Matt Rendell...

[Plugger35]

I'm still at a loss to understand why misfud and his mate didnt take immediate action if they were so offended at the time and I also fail to understand why misfud hasn't spoken to the media

Yeah there's definitely something that doesn't add up here. Also Grant Thomas said last night that he had spoken to Mifsud about Rendell's comments and he basically laughed them off and said that Rendell would never seriously consider his extreme theory about only drafting indigenous players with at least one white parent.

So according to Grant Thomas version of events Mifsud wasn't offended by Rendell's comments but according to Demetriou and Trigg's version of events he was deeply offended, so someone isn't telling the truth here and I know which version of events I'm more inclined to believe and isn't Demetriou's or Trigg's. The only way to find out for sure though is to hear from Mifsud himself but all of a sudden he seems to have disappeared off the face of the earth.

 

[TerryWallet]

So he got fired for a remark he can't recall and that hasn't been reported anywhere?

Or he got fired for a remark that was incorrectly reported and isn't anything beyond a wild exaggeration?

No. He got fired for a conversation that his mate Mifsud remembered clearly enough to report it to the Commission.

 

[Silvagnis]

Trigg and Mifsud are both friendly with Rendell.

Do you honestly think they have stitched Rendell up?

Why does this have to be any deeper than Rendell stuffed up and it made his particular job untenable?

It doesn't mean he's a bad bloke any more than it didn't mean that Damien Monkhorst was a bad bloke when he said what he shouldn't.

If Andrew McLeod comes out in the coming days and says wtte "I've now been told the full conversation and its context and i still believe Rendell has been wronged" then that will be a different matter,...butas the known facts stand....Matt Rendell stuffed up and it cost him his job.

You can't possibly say that Rendell was putting on a show on Monday night and faking his account of what happened. The AFL and their mouth piece The Age have stitched Rendell up. Terrible account by Michael Gleeson in today's Age who defends the story he broke, but didn't hear first hand.

The holier than thou media will never say they're wrong.

Unless they're Tim Lane.

If Rendell's comments were so shocking to Ali Fahour and Jason Mifsud, why hadn't the story broken before this?

The AFL spin doctors and the complicit so called independent media have done him in after a poorly worded plea.

I believe Rendell over the AFL's media arm and flogs such as Wilson, Demetriou, Trigg and Gleeson who weren't there.

Andrew Demetriou: ''I don't think he's racist. I just think he's ignorant. They were stupid, ignorant comments and I think the Adelaide Football Club treated him very fairly.''

Interesting that there's a performance clause in Mifsud's contract related to the number of indigenous and multicultural footballers being recruited. The image conscious AFL clearly doesn't like being told where their development programs are failing and need to improve.

Rendell is nothing but a scapegoat for the image of the game.

 

[MattyB_76]

If I was any less of an adult, I'd be on Twitter now laying into Mifsud and Fahour about remaining silent when a good man is taking a beating. But I doubt I'd get a response from either of them for a couple of months.

 

[TerryWallet]

btw, i'm not excusing the medis's role in all this. They are sewer rats and attempt to muddy the waters at all times in an effort to stretch the story out.

This country is terribly served by its media.

 

[Keys]

Keyser

it has been reported today that Mifsud agonised over taking action for weeks. Why is that so hard to believe? After all, he is friends with Rendell, but is employed as an indigenous officer of the AFL.

It would be quite a conflicted position to be in.

Obviously he wouldn't have done this lightly.

Trigg says the entire conversation is not kind to Rendell. Obviously Mifsud and Farhur remembered it well enough.

Rendell has said he can't remember what else he said....oh, other than it was all taken out of context.

I can believe that misfud may have had reservations about taking action given his friendship with rendell, that certainly seems plausible.

However, given that friendship why didn't he go back to rendell and ask him to clarify his remarks and/or tell him that he had an issue with them. Furthermore, fahour has no such friendship with rendell yet he didn't initiate any action despite being extremely offended

Rendell had a gun pointed to his head and forced to resign without any chance to explain his comments or clear the air with his accusers and we are somehow to believe there's more to it despite the confirmed comments being justifiable when put into context

 

[The Speaker]

No. He got fired for a conversation that his mate Mifsud remembered clearly enough to report it to the Commission.

Okay, let's just assume that this is the case despite the fact that this is at best a case of he said, she said.

What did Rendell say?

 

[Roby]

Michael Gleeson article suggesting that it was more than one "white parent" comment which was found offensive at the meeting.

The conversation began with the draft potential of a promising Ugandan teenager but quickly moved from problems besetting black Africans to those confronting black Australians. On Footy Classified on Monday, Rendell offered a nuanced version of events and admitted the comment about potentially only selecting black players if they had a white parent was silly, wrong and made in the context of a broader discussion about the falling retention rate of black players in the game.
When he made the comment, it is understood Mifsud queried him about it and Rendell repeated the line. Mifsud, who is of indigenous and Maltese heritage, was upset. But the white parent line was not the only comment to offend Mifsud and Fahour. The tone of language in most of the 20-minute discussion alarmed and disturbed them.
Trigg admitted as much on radio yesterday, saying he would spare Rendell further pain by going through other elements of the conversation. ''There was much more in that discussion in terms of what was fed back to me,'' Trigg said. ''The very clear feedback we got from several quarters was that it was unacceptable, not just the point about the parentage but much of the discussion. It was colourful and it was lively and it was all of those things which Matthew knows about and it was received poorly


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ght-message-20120320-1vi0z.html#ixzz1pfJ6ipgF

He hasn't formally genuinely apologised as he made quite clear when he said "IF I have offended anyone..." IF, remember he says IF; given that, and now that we find out that it was possibly a complete barrage of comments in which he was asked to clarify but then repeated without resiling, see a trend?

The AFL and the club asked to go back and think about what he said. After coming back, he said he wouldn't resile. On Footy Classified he never answered promptly to the most pertinent question and when he finally did try to answer... we had 4 seconds pauses.

I wonder if the so called people who are called others witchhunters on Rendell, may actually see the viewpoint that it appears that you may have started the witchhunt on Demetriou, Trigg and Misfud who gave Rendell plenty of opportunity to retract his comments. In fact they have been more than supportive in trying to help someone they respect for having worked 35 years in the AFL.

Like I said already, all Rendell had to do was say: I apologise for these comments, they were made in ignorance and apolgisie for everybody I have offended. No IFS or BUTS.

And yes it is ignorance. Ever heard of Amos Frank? Player recently recruited by the Hawthorn Football Club who came from a remote community. It was not long ago it was inconceivable for someone from an outback remote community to even be a given a chance. Given how technical and strategic the game has become, the necessary education one needs to play AFL football at a fundamental level, it speaks volumes of the AFL right now.

The issues with outback Australia has been know for decades. Nothing the AFL doesn't know about and why they have now an indigenous commissioner and an Academy in Darwin. The ABS estimates that as of 2005 estimates the total indigenous population to be 2.4%, where as indigenous players represent about 10% of the AFL playing list. So the AFL has done a lot and continues to do a lot for indegenous Australia. They also know they can do more, but it's far and above what most organisations in Australia actually ever undertake.

 

[The Speaker]

Michael Gleeson is the one who started this rot.

Interesting that he's only been drip-feeding the "whole" story as the circumstances change.

 

[Ron The Bear]

it has been reported today that Mifsud agonised over taking action for weeks. Why is that so hard to believe?

What a crock of ****ing horseshit! The action he took was to make an oblique reference to comments by "three or four" recruiters during an executive presentation FFS! When grilled by Demetriou afterwards for names, he dropped Rendell in it.

Sick of these lying whitewashing sacks of shit. They can all lose their ****ing jobs AFAIC.

 

[TerryWallet]

Okay, let's just assume that this is the case despite the fact that this is at best a case of he said, she said.

What did Rendell say?

It is reported today that Rendell can't remember what he said other than the 1 white parent quote, which he says was out of context.

His friend Mifsud obviously did remember what was said and reported it to the commission.

His employer Trigg has said that reported conversation is not kind to Rendell and he'd rather let the matter rest.

Rendell is certainly within his rights to ask that the reported conversation be made public.

Somehow i don't think he will though.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

so glad I didn't see fc

can't stand miss "I am sooooo dishhhh-dusshhh-ted by thisssshh horrible bizz-nesh"

 

[The Speaker]

It is reported today that Rendell can't remember what he said other than the 1 white parent quote, which he says was out of context.

His friend Mifsud obviously did remember what was said and reported it to the commission.

His employer Trigg has said that reported conversation is not kind to Rendell and he'd rather let the matter rest.

Rendell is certainly within his rights to ask that the reported conversation be made public.

Somehow i don't think he will though.

And what was it? What did he say?

And if it was so astonishingly bad, why did it come out at all, given the amount of work he has put into indigenous issues? Surely a private conversation which only included three individuals had no reason to come out at all, given what it has potentially cost football?

Oh, that's right:

What a crock of ****ing horseshit! The action he took was to make an oblique reference to comments by "three or four" recruiters during an executive presentation FFS! When grilled by Demetriou afterwards for names, he dropped Rendell in it.

Sick of these lying whitewashing sacks of shit. They can all lose their ****ing jobs AFAIC.

It was intended to stay private.

 

[Plugger35]

It is reported today that Rendell can't remember what he said other than the 1 white parent quote, which he says was out of context.

His friend Mifsud obviously did remember what was said and reported it to the commission.

His employer Trigg has said that reported conversation is not kind to Rendell and he'd rather let the matter rest.

Rendell is certainly within his rights to ask that the reported conversation be made public.

Somehow i don't think he will though.

So in other words you have no idea what Rendell's comments were that were so offensive to Mifsud yet you still keep saying that Rendell stuffed up and deserved to lose his job.

Not the first time you've been made to look foolish though Terry, Nick Riewoldt never went to the Gold Coast either which you were claiming was a certainty because you were in the know.

 

[Ron The Bear]

It was intended to stay private.

What, 'private' as in 'published in a mass-circulation daily newspaper'? Bull SHIT. A well-meaning man has been ****ed over for reasons unknown and the press is too scared to touch it.

 

[The Speaker]

What, 'private' as in 'published in a mass-circulation daily newspaper'? Bull SHIT. A well-meaning man has been ****ed over for reasons unknown and the press is too scared to touch it.

Mifsud obviously intended it to stay private until Vlad asked for names. Hence the whole not saying anything for two months. It was only spoken when his boss forced it out of him, so to speak.

 

[TerryWallet]

It was intended to stay private.

So was Damien Monkhorsts comment.

So was Justin Shermans comment.

 

[TerryWallet]

So in other words you have no idea what Rendell's comments were that were so offensive to Mifsud yet you still keep saying that Rendell stuffed up and deserved to lose his job.

I have never said i know what he said.

I have only said that Mifsud knows what was said and he thought it worthy to report to the commission even though Rendell was his mate.

It's hardly rocket science.

 

[The Speaker]

So was Damien Monkhorsts comment.

So was Justin Shermans comment.

So what did he say?

And if it was so astonishingly bad, why did it come out at all, given the amount of work he has put into indigenous issues? Surely a private conversation which only included three individuals had no reason to come out at all, given what it has potentially cost football?

And why did it take two months for the offence to suddenly appear, only after a new person was informed of the conversation?

And further still, what makes that any reason for it to become public?

 

[ozgamer]

So was Damien Monkhorsts comment.

So was Justin Shermans comment.

Racial abuse situations. Not comparable to Rendell's conversation.

 

[Keys]

Given the subject and tone of the conversation, let's assume that rendell suggested that the upbringing of indigenous footballers was not compatible with the life of a modern day afl player and that if action was not taken to address this then the result may be that recruiters would deliberately overlook indigenous players, particularly those from remote communities. Maybe he suggested that the lack of discipline in their upbringing was an issue, maybe he suggested that they weren't as well educated, maybe he suggested that his view was that such players required more work to ensure they made the grade and that they were a higher risk selection and that maybe the reward wasn't worth the risk


This would have been difficult for misfud to hear and maybe he was offended by what rendell was saying. But what if there was an element of truth to what rendell was saying, shouldn't this be something that the afl should look into rather than put the blinkers on and sack rendell just because they find what he's saying unpalatable

 

[MattyB_76]

I have never said i know what he said.

I have only said that Mifsud knows what was said and he thought it worthy to report to the commission even though Rendell was his mate.

It's hardly rocket science.

Isn't the whole point that Rendell is disputing Mifsud's side of the conversation.

If what Rendell said was so damning, and the 'racism in sport' issue is so important to AFL, Vlad, Mifsud and Fahour then surely talking openly about the conversation and "punishing a nasty racist" is more important.

I mean, he hurt their feelings. They were both deeply offended.

 

[crowtricolours]

[YOUTUBE]06w6wagsgC4[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]kAI2IJ-0eh0[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Plugger35]

So was Damien Monkhorsts comment.

So was Justin Shermans comment.

Bit of a difference there Terry. Both Monkhorst and Sherman racially abused someone directly on the field which was reported straight away to the umpires and the AFL with witnesses.

Rendell's comments weren't racially abusive towards anyone and from what Rendell has said weren't even racist when taken in context. They were also said behind closed doors and his comments weren't reported straight away to the AFL either. On top of that the only two witnesses to the conversation other than Rendell haven't spoken in public about this conversation and why it was supposedly so offensive.

 

[TerryWallet]

Bit of a difference there Terry. Both Monkhorst and Sherman racially abused someone directly on the field which was reported straight away to the umpires and the AFL with witnesses.

Rendell's comments weren't racially abusive towards anyone and from what Rendell has said weren't even racist when taken in context. They were also said behind closed doors and his comments weren't reported straight away to the AFL either. On top of that the only two witnesses to the conversation other than Rendell haven't spoken in public about this conversation and why it was supposedly so offensive.

Plugger


At the risk of repeating myself, Trigg has clearly stated that the entire conversation is not kind to Rendell and he would rather not make them public.

Rendell is clearly within his rights to say he wants the report made public if he disputes this.

Instead, all he is now saying is he can't remember what else he said.

Personally i don't think his mate Mifsud would set him up.

If others do, then that's ok.