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DO NOT QUOTE THREADS FROM OTHER BOARDS

 

[sr36]

Most simple explanation is the AFL have already engineered an outcome and the clubs know what it will be. That’s most likely at this stage. They manage things, it’s how they operate.

This is really a smear on the professionals appointed to head up this inquiry.

So far we've had two AFL clubs commission independent reviews into racism. If this is an industry that stage manages this sort of stuff, it's pretty clear that they're bloody shit at it.

 

[sr36]

More accurately the clubs haven't accepted The Article as holy scripture that is the beginning and end of the matter.

It's moved significantly since then, even if others on here aren't aware.

No one should accept it as holy scripture, or unholy bunkum. At this stage it's nothing more or less than a series of serious claims, printed by a reputable organisation, ditto the review (although no idea if they're reputable or not ).

How has it moved significantly since then? It's yet to move at all since then, as far as I can see. The claims are still there, haven't changed or been tested at all.

 

[the big lebowski]

Hopefully it’s ok for me to pass this on, post 9,485 on page 380 of the clarko thread on the north board, seems like an excellent summary of the Terms of Reference from a legal mind.

I learnt a lot.

 

[Del191229]

No one should accept it as holy scripture, or unholy bunkum. At this stage it's nothing more or less than a series of serious claims, printed by a reputable organisation, ditto the review (although no idea if they're reputable or not ).

How has it moved significantly since then? It's yet to move at all since then, as far as I can see. The claims are still there, haven't changed or been tested at all.

Have a look at the ToR.

 

[sr36]

Have a look at the ToR.

I'm not sure what you mean.

 

[Del191229]

I'm not sure what you mean.

Have a look at how much more wide ranging the AFL investigation Terms of Reference are than what's contained in Rusty's very limited article

 

[faible]

Have a look at how much more wide ranging the AFL investigation Terms of Reference are than what's contained in Rusty's very limited article

This is all getting a bit sad and desperate now, maybe go back to just being a troll.

 

[sr36]

Have a look at how much more wide ranging the AFL investigation Terms of Reference are than what's contained in Rusty's very limited article

I'm not sure what you mean. That article, or the review alone, was always going to trigger a wider inquiry into Hawthorn management, with a potentially broader set of individuals with issues to answer and a potential list of different areas of misconduct to answer to, from inappropriate intrusion, through racial stereotyping and onto direct racism.

Unless all the claims are deemed fraudulent or unproven, a fair few are going to have to answer to knowledge of, sanctioning or performing inappropriate intrusion, with racial stereotyping reasonably likely as well. Hopefully no direct inter-personal racism towards their employees occurred - that seems unlikely due to Clarko and Fagan's history.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Oh wow no surprise I was right.

Both Fagan and Clarko starting next week.

The reason is clear, as behind the scenes those in the know now know that the allegations are grossly exaggerated.

Bring on 2023.

Sent from my CPH2197 using Tapatalk

They have been cleared to begin coaching whilst the investigation takes place.

Not cleared of any wrongdoing just yet.

 

[Forward Press]

I'm not sure what you mean. That article, or the review alone, was always going to trigger a wider inquiry into Hawthorn management, with a potentially broader set of individuals with issues to answer and a potential list of different areas of misconduct to answer to, from inappropriate intrusion, through racial stereotyping and onto direct racism.

The insinuation (there's that word again) is that Russell Jackson was incompetent, reckless and/or negligent because the scope of his article was not as wide as it should be, as there is the perception from some (coughnorthsupporterscough) that it unfairly targeted some staff but not others.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

In a few years we will read the "truth" in the Boys club part 2.

 

[Del191229]

The insinuation (there's that word again) is that Russell Jackson was incompetent

Oh I don't need to insinuate that, he proved his incompetence in defaming a club president and having to withdraw it and scurry away with his tail between his legs

 

[sr36]

In a few years we will read the "truth" in the Boys club part 2.

I agree.

Unless anyone implicated is at Collingwood when it's published. In which case, Michael Warner is a hack who hasn't done his job properly.

 

[Forward Press]

Oh I don't need to insinuate that, he proved his incompetence in defaming a club president and having to withdraw it and scurry away with his tail between his legs

This is all getting a bit sad and desperate now, maybe go back to just being a troll.

 

[db26]

Neither coach should be allowed to come back until the investigation is completed; this is just another hypocrisy version and under the table scenario by the afl.

 

[JackOutback]

If someone accused you of doing something and you say you are innocent, would you want your employer to force you out of your job?

It's perfectly common for people to be stood down (with pay) while serious allegations are considered, such as a police officer accused of abuse of power or a teacher accused of assaulting a student. If it turns out Clarkson and Fagan did what is alleged, they are not fit people to coach a football club of young men from different backgrounds. As it now stands, they will spend at least a month or two doing exactly that.

If they are found to have done what is claimed, North and Brisbane will have made a ****-up of epic proportions.

 

[VicBased]

If they are found to have done what is claimed, North and Brisbane will have made a *-up of epic proportions.

I would suggest that with all the hype around them at the moment they would not put a foot wrong. Fagan has been coaching for years at another club and nobody at that club has stood up and said he is doing that at the club he is coaching.
We should be careful we don't condemn them without evidence, they are still human after all.

 

[Paimon]

Depends on the issue really: if it’s like drugs or race (or sexual harassment), it is out of the AFL’s hands with regard to them being able to control the narrative.

If that case was a case big enough one for Ross Lyon to have lost his job over (remember it was in the midst of the #metoo movement) he would have been sacked. He’s since been employed in the media.

As I said, if the investigation backs up what was written in Jackson’s article, there is no possible way back for Clarko or Fagan.

And I’m struggling to foresee a scenario where what Jackson has written is proven to be lies (this is the era of “my truth”).

Indeed. Subjectivism has been blatantly conflated with objective truth. In any case, it seems the AFL are softening the public making it more (relatively) palatable for them to stay on after a possible negative outcome from the review. From what it seems, those that have already passed a guilty verdict (many on here) will not be swayed from their positions. For me, if Fages and Clarko keep their roles, I’d love to know how many put their money where their mouth is and never support the AFL in any way shape or form again.

 

[Del191229]

]

It's perfectly common for people to be stood down (with pay) while serious allegations are considered, such as a police officer accused of abuse of power or a teacher accused of assaulting a student. If it turns out Clarkson and Fagan did what is alleged, they are not fit people to coach a football club of young men from different backgrounds. As it now stands, they will spend at least a month or two doing exactly that.

If they are found to have done what is claimed, North and Brisbane will have made a *-up of epic proportions.

And if it is found they didn't, or the situation is far more complex and nuanced than presented by Egan and then Jackson?

 

[sr36]

Depends on the issue really: if it’s like drugs or race (or sexual harassment), it is out of the AFL’s hands with regard to them being able to control the narrative.

If that case was a case big enough one for Ross Lyon to have lost his job over (remember it was in the midst of the #metoo movement) he would have been sacked. He’s since been employed in the media.

As I said, if the investigation backs up what was written in Jackson’s article, there is no possible way back for Clarko or Fagan.

And I’m struggling to foresee a scenario where what Jackson has written is proven to be lies (this is the era of “my truth”).

For serious sanctions to be avoided(I don't think they will be) it doesn't have to be proven to be lies. For sanctions to occur, it needs to be "proven" that the claims are probably true.

 

[Del191229]

For serious sanctions to be avoided(I don't think they will be) it doesn't have to be proven to be lies. For sanctions to occur, it needs to be "proven" that the claims are probably true.

It's almost certain the material facts of the claims won't be contested.

 

[sr36]

It's perfectly common for people to be stood down (with pay) while serious allegations are considered, such as a police officer accused of abuse of power or a teacher accused of assaulting a student. If it turns out Clarkson and Fagan did what is alleged, they are not fit people to coach a football club of young men from different backgrounds. As it now stands, they will spend at least a month or two doing exactly that.

If they are found to have done what is claimed, North and Brisbane will have made a *-up of epic proportions.

I think the coaches have been silly to have been so assertive in their statements of no "wrongdoing" and in pushing through and going straight back to work ASAP, as I do think there will be a finding of misconduct of some variety. I think they should have stayed voluntarily stood down until the findings come back.

But I don't see how a club could stand them down. They're standard company middle management - without the exceptional situation and responsiblity of the police and teachers.

 

[sr36]

It's almost certain the material facts of the claims won't be contested.

What makes you say that?

If that's true, then they're getting charged with misconduct and copping a whack. They couldn't possibly claim that a football coach's intrusions into a player's family relationships and family planning were appropriate. So then it would come down to the seriousness of the misconduct charge - Coercion? Racial stereotyping? Direct racism? All with the potential to increase the consequence.

 

[the big lebowski]

For serious sanctions to be avoided(I don't think they will be) it doesn't have to be proven to be lies. For sanctions to occur, it needs to be "proven" that the claims are probably true.

I must say overall you seem pretty balanced on the subject. Especially lately.

To the same degree you are confident of serious sanctions prior to any investigation.

You would have to conclude that you have been solely influenced by 2 documents that effectively state they havent even tried to provide any real basis for conclusion.

 

[the big lebowski]

What makes you say that?

If that's true, then they're getting charged with misconduct and copping a whack. They couldn't possibly claim that a football coach's intrusions into a player's family relationships and family planning were appropriate. So then it would come down to the seriousness of the misconduct charge - Coercion? Racial stereotyping? Direct racism? All with the potential to increase the consequence.

I’d say they’ll be contesting

1: we never told or encouraged anyone to get an abortion

2: we never forced anyone to live anywhere

What we did do was

1: alert a seemingly troubled young man that he had options with regards to his domestic life

2: being a professional footballer is hard and if you want the best chance to make it you should consider these options with regards to living arrangements