News Review into racism at Collingwood

Remove this Banner Ad

Bucks has been forced by circumstance to make a public statement acknowledging historically based problems.
Does that change the message behind his statement?
 
The racist incident upon which most of Leon's case is based occurred not 10 but 20 years ago - the completion of the profile and the ostracism which he never reported. He does not specifically mention another incident from his 11 years at the club. He states that he never heard the name Chimp used.

For me, this comes across as a bit of a fluff article, for which Davis has obviously been paid, strong on sentiment but thin on detail. I have no disagreement in the value of listening to the 'truths' as indigenous people see them. But to pretend that he is in any way describing the club's current attitude towards POC is doing the club a disservice. I would like to hear now from some of the other POCs who played at the club - particularly Brad Dick.

I don't like ex players taking aim at the club from the comfort of a 2 page newspaper article, but now that the discussion is taking place via the media, as evidenced by Buckley being coerced by the publicity into a public apology, why not now conduct the whole issue via the media. If any ex players have a comment, let them make it through the newspapers or TV, with the added value of making a little extra money on the side.

Quite obviously the club's culture has changed, but we are never going to be able to understand this while the commentary and analysis is historically based.
Show me your proof. Why do you feel like you have to slander him when you have no proof?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

show me your proof. You are absolutely slandering him because that is the point of your post. Otherwise i dont know why you posted it.
I am not suggesting that payment has influenced his views. I am not happy with this debate taking place via the media instead of directly with the club. If people are genuinely interested in being part of the process of change in the club, they would be offering their services and thoughts directly to the club. We know for instance that the ultimate aim of Lumumba's campaign is a financial settlement, particularly as he repeatedly refused direct discussion with the club and committee and has taken it straight to court.
 
I am not suggesting that payment has influenced his views. I am not happy with this debate taking place via the media instead of directly with the club. If people are genuinely interested in being part of the process of change in the club, they would be offering their services and thoughts directly to the club. We know for instance that the ultimate aim of Lumumba's campaign is a financial settlement, particularly as he repeatedly refused direct discussion with the club and committee and has taken it straight to court.
You have zero knowledge of HL's motivations, you are making those up as well. IF you can assume that, i can assume your motivations for posting are either you are just trying to discredit HL and LD and the report because you don't agree that the club is systemically racist or you actually are racist.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Did you read the Leon Davis article?

Yeah. They were incidents by playing group and some w***er fans. He talks about wider Australia.

When you consider charitable, social causes championed, its greater than most of the individual negatives or those voicing them.
 
I am not suggesting that payment has influenced his views. I am not happy with this debate taking place via the media instead of directly with the club. If people are genuinely interested in being part of the process of change in the club, they would be offering their services and thoughts directly to the club. We know for instance that the ultimate aim of Lumumba's campaign is a financial settlement, particularly as he repeatedly refused direct discussion with the club and committee and has taken it straight to court.

In terms of a reconciliation mediation/ conflict resolution, we've had a bit of movement as a result of it playing out in the media. HL said his beliefs ages ago. Bucks and co said their belief ages ago. As a result of the mediator (the reviewers) Bucks has better understood HLs point of view, which may have resulted in him softening his view of HL. I wonder if HL will be asked to understand Bucks's view? Unfortunately, I don't think so - until the court enforces mediation, but even then his heels are dug in and he's not going to listen.

I don't think anyone involved is a bad person or it was really about race. There was a conflict, a staff member was disgruntled. The club had the power and arrogantly decided they owned the truth and didn't listen and thus he didn't listen to them and it went pear shaped from there.
 
Last edited:
I was watching the footy over the weekend and getting inundated with those NAB commercials...... more than just money. Pleasssssssssssssssseee....

The reason that I mention it is that not long ago, this bank was known as a shafter, a fleecer, a pack of scum. But it plodded on and did all the right things. Sinking a couple of million of their customers money into footy. Taking the credit for low mortgage rates that were gifted to it by the Federal Reserve. Keeping its head down and making out that it was smelling like roses.

It's a lesson for the Pies. Do the right things, tick all the boxes and the worm can turn.
 
Bucks has been forced by circumstance to make a public statement acknowledging historically based problems.

I'd consider them comments from improved understanding.
 
I'd consider them comments from improved understanding.
I'd consider them circumstances forcing a placatory statement regarding Lumumba which I am sure Buckley would prefer not to have to make. Waleed Aly has not apologised for his interview with the man and nor should Buckley apologise for anything. Unfortunately the club has been pressured in the media by the almost fluff media article by Davis who did not even serve under Buckley with Lumumba as a player. The club have to play the media game and the odds are weighted against them in this over-charged PC environment.
 
I'd consider them circumstances forcing a placatory statement regarding Lumumba which I am sure Buckley would prefer not to have to make. Waleed Aly has not apologised for his interview with the man and nor should Buckley apologise for anything. Unfortunately the club has been pressured in the media by the almost fluff media article by Davis who did not even serve under Buckley with Lumumba as a player. The club have to play the media game and the odds are weighted against them in this over-charged PC environment.

I think Bucks comments were sincere and you're viewing them cynically.
 
I think Bucks comments were sincere and you're viewing them cynically.
I suppose I am viewing the comments from my point of view. You may well be right. I would not think an apology wise when you are being taken to court on a civil action, but perhaps Buckley and the club know what they are doing.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top