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.

 

[Off The Couch]

So, when is the right time to approach Silk and offer him the new full-time Indigenous liaison officer role?

Would be a waste of time, he won’t be coming back to Melbourne

Personally I think they need someone from outside the football industry

 

[brad sue well]

Am I missing something... Silk is a board member and as far as a quick google found, doesn't seem to be Indigenous.

 

[Steven Tyler]

Am I missing something... Silk is a board member and as far as a quick google found, doesn't seem to be Indigenous.

Shaun Burgoyne is Silk

 

[brad sue well]

Shaun Burgoyne is Silk

Oh, now that is highly embarrassing. I hope this doesn’t reverse the curse in the hearse.

I won’t delete it. In true footy style I will “own” this error and need to live with it. I hope I can earn the respect of BF from here forward.

I will throw the 6am start the kids forced on me and throw them under the bus.

For a moment I wanted Ian off the board if he couldn’t live in Melbourne. Shaun will always be my Ian.

 

[berniemccarthy]

Oh, now that is highly embarrassing. I hope this doesn’t reverse the curse in the hearse.

I won’t delete it. In true footy style I will “own” this error and need to live with it. I hope I can earn the respect of BF from here forward.

I will throw the 6am start the kids forced on me and throw them under the bus.

For a moment I wanted Ian off the board if he couldn’t live in Melbourne. Shaun will always be my Ian.

While you are on the subject of owning whomever wrote your FAQ's means refute not rebuke. Completely wrong word.

 

[SJT76]

While you are on the subject of owning whomever wrote your FAQ's means refute not rebuke. Completely wrong word.

Whoever, FAQs… this is fun!

 

[brad sue well]

While you are on the subject of owning whomever wrote your FAQ's means refute not rebuke. Completely wrong word.

Looks like SJT76 has owned you Burnie.

 

[grumbleguts]

While you are on the subject of owning whomever wrote your FAQ's means refute not rebuke. Completely wrong word.

Thank you for learning us how to words, but you are wrong.

the verb to write has a subject that subject is whoever, whomever is an objective pronoun,

whomever did you write it for?
whoever wrote it.

Also what the hell is the role of that apostrophe?

 

[chopflop]

Thank you for learning us how to words, but you are wrong.

the verb to write has a subject that subject is whoever, whomever is an objective pronoun,

whomever did you write it for?
whoever wrote it.

Also what the hell is the role of that apostrophe?

 

[brad sue well]

See, footy can be hard.

 

[badgrill]

Fagan and Clarko back front and centre, didn't last long...

 

[Bugs1977]

Says Fagan has signed a confidentiality agreement which prevents him from discussing the investigation. This mess seems far from getting to a resolution.

‘Can’t live like that’: Fagan speaks for first time since AFL launched racism probe

‘Can’t live like that’: Fagan speaks for first time since AFL launched racism probe

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[brad sue well]

McLachlan said something along the lines that the Investigation will be open so like anything, it is the degree of openness that counts. I take it that the public won’t find out the coaches reply, or at least Fagan’s?

 

[cryptor]

Says Fagan has signed a confidentiality agreement which prevents him from discussing the investigation. This mess seems far from getting to a resolution.

‘Can’t live like that’: Fagan speaks for first time since AFL launched racism probe

‘Can’t live like that’: Fagan speaks for first time since AFL launched racism probe

www.foxsports.com.au

Signed it with deed poll. I've never heard of a confidentiality agreement done like that before. Anyone know how that works?

 

[MrPremiership]

Signed it with deed poll. I've never heard of a confidentiality agreement done like that before. Anyone know how that works?

Is it an undertaking to another party to perform a series of events, whilst keeping the details of that party confidential?

 

[cryptor]

Is it an undertaking to another party to perform a series of events, whilst keeping the details of that party confidential?

The way I understood it from reading it and a layman's definition of deed poll from a Google search, it sounded like he's made a legally binding promise to himself not to talk about it until after the investigation concludes.

Which doesn't really make sense to me because if he chose to break it who's coming after him? And if someone can then why put the restriction on himself to begin with.

As far as I can tell it just seems like a mechanism for him to tell the media "legally I can't comment" rather than "I don't want to talk about it".

 

[MrPremiership]

The way I understood it from reading it and a layman's definition of deed poll from a Google search, it sounded like he's made a legally binding promise to himself not to talk about it until after the investigation concludes.

Which doesn't really make sense to me because if he chose to break it who's coming after him? And if someone can then why put the restriction on himself to begin with.

As far as I can tell it just seems like a mechanism for him to tell the media "legally I can't comment" rather than "I don't want to talk about it".

I thought it was a legally binding promise to the AFL, effected parties and investigation team

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

McLachlan said something along the lines that the Investigation will be open so like anything, it is the degree of openness that counts. I take it that the public won’t find out the coaches reply, or at least Fagan’s?

It will be stage managed.

Every release and report will paint a story of plausible deniability and misunderstanding so that the players can’t be targeted and the coaches walk back into their jobs with a minor blip on the radar behind them.

I don’t believe for one that we’ll get the answers to the questions that we all have as to whether these things took place or not.

 

[Brishawk]

It will be stage managed.

Every release and report will paint a story of plausible deniability and misunderstanding so that the players can’t be targeted and the coaches walk back into their jobs with a minor blip on the radar behind them.

I don’t believe for one that we’ll get the answers to the questions that we all have as to whether these things took place or not.

The report will be the only narrative and it will say little of substance. The coaches were never going to have to defend themselves publicly.

 

[brad sue well]

It will be stage managed.

Every release and report will paint a story of plausible deniability and misunderstanding so that the players can’t be targeted and the coaches walk back into their jobs with a minor blip on the radar behind them.

I don’t believe for one that we’ll get the answers to the questions that we all have as to whether these things took place or not.

I like frogs, no it is a racist meme used over and over - Pepe the frog. Snakes are for me(!), look at my Gadsden flag I flew on January 6.

Not saying amphibians and reptiles are how coaches operate but the key term isn’t new.

Plausible deniability​

Plausible deniability is the ability of people, typically senior officials in a formal or informal chain of command, to deny knowledge of or responsibility for any damnable actions committed by members of their organizational hierarchy. They may do so because of a lack or absence of evidence that can confirm their participation, even if they were personally involved in or at least willfully ignorant of the actions. If illegal or otherwise disreputable and unpopular activities become public, high-ranking officials may deny any awareness of such acts to insulate themselves and shift the blame onto the agents who carried out the acts, as they are confident that their doubters will be unable to prove otherwise. The lack of evidence to the contrary ostensibly makes the denial plausible (credible), but sometimes, it makes any accusations only unactionable.
The term typically implies forethought, such as intentionally setting up the conditions for the plausible avoidance of responsibility for one's future actions or knowledge. In some organizations, legal doctrines such as command responsibility exist to hold major parties responsible for the actions of subordinates who are involved in heinous acts and nullify any legal protection that their denial of involvement would carry.
In politics and espionage, deniability refers to the ability of a powerful player or intelligence agency to pass the buck and to avoid blowback by secretly arranging for an action to be taken on its behalf by a third party that is ostensibly unconnected with the major player. In political campaigns, plausible deniability enables candidates to stay clean and denounce third-party advertisements that use unethical approaches or potentially libelous innuendo.
Although plausible deniability has existed throughout history, the term was coined by the CIA in the early 1960s to describe the withholding of information from senior officials to protect them from repercussions if illegal or unpopular activities became public knowledge.[1]

Plausible deniability - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

​

 

[SJT76]

Signed it with deed poll. I've never heard of a confidentiality agreement done like that before. Anyone know how that works?

Usually you would use a deed where there is no consideration - for a contract to be binding, both parties have to give the other something. If he’s giving a promise but getting nothing in return then you use a deed

 

[cryptor]

Usually you would use a deed where there is no consideration - for a contract to be binding, both parties have to give the other something. If he’s giving a promise but getting nothing in return then you use a deed

What's the cost of breaking the promise? Legally speaking. What's the punishment and who dishes it out?

 

[corporal]

It will be stage managed.

Every release and report will paint a story of plausible deniability and misunderstanding so that the players can’t be targeted and the coaches walk back into their jobs with a minor blip on the radar behind them.

I don’t believe for one that we’ll get the answers to the questions that we all have as to whether these things took place or not.

Do you believe all the things took place?

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Do you believe all the things took place?

Are you lost?

 

[Off The Couch]

I don’t know why there’s a need for a confidentiality agreement at all

You can just see how this is going to play out - getting ahead of myself but.. this shits me