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DO NOT QUOTE THREADS FROM OTHER BOARDS

 

[Elixuh]

I’m asking why people seem to be recently just assuming that the allegations made by First Nations players aren’t true. There’s been a lot of noise about Hawthorn and the AFL handling the situation badly, which I don’t disagree with, plus the Phil Egan fraud thing, and it seems like people have equated these things with the allegations not being credible. Which I don’t understand. I’m asking a question.

Aside from one or two in here from time to time, I haven't seen anyone saying the allegations are untrue? They are just untested and unverified - so you can't make a judgment one way or the other. Which was why I found your sweeping whatever under the carpet comment to be weird.

And yes Hawthorn is incompetent and has caused this mess. The AFL can't really do anything so their handling is largely irrelevant.

 

[Elixuh]

I understand how common unreasonable influence and control would be in an environment such as professional sport.

"Everybody else is doing it" doesn't make it right.

Of course the AFL doesn't want to expose it's dark side.

Yeah so you keep raising things that I'm not arguing. But ok.

 

[Number37]

Nope. My view is speaking about the veracity of the allegations is a waste of time until the accounts of everyone involved are heard and tested. I have consistently maintained this position.

'speaking about the veracity of the allegations' is just your way of saying you don't believe the allegations.

Allegations, by definition, are unproven.
We can speak about the allegations in 3 ways
1. IMO they sound legit
2. IMO they don't sound legit
3. IMO dunno


What we now know is that Clarko & co did turn up at a player's house to help facilitate the end of the player's relationship.
And the only reason that happened was because it would help the player become a better footballer. Supposedly.

That sounds f'd up to me.
If Clarko doesn't understand how f'd up that sounds, then he shouldn't be allowed to coach.

 

[Number37]

Yeah so you keep raising things that I'm not arguing. But ok.

I'm not saying its right, but I think you're underestimating how common unreasonable influence and control over the personal lives of players is comp wide.

 

[Elixuh]

LMFAO oh my. You literally highlighted all of the words expect for the first 5 which demonstrate that I am not in fact arguing that.

You are a mental giant sir. One of the best.

 

[Elixuh]

'speaking about the veracity of the allegations' is just your way of saying you don't believe the allegations.

Allegations, by definition, are unproven.
We can speak about the allegations in 3 ways
1. IMO they sound legit
2. IMO they don't sound legit
3. IMO dunno


What we now know is that Clarko & co did turn up at a player's house to help facilitate the end of the player's relationship.
And the only reason that happened was because it would help the player become a better footballer. Supposedly.

That sounds f'd up to me.
If Clarko doesn't understand how f'd up that sounds, then he shouldn't be allowed to coach.

Pretty shit thing to say when I have expressly said that I do not intend to speak to the veracity of the allegations.

Are you unable to have a nuanced conversation? Your mind is a blunt instrument.

 

[Number37]

LMFAO oh my. You literally highlighted all of the words expect for the first 5 which demonstrate that I am not in fact arguing that.

You are a mental giant sir. One of the best.

Seems strange that you would reference it, if you weren't making that argument.
And let's not delude ourselves, you were making that argument.
You did in fact make the argument, which you qualified with your first 5 words ("I don't think it's right").

Which is a lot like when racist people say "I'm not racist, but....."

 

[Elixuh]

Seems strange that you would reference it, if you weren't making that argument.
And let's not delude ourselves, you were making that argument.
You did in fact make the argument, which you qualified with your first 5 words ("I don't think it's right").

Which is a lot of like when racist people say "I'm not racist, but....."

You know that in life you can discuss and raise things that you don't yourself agree with? You're a bit dull aren't you.

 

[Maxabillions]

Do you want to have another go at this?

Misread your post

 

[Number37]

Pretty s**t thing to say when I have expressly said that I do not intend to speak to the veracity of the allegations.

Are you unable to have a nuanced conversation? Your mind is a blunt instrument.

So you're just here stating the bleeding the obvious?

 

[Number37]

You know that in life you can discuss and raise things that you don't yourself agree with? You're a bit dull aren't you.

Yes I am dull.
But let's get back to what you were saying, rather than head down the ad-hom path eh.


You've said;
1) veracity of the allegations
2) widespread in clubland
3) bla-bla-bla


Sounds to me like you are making excuses for Clarko.
That doesn't mean that you are making excuses for Clarko, it means that it sounds to me like you are making excuses for Clarko.

It sounds to me like you are making excuses for Clarko because that seems to be the theme of your writing.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Seems strange that you would reference it, if you weren't making that argument.
And let's not delude ourselves, you were making that argument.
You did in fact make the argument, which you qualified with your first 5 words ("I don't think it's right").

Which is a lot like when racist people say "I'm not racist, but....."

Youre making a pretty dumb argument.

 

[Number37]

Youre making a pretty dumb argument.

How is it dumb?

 

[PizzaPie]

How is it dumb?

You're putting words in people's mouths based on a sweeping generalization of views shared previously, as a collective, that you made up. It just reads like some form of virtue signaling.

 

[Elixuh]

Yes I am dull.
But let's get back to what you were saying, rather than head down the ad-hom path eh.


You've said;
1) veracity of the allegations
2) widespread in clubland
3) bla-bla-bla


Sounds to me like you are making excuses for Clarko.
That doesn't mean that you are making excuses for Clarko, it means that it sounds to me like you are making excuses for Clarko.

It sounds to me like you are making excuses for Clarko because that seems to be the theme of your writing.

 

[Number37]

You're putting words in people's mouths based on a sweeping generalization of views shared previously, as a collective, that you made up. It just reads like some form of virtue signaling.

"..based on views shared previously"
"...that I made up..."

So the views were shared previously.
But I made them up.

oh
kay

 

[Elixuh]

"..based on views shared previously"
"...that I made up..."

So the views were shared previously.
But I made them up.

oh
kay

I don’t think this is the thread for you if you’re struggling with basic comprehension and the ability to discuss the topic in a nuanced way.

 

[Maxabillions]

Aside from one or two in here from time to time, I haven't seen anyone saying the allegations are untrue? They are just untested and unverified - so you can't make a judgment one way or the other. Which was why I found your sweeping whatever under the carpet comment to be weird.

And yes Hawthorn is incompetent and has caused this mess. The AFL can't really do anything so their handling is largely irrelevant.

Not necessarily here (but I do think there’s been more than one or two people saying the allegations are unlikely to be true) but in the media with The Age reporting Clarkson will be “exonerated” and the AFL moving to somehow wrap things up quickly, that feels like a sweeping under the carpet, especially after the comments from Burt that I think made it clear that at least some of what was alleged definitely happened. A poster above r_boy said the claims hadn’t stood up to scrutiny but didn’t provide any examples of this when I asked them.

 

[Elixuh]

Not necessarily here (but I do think there’s been more than one or two people saying the allegations are unlikely to be true) but in the media with The Age reporting Clarkson will be “exonerated” and the AFL moving to somehow wrap things up quickly, that feels like a sweeping under the carpet, especially after the comments from Burt that I think made it clear that at least some of what was alleged definitely happened. A poster above r_boy said the claims hadn’t stood up to scrutiny but didn’t provide any examples of this when I asked them.

Wrapping up the independent investigation doesn’t prejudice the parties ability to bring actions in other forums.

It makes no sense to continue the independent investigation when it cannot progress or reach any kind of meaningful conclusion, eg where relevant documents which Clarkson Burt fagan have requested aren’t being produced etc.

 

[perplexed]

Not necessarily here (but I do think there’s been more than one or two people saying the allegations are unlikely to be true) but in the media with The Age reporting Clarkson will be “exonerated” and the AFL moving to somehow wrap things up quickly, that feels like a sweeping under the carpet, especially after the comments from Burt that I think made it clear that at least some of what was alleged definitely happened. A poster above r_boy said the claims hadn’t stood up to scrutiny but didn’t provide any examples of this when I asked them.

Pretty much everyone accepts that the stories are based on real events. What we don't have yet is alternative perspectives or any back story or context to assess the extent to which the club and its employees overstepped.

 

[HairyO]

Burt’s timing was ordinary.

But all the damaging leaks against the accused were perfectly timed...

It needs to go to court and the accusers need to be put on the stand and told to tell the truth, then all of their claims can be fully tested. Anything else is a complete waste of time.

 

[Chief]

the accusers need to be put on the stand and told to tell the truth

But not the accused?

 

[Maxabillions]

Wrapping up the independent investigation doesn’t prejudice the parties ability to bring actions in other forums.

It makes no sense to continue the independent investigation when it cannot progress or reach any kind of meaningful conclusion, eg where relevant documents which Clarkson Burt fagan have requested aren’t being produced etc.

Doesn’t the fact that it seems to have been leaked that Clarkson will be exonerated suggest that they think it will come to a meaningful conclusion? When as you say documents haven’t been produced and they haven’t been able to get to the bottom of things?

 

[HairyO]

But not the accused?

So in your mind the legal system works where the ones accused take the stand and defend themselves against nothing?

Legally they dont actually have to. The accusers do. If what they say is complete garbage the accused can stay quiet and let the case fall apart.

But yes, after the accusers take the stand as well as their mums and whoever else has been used as evidence in the Egan report and through all the other leaks through the media, the accused would then share their version.

 

[sr36]

Doesn’t the fact that it seems to have been leaked that Clarkson will be exonerated suggest that they think it will come to a meaningful conclusion? When as you say documents haven’t been produced and they haven’t been able to get to the bottom of things?

How meaningful is it when the major claimants weren't willing to participate in an AFL inquiry?