Current Trial Pell retains honorary role at the Tigers

Are you comfortable with Pell having an official role in the AFL?

  • Yes

    Votes: 3 6.1%
  • No

    Votes: 46 93.9%

  • Total voters
    49

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

IMO Richmond should have parted ways with the evil man based on the evasive and empathy-free testimony he has already given - that clearly put church interest ahead of victims (for whom the church is supposed to be compassionate for)

However.... given they didn't - the fact he is charged is somewhat irrelevant - he is presumed innocent and therefore no issues for the Tigers having links to him.
 

calyam

Norm Smith Medallist
May 9, 2011
5,834
6,784
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
IMO Richmond should have parted ways with the evil man based on the evasive and empathy-free testimony he has already given - that clearly put church interest ahead of victims (for whom the church is supposed to be compassionate for)

Agree wholeheartedly with this. His testimony was an absolute disaster and it is almost impossible to believe that he didn't have greater awareness of what was happening during that time period given the roles he held and his connections to those found to be paedophiles.

Purely on that I would, if I was Richmond, distance myself from any connection with Pell.
 

RightYouAreThen

Team Captain
Oct 16, 2014
468
552
AFL Club
Fremantle

Bokonon_

Cancelled
10k Posts
Nov 23, 2016
10,558
7,069
AFL Club
GWS
Can you post the link where he has been convicted?

If he is still a patron if hes found guilty, i will be scrraming blue bloody murder with you, but this hasnt happened

Also its an honorary position, so its not like we have a operational or management role to suspend him from for the duration of the trial.
I'm not trying to suggest RFC is tainted by this. I do wonder if there would be an appropriate time to remove him though, with or without a conviction.
Given the age of events and the way the legal system works it may be there will never be a conviction, which doesn't prove innocence.
If an inference was made in the final royal commission report for example, that should be sufficient?
Less about staining the club than removing support in the community generally for the perpetrators of appalling events.
 
It's judgement. To quote Patrick Smith:

"If it's a bad look it's damaging"

http://at.theaustralian.com.au/link/c297530b9647c62a365bd79ae1133f4f

Its about allowing justice to do its thing

I was against watson handing over his brownlow and efc being banned before being found guilty - and i hate the dons. Im no fan of the catholic church, but we have a presumption of innocence for a reason

This whole Ms Lovejoy hang em immediately because it looks bad mentality is one of the things that shits me about society today. Perception should not outweigh reality
 
I'm not trying to suggest RFC is tainted by this. I do wonder if there would be an appropriate time to remove him though, with or without a conviction.
Given the age of events and the way the legal system works it may be there will never be a conviction, which doesn't prove innocence.
If an inference was made in the final royal commission report for example, that should be sufficient?
Less about staining the club than removing support in the community generally for the perpetrators of appalling events.

Details of the charge havent even been made public, so we have nothing in terms of any details of the charges to even attempt to weigh them up with any degree of fairness.

The closest ive heard is it relates to one of the cases listed in the book written about the whole situation, but even the author was saying the other week she doesnt know which specific case the charges are linked to
 

Russian Demon

Premiership Player
Mar 26, 2015
4,225
5,651
AFL Club
Melbourne
Details of the charge havent even been made public, so we have nothing in terms of any details of the charges to even attempt to weigh them up with any degree of fairness.

The closest ive heard is it relates to one of the cases listed in the book written about the whole situation, but even the author was saying the other week she doesnt know which specific case the charges are linked to

From what he has already put on the record in the RC, he's already contravened what I'm sure are Richmond's club values.... civic duty, fairness, honesty, defence of the vulnerable ect ect.
 
Agree wholeheartedly with this. His testimony was an absolute disaster and it is almost impossible to believe that he didn't have greater awareness of what was happening during that time period given the roles he held and his connections to those found to be paedophiles.

Purely on that I would, if I was Richmond, distance myself from any connection with Pell.

Fwiw i dont think most rfc people even knew he was still a patron. I knew he was when ab of melbourne, but i assumed (incorrectly) that ended when he was made ab of sydney.

Cant remember anything on our board about it at all, and we usually argue obsessively about anything rfc related
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Bokonon_

Cancelled
10k Posts
Nov 23, 2016
10,558
7,069
AFL Club
GWS
Details of the charge havent even been made public, so we have nothing in terms of any details of the charges to even attempt to weigh them up with any degree of fairness.

The closest ive heard is it relates to one of the cases listed in the book written about the whole situation, but even the author was saying the other week she doesnt know which specific case the charges are linked to
I did watch the broadcast of his testimony to the royal commission, and he didn't come off well to my subjective view. I was taking the broader view.
I do think it it's appalling to troll the club over this, and there has to be some inertia to avoid overreaction, I get.
 
From what he has already put on the record in the RC, he's already contravened what I'm sure are Richmond's club values.... civic duty, fairness, honesty, defence of the vulnerable ect ect.

In all honesty, i didnt listen to any of the rc or followed it in the media, so i cant comment one way or another on that (ill leave that to others)
 

OzJohnnie

Cancelled
Hawthorn Hawks - Conor Nash Player Sponsor 2017 Hawthorn Hawks - James Cousins Player Sponsor 2017 Hawthorn Hawks - Kaiden Brand Player Sponsor 2017
Feb 4, 2016
2,666
6,947
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Shouldn't have been given the position in the 1990s on the basis of being an utter prick. Don't need a trial to be sure of that.

If being an utter prick were disqualifying from association with a club then 90% of BF would have memberships revoked.
 
A tough situation..........

Personally l think Richmond should never have gotten involved with a well known established paedophile organisation and its ring leader.

but given Richmond jumped into bed with Pell, they have no choice but to sit it out until the end of the trial.
 
A tough situation..........

Personally l think Richmond should never have gotten involved with a well known established paedophile organisation and its ring leader.

but given Richmond jumped into bed with Pell, they have no choice but to sit it out until the end of the trial.

Just on your first point, Richmond is a historically catholic club, given our base was initially irish immigrants living in the shithole that was richmond back in the day. So its not that we aligned with the church x number of years ago as some kind of marketing/promo choice
 
Just on your first point, Richmond is a historically catholic club, given our base was initially irish immigrants living in the shithole that was richmond back in the day. So its not that we aligned with the church x number of years ago as some kind of marketing/promo choice

that's reasonable

thanks
 

sprockets

Cancelled
Crime Board Sleuth BeanCoiNFT Investor
Oct 15, 2004
5,562
9,546
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
In the eyes of the LAW he's innocent until proven guilty. The rest of us don't need to live to that standard. I have no doubt that he must have known SOMETHING about SOME of the incidents. Bone him Tigers.
 

gavaniacono

Cancelled
Oct 7, 2014
7,939
10,152
Hanoi
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Wolverhampton Wanderers
I'm not trying to suggest RFC is tainted by this. I do wonder if there would be an appropriate time to remove him though, with or without a conviction.
Given the age of events and the way the legal system works it may be there will never be a conviction, which doesn't prove innocence.
If an inference was made in the final royal commission report for example, that should be sufficient?
Less about staining the club than removing support in the community generally for the perpetrators of appalling events.
The good thing abt the royal commish was that many things insiders and ex cathos like me knew about him were confirmed, key among them: a lack of curiosity about the many rumours around certain clergy esp in Ballarrat; prime concern to protect church hierarchy not catholics; probable knowledge unactioned; immunizing the vaticans assetts from claims; playing hardball with victims and softball with clergy; avoiding a return to Oz until necessity made it happen; etc etc.
RFC should be embarrassed as I am for not acting long ago, irrespective of legal guilt. Do we want our club associated with such people?
 

Bokonon_

Cancelled
10k Posts
Nov 23, 2016
10,558
7,069
AFL Club
GWS
The good thing abt the royal commish was that many things insiders and ex cathos like me knew about him were confirmed, key among them: a lack of curiosity about the many rumours around certain clergy esp in Ballarrat; prime concern to protect church hierarchy not catholics; probable knowledge unactioned; immunizing the vaticans assetts from claims; playing hardball with victims and softball with clergy; avoiding a return to Oz until necessity made it happen; etc etc.
RFC should be embarrassed as I am for not acting long ago, irrespective of legal guilt. Do we want our club associated with such people?
Ultimately that's for Richmond I think. I am an outsider but I get it's a lot broader than AFL.
 
Back