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DO NOT QUOTE THREADS FROM OTHER BOARDS

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Should just change the thread title to Russell Jackson did a bad bad thing.

 

[Gralin]

That's exactly what they do.
You always read the judge saying "good person who's made a mistake" etc

No they don't interview the whole pub and ask anyone else if they were hit

The defence will get character witnesses that say the person has never been violent but that's not the same thing.

They also don't say not punching 10 people cancels out punching one

 

[perplexed]

Is there some sort of trolling competition to decide who gets to be a Hawthorn moderator?

 

[Gralin]

Is there some sort of trolling competition to decide who gets to be a Hawthorn moderator?

No

 

[Del191229]

In terms of the where are we parts, how would we be in a better situation without the article. For a start, the AFL probably wouldn't have made the inquiry as independent as they have made it. If it's done that, it's done its job and it hasn't closed down the other avenues where you'd like it investigated.

That's a fair point. Again, I've never ever said Jackson shouldn't have published.

But it is also worth noting the AFL struggled to put together the investigation and then the ToR due to the climate once the story dropped.

 

[gouki88]

Is there some sort of trolling competition to decide who gets to be a Hawthorn moderator?

Trolling = disagreeing with you?

 

[Gralin]

That's a fair point. Again, I've never ever said Jackson shouldn't have published.

But it is also worth noting the AFL struggled to put together the investigation and then the ToR due to the climate once the story dropped.

making it hard for the AFL to put together the terms of reference is a good thing

it means they couldn't stage manage the process before anyone knew anything

 

[Del191229]

Should just change the thread title to Russell Jackson did a bad bad thing.

More troll crap.

Lets talk about how Hawthorn's investigation got leaked shall we?

Or is that mooting the shesshenger too

 

[sr36]

More troll crap.

Lets talk about how Hawthorn's investigation got leaked shall we?

Or is that mooting the shesshenger too

Noone knows. And in this case, leaked could simply mean someone saying: "Shit that Hawthorn review is bad."

 

[Gralin]

More troll crap.

Lets talk about how Hawthorn's investigation got leaked shall we?

Or is that mooting the shesshenger too

You going to blame Egan for that leak as well?

 

[Del191229]

Noone knows. And in this case, leaked could simply mean someone saying: "s**t that Hawthorn review is bad."

???

The Egan document itself was provided to the Herald Sun who have put up a PDF of it.

I adore the touchingly naive fantasy world many have constructed that the document itself wasn't leaked to Jackson too.

But some get an attack of the vapours when that is discussed.

 

[South of the Yarra]

See this is how things happen for Aboriginal people in our country

Stolen Generation- An atrocity quickly changes to we did it for the good of the families, the children and the nation then to did it even happen.
Aboriginal Incarceration- A huge problem turns to well the statistics say .....
Poverty in Communities- Such a shame becomes well they brought in on 'themselves'
Education standards- Kids struggle well 'they' don't even get to school
Racism- Just horrible turns to well 'they' should be more resilient
Current AFL Saga - Aboriginal players tell horror stories turns to victims must talk more, it was a bad article, it should not have been leaked to the media, Egan is bad, the victims are from bad families they must be liars, one side didn't get a chance to talk to and then finally Clarkson and Fagan are heroes.

 

[Del191229]

You going to blame Egan for that leak as well?

Egan leaked it to Jackson for sure.

Hawthorn themselves then leaked it to the Hun, that's my working assumption.

How do you think it got out into the wild?

Magic? Vladimir Putin's hybrid warfare?

 

[sr36]

???

The Egan document itself was provided to the Herald Sun who have put up a PDF of it.

I adore the touchingly naive fantasy world many have constructed that the document itself wasn't leaked to Jackson too.

But some get an attack of the vapours when that is discussed.

The fumes may be because you usually discuss it with a finger pointing to one potential leaker, which doesn't appear to be based on any evidence at all. Can't name names based on a swag of testimony, but can name them based on no evidence whatsoever. Your logic and reasoning is basically all over the shop regarding this story and the amount of things that you are certain of is off the fricken charts.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

No they don't interview the whole pub and ask anyone else if they were hit

The defence will get character witnesses that say the person has never been violent but that's not the same thing.

They also don't say not punching 10 people cancels out punching one

But they would ask witnesses the context.
Was a punch thrown for no reason, was the alleged victim hassling the alleged assailant in the lead up, etc.

 

[faible]

Egan leaked it to Jackson for sure.

As a journalist you should be well aware that statements of opinion aren't statements of fact.

 

[JackOutback]

That's exactly what they do.
You always read the judge saying "good person who's made a mistake" etc

That's a character reference that might get you a reduction in punishment, it doesn't get you off.

 

[Makeshift Park]

Getting the occasional article wrong or being sued for defamation (mind you, the ABC won the Christian Porter case despite what Porter himself thought)

It's getting off track from this thread, but no one "won" the ABC v Porter case, it was settled, with the broadcaster paying mediation costs but not paying damages. On the flipside, Porter paid with his political career. Saying that one of the parties "won" is about as reductionist as suggesting that anyone in this thread is "winning" this discussion.
(Porter did lose a related case involving Jo Dyer.)

does not mean we start from the presumption that the Russell Jackson article is wrong, though.

On the flipside, I'm sure you'll agree that Clarkson and Fagan are entitled to the presumption of innocence.

There is no doubt that Jackson's article, since it named people and reported serious allegations that damaged their reputations, would have gone through lawyers and editors before being given the tick of approval.

I agree.

The idea that it's all made up by disgruntled ex-employees and that the journalist did not bother to verify, corroborate and seek comment from the accused should be ridiculed as a result.

There have been some pretty strange suggestions in this thread, but I don't remember anyone proposing that the allegations were totally fabricated.
I'd like to think that there was verification and corroboration involved. In the fullness of time we'll find out whether there was.

 

[Gralin]

Egan leaked it to Jackson for sure.

For sure? So you have evidence to back this accusation up then.
Wouldn't want you to get in trouble for defamation or anything, that would be bad judgment as a journalist

Hawthorn themselves then leaked it to the Hun, that's my working assumption.

The faceless Hawthorn and the named black man in Egan....

How do you think it got out into the wild?

I really don't give a shit, there are multiple stops along the way that this could have been leaked by multiple people

Magic? Vladimir Putin's hybrid warfare?

at the end of the day the report was handed in and nothing was done for or said for weeks

the end result of that is what we have now

but again, you really personally seem worried about absolutely everything but the actual issue

and looking for anyone to blame at all whose name isn't Clarkson, Fagan or Burt

why would that be?

 

[Gralin]

But they would ask witnesses the context.
Was a punch thrown for no reason, was the alleged victim hassling the alleged assailant in the lead up, etc.

a publicly witnessed assault is a little different to the coach in your house telling you to do things isn't it

no point asking people who weren't there if they saw it happen is there

another reason this shit analogy is shit and wrong

 

[Mitchell Madness]

a publicly witnessed assault is a little different to the coach in your house telling you to do things isn't it

no point asking people who weren't there if they saw it happen is there

another reason this s**t analogy is s**t and wrong

Bit asking everyone who was part of the organisation is relevant.
Compare the organisation to the pub.
Compare ALL the players to the witnesses in an assault in a pub.

 

[Gralin]

Bit asking everyone who was part of the organisation is relevant.
Compare the organisation to the pub.
Compare ALL the players to the witnesses in an assault in a pub.

yeah lets not

you want to talk about the issue talk about the issue

and the issue is there are accusations from certain players and their families of bad treatment

other players saying it didn't happen to them doesn't mean it didn't happen to the people who have come forward

do you know what goes on with the people you work with?

i don't unless they tell me or I see something happen, which I don't hang around at their houses and i don't go into meetings that im not invited to

 

[Area51]

It's not surprising that the players are reluctant to take part in the AFL process but they need to have their allegations tested somewhere. Yoorrook seems like the logical place but I'm not sure Egan can refer the matter to them, I think the players may have to. If they are reluctant to do this or take part in the AFL process, I'm not sure how this can credibly move forward unless someone sues someone.

Where does this come from? Players were asked to participate in Hawthorn's review. They and others spoke to a journalist who wanted to tell their story - where is the imperative coming from that they have to be tested? Because the AFL says so? Maybe if they were getting sued personally for defamation they would need to defend themselves but until then?

 

[South of the Yarra]

See this is how things happen for Aboriginal people in our country

Stolen Generation- An atrocity quickly changes to we did it for the good of the families, the children and the nation then to did it even happen.
Aboriginal Incarceration- A huge problem turns to well the statistics say .....
Poverty in Communities- Such a shame becomes well they brought in on 'themselves'
Education standards- Kids struggle well 'they' don't even get to school
Racism- Just horrible turns to well 'they' should be more resilient
Current AFL Saga - Aboriginal players tell horror stories turns to victims must talk more, it was a bad article, it should not have been leaked to the media, Egan is bad, the victims are from bad families they must be liars, one side didn't get a chance to talk to and then finally Clarkson and Fagan are heroes.

11kgm Just wondering what aspect of this you disagreed with

 

[Del191229]

The fumes may be because you usually discuss it with a finger pointing to one potential leaker, which doesn't appear to be based on any evidence at all. Can't name names based on a swag of testimony, but can name them based on no evidence whatsoever. Your logic and reasoning is basically all over the shop regarding this story and the amount of things that you are certain of is off the fricken charts.

You always get personal when you don't have an answer. It's quite endearing.

How do you think the Herald Sun came about their copy of the Egan report?

I certainly don't think Egan leaked it to them.