News Hawthorn Racism Review - No player name speculation - opposition posters tread very carefully

[Strapping Young Lad]

Wrong. Hawks did what they had to do by the rules of the AFL.

Correct. For reference below, once the HFC had the report outlining serious allegations they were duty bound by the AFL’s protocol to hand over the report to the AFL integrity unit.

I will pin this post, as it seems to be a constant query.

 

[HairyO]

if the club is proven to have wronged these people, then money is probably the only way it goes away.
We know the club has money allocated already for this happening.

The HRC wont make a finding of proof, will it?

Usually the next step if sides wont come to an agreement is for it to go to court. That is when the HRC opinion gets tested.

That said, would be good to know how often courts land the opposite side of the HRC findings.

 

[Brucie Buffer]

I got a feeling this will all be settled behind closed doors, money will be paid, the accused will walk away with reputations in tact, and the Hawthorn football club will be left with the stench.

Hope I’m wrong.

 

[Stranglers]

I got a feeling this will all be settled behind closed doors, money will be paid, the accused will walk away with reputations in tact, and the Hawthorn football club will be left with the stench.

Hope I’m wrong.

You won't be.

 

[threesixpio]

I'm more hopeful than this.

People who once shared a close relationship, who may all be regretting the way it has evolved, actually able to sit down face to face...it there is a skerrick of good will left, it may lead to actual open communication....if there were errors, miscommunications, misunderstandings, whatever.

I'm certainly more hopeful than I am with intermediaries, with possible agendas of blame and compensation at the forefront of their thinking, rather than re-establishing (or at least healing) relationships.

Totally agree

 

[DogDaySonny]

The HRC process isn't the forum to determine whether the allegations are true or not. A court can only do that. It is a conciliation process where frank and open discussions can take place and hopefully a resolution can be reached. It also should be noted that these discussions are confidential and are inadmissible in a court of law.

This post will be covered in cobwebs when it should be most remembered. It should, but won't, be remembered when leaks are coming left and right, temperatures are rising, sides are being chosen, and battlelines are being drawn.

 

[play2win]

Whilst it’s easy for everyone to have an opinion on this, we largely remain in the dark about what really happened. However, what can be done about it from the clubs perspective to avoid such similar outcomes? In my ignorant opinion, two areas need to be addressed.
Firstly we need to define the boundaries with how HFC staff can engage with the players, what are acceptable working conditions, times etc. , and where does this crossover to become personal and time away from work. Whilst it has been a bit of a rat race from clubs to differentiate themselves by offering ‘personal’ services beyond just playing football to players, boundaries need to be set and the danger here is that it may impact the ability to become a destination club. Far better for the AFL to own this issue rather than the club, but would you trust this in AFL hands? There is lots to unpack here and not an easy task.
Secondly, how do you address the issue of timeframe between ‘events’ occurring and raising an issue or complaint? For me, it is unacceptable to have an issue bubbling away for 5+ years before any complaint is made. I have no idea what the solution is, but could this somewhat be mitigated via an established exit interview process? Club performs an exit interview, an independent body also does so but maybe this also includes a 1-2 year follow up process?
Whatever happens, we need systems in place to not only become a better workplace but also identity and rectify issues before these things turn into what we are currently experiencing.

 

[Charchi]

I'm more hopeful than this.

People who once shared a close relationship, who may all be regretting the way it has evolved, actually able to sit down face to face...it there is a skerrick of good will left, it may lead to actual open communication....if there were errors, miscommunications, misunderstandings, whatever.

I'm certainly more hopeful than I am with intermediaries, with possible agendas of blame and compensation at the forefront of their thinking, rather than re-establishing (or at least healing) relationships.

with the most aggressive law firm in Victoria involved i doubt it very much

 

[eldorado]

with the most aggressive law firm in Victoria involved i doubt it very much

Are they involved in the mediation process?

I would hope they wouldn't be...

 

[brad sue well]

Accurate.

INTERVIEW: Caroline Wilson - 28 March 2024 - The FIVEAA Sports Show

The FIVEAA Sports Show covers the latest in sport. With exclusive interviews and high profile contributors, Stephen Rowe and Tim Ginever deliver the sporting news South Australians want to hear. 4-6pm weekdays on FIVEAA. Show highlights uploaded here every weekday.

pca.st

 

[2OLD 2SLOW]

Whilst it’s easy for everyone to have an opinion on this, we largely remain in the dark about what really happened. However, what can be done about it from the clubs perspective to avoid such similar outcomes? In my ignorant opinion, two areas need to be addressed.
Firstly we need to define the boundaries with how HFC staff can engage with the players, what are acceptable working conditions, times etc. , and where does this crossover to become personal and time away from work. Whilst it has been a bit of a rat race from clubs to differentiate themselves by offering ‘personal’ services beyond just playing football to players, boundaries need to be set and the danger here is that it may impact the ability to become a destination club. Far better for the AFL to own this issue rather than the club, but would you trust this in AFL hands? There is lots to unpack here and not an easy task.
Secondly, how do you address the issue of timeframe between ‘events’ occurring and raising an issue or complaint? For me, it is unacceptable to have an issue bubbling away for 5+ years before any complaint is made. I have no idea what the solution is, but could this somewhat be mitigated via an established exit interview process? Club performs an exit interview, an independent body also does so but maybe this also includes a 1-2 year follow up process?
Whatever happens, we need systems in place to not only become a better workplace but also identity and rectify issues before these things turn into what we are currently experiencing.

Excellent post.

I work in a school and the "personal services" you mention are described as pastoral care. Every school likes to boast about a special, personal level of care / guidance they provide for those under their charge. It is mostly just brochure level stuff but there are always teachers who revel in being involved in students lives and take that to extremes (insert your own psychoanalysis here ...). For this reason, it is essential that schools set very firm boundaries and enforce them - because bad things will happen when they don't, and not just the obvious criminal things.

Just as teachers can justify all manner of things with the idea they are "more than just a teacher," so too AFL coaches can justify all manner of things with the idea they are "more than just a football coach." I'm sure plenty of coaches (maybe all of them) tend to see themselves as father figures - molding men as much as footballers. Without the clear boundaries you speak of, you can guarantee coaches (and Presidents and other club professionals no doubt) will overstep the mark time and again. As much as I love Clarko, he does seem the type to go blundering across lines in the name of doing what's best for the player or the club ... particularly tricky when the interests of the club and the player are in conflict.

But the AFL is an absolutely rubbish organization with the moral standing and sense of community of a tobacco company. So not holding my breath for leadership at that end. Will have to come from within.

 

[brad sue well]

Excellent post.

I work in a school and the "personal services" you mention are described as pastoral care. Every school likes to boast about a special, personal level of care / guidance they provide for those under their charge. It is mostly just brochure level stuff but there are always teachers who revel in being involved in students lives and take that to extremes (insert your own psychoanalysis here ...). For this reason, it is essential that schools set very firm boundaries and enforce them - because bad things will happen when they don't, and not just the obvious criminal things.

Just as teachers can justify all manner of things with the idea they are "more than just a teacher," so too AFL coaches can justify all manner of things with the idea they are "more than just a football coach." I'm sure plenty of coaches (maybe all of them) tend to see themselves as father figures - molding men as much as footballers. Without the clear boundaries you speak of, you can guarantee coaches (and Presidents and other club professionals no doubt) will overstep the mark time and again. As much as I love Clarko, he does seem the type to go blundering across lines in the name of doing what's best for the player or the club ... particularly tricky when the interests of the club and the player are in conflict.

But the AFL is an absolutely rubbish organization with the moral standing and sense of community of a tobacco company. So not holding my breath for leadership at that end. Will have to come from within.

I agree, with your post and playtowin.

I would argue a lot of the systems required are in place. Knowing where they are, understanding and interpretation in a non-traditional setting is the massive challenge.

Time to do these things in a full on environment (of their own making, this will never change in professional sport) means it isn’t so important. This week a player saying how a coach told him to do something outside of football is 30 years ago (Parkin), this should be so far embedded not a nice occurrence.

Ex players have a place but so do alcohol and other drug workers. Sure, it might be for just one player out of 70? at a club but their specialised skills are essential.

It looks like the High Court isn’t needed, Clarkson and Fagan need to use this to be shining examples and use their leadership across the AFLCA membership. Doubt it will happen.

Indigenous families list of improvements are the road map.

 

[wahawk]

I am also strongly in the camp that Clarkson and others should receive no payout from us. Just the players.

Where I disagree is the comment that the club has no ties to either party - that’s incorrect. It happened while at the club.

So if the players claims are not proven, do Clarko & others receive payouts ?

I ask because you seem to be strongly in the camp that Clarko & others are guilty.

At this stage I don’t think any of us would absolutely know enough to know who’s telling the truth here.
We have opinions. Which we are all entitled too.

 

[pattymalone00]

 

[kazzooka]

You have players making allegations against people employed by the HFC so it really doesn't matter who wins this thing because either way the HFC will have to pay something which I assume explains why there's been money put aside for this. If the allegations are proven to be true then we'll have to compensate the players OR if the allegations can't be proven then we'll have to compensate the coaches. I'm sure there's also a scenario where we have to compensate both which will really be the only thing that would sh*t me. The common theme in all this is that no matter what is or isn't proven is that it all happened under the the watch of the HFC. We'll be eating the sh*t sandwich on this no matter the outcome so it's just a matter of how big the sandwich is.

IF the allegations can't be proven we should absolutely NOT be compensating ANYONE. Allegations were made in a review that ALL organisations should be encouraged to conduct. Allegations were correctly reported to AFL. Allegations were also made direct to media and published. The AFL then also leaked report to Media.

Hawthorn did not make any false allegations. Hawthorn did not publish allegations.

Any compensation would come from those making and publishing allegations IF they are without Merit.

IF they are true. Hawthorn is responsible for the conduct of it's employees, even if the club was not aware of and did not condone the actions of those employees. In that case they should compensate victims.

 

[IndiaHawk]

If I am right, Cyril was not part of the Phil Egan reprt. What exactly is the issue he has with Clarkson and Fagan?

On SM-A346E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Ned Ryerson]

If I am right, Cyril was not part of the Phil Egan reprt. What exactly is the issue he has with Clarkson and Fagan?

On SM-A346E using BigFooty.com mobile app

Six Hawks racism complainants revealed in letter

Hawthorn great Cyril Rioli is among six complainants in the Hawks' AFL racism saga to publicly reveal their identities, in an open letter confirming they plan to take their case to the Human Rights Commission.

www.espn.com.au

Cyril believes, either in full or part, the accusations.

 

[IndiaHawk]

Six Hawks racism complainants revealed in letter

Hawthorn great Cyril Rioli is among six complainants in the Hawks' AFL racism saga to publicly reveal their identities, in an open letter confirming they plan to take their case to the Human Rights Commission.

www.espn.com.au

Cyril believes, either in full or part, the accusations.

How does believing in the allegations alone make him a party to the process?

 

[Ned Ryerson]

How does believing in the allegations alone make him a party to the process?

You were asking what issue he had with Fagan and Clarko - I was simply responding that if he believes those making the accusations that might explain why he takes issue with them.

 

[HedgeFund]

If I am right, Cyril was not part of the Phil Egan reprt. What exactly is the issue he has with Clarkson and Fagan?

On SM-A346E using BigFooty.com mobile app

From memory, the Egan Report was commissioned by the club following the incident between Kennett and Shannyn Ah Sam being reported in The Age as one of the main reasons Cyril retired early and has no connection with the club anymore.

He and/or Shannyn may well have raised their issues separately to the Egan Report players / partners and chosen to join in the HRC process so all relevant issues could be raised in the one forum.

He may well have other instances he wanted to talk about which related more directly to the Clarko / Fagan that we never brought to light previously. I can't say I know what they may well be, but they may have not been raised prior to the HRC process starting.

Makes sense to have all complainants together at the one time, no point fragmenting the process.

Bring it all to the table and talk it through.

 

[IndiaHawk]

From memory, the Egan Report was commissioned by the club following the incident between Kennett and Shannyn Ah Sam being reported in The Age as one of the main reasons Cyril retired early and has no connection with the club anymore.

He and/or Shannyn may well have raised their issues separately to the Egan Report players / partners and chosen to join in the HRC process so all relevant issues could be raised in the one forum.

He may well have other instances he wanted to talk about which related more directly to the Clarko / Fagan that we never brought to light previously. I can't say I know what they may well be, but they may have not been raised prior to the HRC process starting.

Makes sense to have all complainants together at the one time, no point fragmenting the process.

Bring it all to the table and talk it through.

If Cyril is privately raising his issues, why is that not referenced in the publicly released letter along with the other players? The HRC process at least based on public information is more about the allegations by the players in the Phil Egan report as Clarkson, Fagan and Burt are the main accused.

If Cyril has different instances not directed at the three then should it not be directed more towards HFC or other individuals?

 

[IndiaHawk]

You were asking what issue he had with Fagan and Clarko - I was simply responding that if he believes those making the accusations that might explain why he takes issue with them.

Was wondering if belief alone in some incidents happening where Cyril is not involved qualify him to be a party for the HRC process.

This will open a whole can of worms where any one remotely associated can claim belief in any work place related incidents can declare themselves to be aggrieved and join the action.

If we use the same analogy, in the current Red Bull F1 saga all female employees can claim belief and become parties wit claims against Horner.

 

[Yardie]

Was wondering if belief alone in some incidents happening where Cyril is not involved qualify him to be a party for the HRC process.

This will open a whole can of worms where any one remotely associated can claim belief in any work place related incidents can declare themselves to be aggrieved and join the action.

If we use the same analogy, in the current Red Bull F1 saga all female employees can claim belief and become parties wit claims against Horner.

The club is involved in the process and Cyril has issues with the club.

 

[Yardie]

Some other "journalists" should have a read of below.

Mediation commences between Indigenous former Hawks, Hawthorn staff

Cyril Rioli confronted his former Hawthorn bosses Alastair Clarkson and Chris Fagan on Tuesday for the first time in more than five years at the Australian Human Rights Commission that continued media...

nit.com.au

 

[IndiaHawk]

The club is involved in the process and Cyril has issues with the club.

Should they not be two separate processes?

There are specific allegations against three individuals. How will the process be fair to them, if these are clubbed with other issues?

If the entire grievance is towards HFC then why are the three individuals involved in a personal capacity?

 

[Yardie]

Should they not be two separate processes?

There are specific allegations against three individuals. How will the process be fair to them, if these are clubbed with other issues?

If the entire grievance is towards HFC then why are the three individuals involved in a personal capacity?

Best to keep it all together.

Just highlighting the bold - I'm confident that the AHRC mediation process, potentially followed by a Federal Court case (if mediation fails) would be the fairest outcome for all people involved.