounce Kennett and cut him out completely, but I won’t hold my breath.

On the flip side, the whining from North supporters has been pretty pathetic. The way some carry on, you would think that Hawthorn forced you to hire Clarko and then leaked the report to the media. They did neither.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

I don’t know of anyone who sees positives to come out of it. Everyone kind of looks worse. I’m not comfortable with any Hawks supporters who say the club handled everything well. I dream that one day the club will renounce Kennett and cut him out completely, but I won’t hold my breath.

At least some of you have this (reasonable) opinion.

On the flip side, the whining from North supporters has been pretty pathetic. The way some carry on, you would think that Hawthorn forced you to hire Clarko and then leaked the report to the media. They did neither.

In 2022, our club was at rock bottom (our fault). North signed Clarkson on August 19 after weeks of speculation that he was going to get the job. Hawthorn should have known about the allegations well before then. If AFL Integrity had been engaged earlier in the piece then they could have better supported them with the review and reduced the likelihood of the story being leaked to the media.

Since that didn’t occur, the fallout with Clarkson ruined North’s 2023 season and delayed their rebuild by an extra 12 months. Hawthorn is at least partly responsible for that and they haven’t even acknowledged it, let alone apologised.

 

[Guardian Hawk]

It’s all well and good for Hawks supporters to fish for positives with regard to their club’s cultural safety review, but as a supporter of a rival club that was also severely affected by Hawthorn’s management of it, I do not share your sentiment.

I will concede that Hawthorn’s decision to undertake the review was underpinned by good intentions. If the review resulted in improvements to the lives of the players (their families) and Hawthorn’s culture then that’s great for them, but we also need to bring attention to the harm/damage that it caused.

IMO, it was a sad chapter in the history of our sport that brought the whole league into disrepute. And some (not all) of that harm can be attributed to Hawthorn’s handling of the review. What I take umbrage at is:

1. The cavalier attitude HFC had towards the review from the beginning and the ramifications that it could have on the players, former staff and entire AFL industry. Not enough safeguards in place to protect all stakeholders.
2. The original terms of reference of the review that were seemingly too narrow to adequately explore such an important issue holistically.
3. The hiring of Phil Egan to author the review, which was completed between May and August, 2022.
4. When the review participants first made serious allegations against the HFC and some of its former staff members, these adverse findings were not passed onto AFL Integrity for their input/support. The terms of the reference were also not changed to cater for these allegations. It’s unclear whether HFC did or did not have any knowledge of these decisions at the time.
5. It is clear that HFC received the completed review in August, 2022. They released a statement after the scandal went public saying that they immediately handed the review over to AFL Integrity upon receipt.
6. ABC made the allegations public via their reporting on 20th September. We know that ABC didn’t wait for responses from the accused before releasing their story, which to this day I still cannot believe. Despite this, there are important questions that (to my knowledge) remain unanswered and may never be. Who leaked info about the review and the allegations to Russell Jackson? And between August _ and September 20 - what was AFL Integrity doing to support the accusers, the accused, and the three footy clubs that were embroiled in the scandal
7. Hawthorn said it would be “disappointed” if sanctioned by the AFL for the way it handled the review. When points #1-4 are considered, I’m disappointed they weren’t.
8. I appreciate that legal advice probably dictated HFC’s decision making after the allegations were made public, but in my view, it would have been nice to see greater public displays of contrition. They released their first apology to the players as part of the Federal Court settlement (which was very carefully worded) and to this day they still haven’t publicly apologised to Clarkson, Fagan, Burt, North Melbourne or Brisbane for the severe torment and disruption that they caused to them, their families, and new employers (keeping in mind that the AFL-led review found those individuals had no case to answer).

I didn’t mind Hawthorn for most of my life, was pumped to see them get up in 08; however, since then we’ve seen dog shots from the unsociable Hawks, refusing to give Tasmania clear air with their own team by attempting to maintain a presence post-2028, Sam Mitchell having covert meetings with multiple rival club Captains, and the questionable handling and subsequent lack of contrition for the Binmada review.

Nowadays the Hawks are a big no from me for a North supporter to focus on the club other than Essendon in this thread is saying something!

I was not necessarily seeking positives and I agree with many of the aspects you've highlighted- certainly that aspects of how it was handled could have been better.

I was speaking in a broad sense to the place of racism in football and ironically, discouraging club allegiance based defending of what occurred.

Contrition as a club and to the players I think is important. Not sure about needing to apologise to North Melbourne or to those who were the accused perpetrators of the racism (It seems a little strange to call on Hawthorn to be stronger in their apology to the players but also ask people at the club not involved in the racism to apologise to those who perpetrated the racism - that seems incongruent).

I'm also not certain how damaging it was to North as a club and how much it has set you back. Surely the players development and the progress and rebuild is not reliant on one guy. Especially since hes had multiple years at the club so far and things are yet to meaningfully progress. I don't think creating an external locus (I.e. Hawthorn) of blame/control for any of Norths plight will do them any favours. They purely need to look inward in relation to how things have tracked since 2020 (which I'm sure they mostly are).

Hope you guys bounce back sooner rather than later- no one wants to see a club struggle for as long as North have. I know lots of good and invested people that deserve a competitive North.

 

[ReturningHawk]

At least some of you have this (reasonable) opinion.


In 2022, our club was at rock bottom (our fault). North signed Clarkson on August 19 after weeks of speculation that he was going to get the job. Hawthorn should have known about the allegations well before then. If AFL Integrity had been engaged earlier in the piece then they could have better supported them with the review and reduced the likelihood of the story being leaked to the media.

Since that didn’t occur, the fallout with Clarkson ruined North’s 2023 season and delayed their rebuild by an extra 12 months. Hawthorn is at least partly responsible for that and they haven’t even acknowledged it, let alone apologised.

If Hawthorn had been the ones making the allegations, I would be able to see your point. No doubt Hawthorn’s poor handling of the report made proceedings more difficult. But we’re talking about plaintiffs who took their case of unlawful discrimination against three individuals to the AHRC. To think that Hawthorn could’ve possibly handled this in a way that shielded Clarkson from legal proceedings is unrealistic. Nor should they be expected to. They were serious allegations about a former employee and his behaviour towards his staff.

To hold Hawthorn accountable for North’s predicament is not only illogical (it infers that Hawthorn is responsible for Alastair’s behaviour, while he himself is not) but also neatly ignores the fact the Clarko’s unavailability for a period of time barely even rates in the top 5 for problems at North over the past decade.

 

[Shane Heard]

The irony of this is that this is all that Essendon supporters have these days.

Nothing on field or about the club today brings any joy whatsoever and so Essendon supporters are 'proud' to say things like "see - every club has a thread on their Board about us - we're relevant - yay" completely ignoring the fact that the primary reason for this is that it was Essendon at the centre of the biggest shame our sport (or any Australian sport) has seen - and is therefore relevant for all clubs. Nothing to be proud of whatsoever.

Faded glories and old rivalries are clung onto by clubs unable to produce or have relevance in the modern game - that's a description that applies to only one of our clubs.

A typical morbid, sanctimonious quote directed towards the EFC empire from a poor wittle hawk dweed.

Wake up to yourself man.

It’s embarrassing.

​

 

[Shane Heard]

If Hawthorn had been the ones making the allegations, I would be able to see your point. No doubt Hawthorn’s poor handling of the report made proceedings more difficult. But we’re talking about plaintiffs who took their case of unlawful discrimination against three individuals to the AHRC. To think that Hawthorn could’ve possibly handled this in a way that shielded Clarkson from legal proceedings is unrealistic. Nor should they be expected to. They were serious allegations about a former employee and his behaviour towards his staff.

To hold Hawthorn accountable for North’s predicament is not only illogical (it infers that Hawthorn is responsible for Alastair’s behaviour, while he himself is not) but also neatly ignores the fact the Clarko’s unavailability for a period of time barely even rates in the top 5 for problems at North over the past decade.

That’s all well and true.

But if we focus for one brief moment about what the HFC said to a star indigenous player in an office surrounded by high officials, then we get a pretty clear idea about how this joint has been run…in the not too distant past.

The facts are …HFC “ advised “ or put forward to an indigenous player with the suggestion …that he should encourage his partner to terminate a pregnancy to benefit his career.

It’s not a good look…

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

That’s all well and true.

But if we focus for one brief moment about what the HFC said to a star indigenous player in an office surrounded by high officials, then we get a pretty clear idea about how this joint has been run…in the not too distant past.

The facts are …HFC “ advised “ or put forward to an indigenous player with the suggestion …that he should encourage his partner to terminate a pregnancy to benefit his career.

It’s not a good look…

They’re not the facts at all though. Nothing was proven, admitted to or upheld by anyone at the HRC.

You’re rolling with how the indigenous player felt and what he had perceived was being said to him, rather than having any proof that anyone said such a thing.

Which is exactly why this whole situation played out like it did, and what a mess it was, as it was perceptions and heresay, rather than any documented proof or record of things being said, rendering the whole thing to be squared away out of court with a settlement.