Opinion Hawthorn - Clarkson - Fagan Racism Investigation

[arrowman]

There have been some comments on this thread to the effect that this should be handed straight to the Police and/or WorkSafe Victoria. I disagree.

To "hand it to the Police" you would need to be alleging that there have been actual criminal offences, and that's not clear at all. And the Police are not some sort of third party general investigating agency, that you can in effect commission to conduct an inquiry on your behalf and then pass on the results to you. What happens if the Police investigate (with or without the cooperation of the complainants), and they find there is no solid case for a criminal prosecution? Can the AFL then ask them to hand over the details / results of their inquiry, for the AFL's own purposes?

Similarly for WorkSafe. It's possibly more likely that WorkSafe would find some breach(es) or WHS laws, and if they did they would probably go back to the AFL / Hawthorn for remediation of some kind. But SafeWork SA investigated the Crows camp, and found no breaches - that doesn't mean there weren't issues that the club needed to address.

Like it or not, it has to start with an AFL inquiry, with other agencies brought in afterwards, if appropriate / necessary. Not the other way around.

 

[Bearded Clam]

If your home life was significantly affecting your job performance, in normal situations, you’d be warned then sacked.

Correct..

But thats not whats alleged here is it..

 

[Slippery Pete]

How is it their job?

You’re not really demonstrating any understanding of how industrial relations works here, mate.

 

[Geoffa32]

When Fagan and Clarko are cleared, and they will be, any notion of whistleblowing in the AFL will be halted.


What's the point.



As long as the AFL funds the AFLW, churns out Indegenous Jumpers and token performances at the GF half time show under the notion of inclusion it's all good.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Bearded Clam]

There have been some comments on this thread to the effect that this should be handed straight to the Police and/or WorkSafe Victoria. I disagree.

To "hand it to the Police" you would need to be alleging that there have been actual criminal offences, and that's not clear at all. And the Police are not some sort of third party general investigating agency, that you can in effect commission to conduct an inquiry on your behalf and then pass on the results to you. What happens if the Police investigate (with or without the cooperation of the complainants), and they find there is no solid case for a criminal prosecution? Can the AFL then ask them to hand over the details / results of their inquiry, for the AFL's own purposes?

Similarly for WorkSafe. It's possibly more likely that WorkSafe would find some breach(es) or WHS laws, and if they did they would probably go back to the AFL / Hawthorn for remediation of some kind. But SafeWork SA investigated the Crows camp, and found no breaches - that doesn't mean there weren't issues that the club needed to address.

Like it or not, it has to start with an AFL inquiry, with other agencies brought in afterwards, if appropriate / necessary. Not the other way around.

If you were involved in an incident at your work tomorrow.. with serious ramifications..

Who would you want to be investigating it?..

The proper authorities. Police, workcover, worksafe etc..

Or the company you work for?…

I know who I would be chosing.. and it wouldnt be the company I work for!… who would no doubt be doing everything they can to ensure they come out of it as squeeky clean as possible.

Hawthorn have already held an enquiry.. hand it over to the authorities and see if they think it needs further investigations..

not over to Gill the dill and his quazi court to investigate further..

The AFL cant even get their own weekly match review process correct!..

 

[moogerfooger]

I'm wondering if it's too late for all parties to try and find some middle ground, where the issue is kept within the confines of the AFL investigation to avoid it going to court. One last deal for Gil to broker. I don't think any party wants this to go to court with all the dirty laundry that would entail.

I suspect the AFL will try for Clarkson/Fagan/Burt to agree to a mediation that satisfies the accusers to some degree (admitting cultural insensitivity without accepting the most serious allegations), where each side can privately agree they have differing recollections while keeping further details from reaching the public domain. Something that accepts some responsibility but enables the footy people to keep their current jobs - on the condition the league put into place minimum standards of indigenous support at every club. This is a league wide issue, not just a Hawthorn issue. The families could then walk away having achieved their main goal of driving generational change, which I think is what everyone is looking for here.

If I'm wrong and the families want the accused to pay a price, and the accused want to air their version in public, it'll take years to work it's way through the legal system. This is no ordinary workplace dispute.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Similarly for WorkSafe. It's possibly more likely that WorkSafe would find some breach(es) or WHS laws, and if they did they would probably go back to the AFL / Hawthorn for remediation of some kind

IIRC I read a report last week, where it was said, Worksafe were already involved

 

[arrowman]

IIRC I read a report last week, where it was said, Worksafe were already involved

Interesting. At whose instigation, I wonder?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Interesting. At whose instigation, I wonder?

I'm assuming their own instigation ?

 

[Scorpus]

I'm wondering if it's too late for all parties to try and find some middle ground, where the issue is kept within the confines of the AFL investigation to avoid it going to court. One last deal for Gil to broker. I don't think any party wants this to go to court with all the dirty laundry that would entail.

I suspect the AFL will try for Clarkson/Fagan/Burt to agree to a mediation that satisfies the accusers to some degree (admitting cultural insensitivity without accepting the most serious allegations), where each side can privately agree they have differing recollections while keeping further details from reaching the public domain. Something that accepts some responsibility but enables the footy people to keep their current jobs - on the condition the league put into place minimum standards of indigenous support at every club. This is a league wide issue, not just a Hawthorn issue. The families could then walk away having achieved their main goal of driving generational change, which I think is what everyone is looking for here.

If I'm wrong and the families want the accused to pay a price, and the accused want to air their version in public, it'll take years to work it's way through the legal system. This is no ordinary workplace dispute.

The reason this is in the media is precisely because (I would imagine) the accusers explicitly don't want this confined to an AFL investigation. An organization with a history of cover ups and sweeping things under the rug. The AFL will try their best to keep it in house as they always do but it's already out

 

[Bearded Clam]

The reason this is in the media is precisely because (I would imagine) the accusers explicitly don't want this confined to an AFL investigation. An organization with a history of cover ups and sweeping things under the rug. The AFL will try their best to keep it in house as they always do but it's already out

Yep..

Hawthorn have already investigated it.. already have a report.

Hand it all to the authorities..

The only reason I could think of for Gill wanting rhe AFL to hold another investigation, and hold off on handing it all over to the proper authorities to investigate, is so the AFL can continue to try and control the narrative.

And its strange that Gill also is making noises about him now sticking around for longer to see out this new investigation.

Given Gills extremely cosy relationship with his morning coffee buddy Clarko.. if I’m one of the accusers I’m gonna be thinking Gill wants the AFL to investigate further, and Gill to hang around while it happens, so he can protect his buddy..

Fxxk that.. the little boys club circus called the AFL can barely be trusted to run a chook raffle fairly..

Have an authority with real independence look further into it.. not a group of people hand picked by Gill, and the AFL, that Gill calls independent..

 

[Ramify]

Yep..

Hawthorn have already investigated it.. already have a report.

Hand it all to the authorities..

The only reason I could think of for Gill wanting rhe AFL to hold another investigation, and hold off on handing it all over to the proper authorities to investigate, is so the AFL can continue to try and control the narrative.

And its strange that Gill also is making noises about him now sticking around for longer to see out this new investigation.

Given Gills extremely cosy relationship with his morning coffee but Clarko.. if I’m one of the accusers I’m gonna be thinking Gill wants the AFL to investigate further, and Gill to hang around while it happens, so he can protect his buddy..

Fxxk that.. the little boys club circus called the AFL can barely be trusted to run a chook raffle fairly..

Have an authority with real independence look further into it.. not a group of people hand picked by Gill, and the AFL, that Gill calls independent..

You would hardly describe the Hawthorn investigation as complete would you?

I do agree though. I think it should be taken out of their(AFL) hands.
Somehow...

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

You’re not really demonstrating any understanding of how industrial relations works here, mate.

yeah cool. Are the AFLPA having a seat on the committee too?

 

[Ramify]

yeah cool. Are the AFLPA having a seat on the committee too?

Wouldn't be the worst Idea.

 

[GROTTO]

When Fagan and Clarko are cleared, and they will be, any notion of whistleblowing in the AFL will be halted.


What's the point.



As long as the AFL funds the AFLW, churns out Indegenous Jumpers and token performances at the GF half time show under the notion of inclusion it's all good.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

100%.

Both will be coaching AFL in 2023.

 

[Ramify]

When Fagan and Clarko are cleared, and they will be, any notion of whistleblowing in the AFL will be halted.


What's the point.



As long as the AFL funds the AFLW, churns out Indegenous Jumpers and token performances at the GF half time show under the notion of inclusion it's all good.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

What more would you have them do?

 

[Geoffa32]

What more would you have them do?

It will be a whitewash.


I understand only one side of story yadda yadda.

But it is too detailed and precise in naming the two coaches.

Even removing race from the equation the allegations are abhorrent if only partially true. Particularly guys whose job it is to be leaders of young men. Many of whom living in a different state to their families.

And they will be allowed to keep their jobs.


So in the future why is anyone going to bother calling out foul play when a senior AFL figure is involved.

Especially when after these guys get cleared every Aboriginal player (except Shaun Burgoyne) who was at Hawthorn during the period will most likely cop it and labelled liars.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

There have been some comments on this thread to the effect that this should be handed straight to the Police and/or WorkSafe Victoria. I disagree.

To "hand it to the Police" you would need to be alleging that there have been actual criminal offences, and that's not clear at all. And the Police are not some sort of third party general investigating agency, that you can in effect commission to conduct an inquiry on your behalf and then pass on the results to you. What happens if the Police investigate (with or without the cooperation of the complainants), and they find there is no solid case for a criminal prosecution? Can the AFL then ask them to hand over the details / results of their inquiry, for the AFL's own purposes?

Similarly for WorkSafe. It's possibly more likely that WorkSafe would find some breach(es) or WHS laws, and if they did they would probably go back to the AFL / Hawthorn for remediation of some kind. But SafeWork SA investigated the Crows camp, and found no breaches - that doesn't mean there weren't issues that the club needed to address.

Like it or not, it has to start with an AFL inquiry, with other agencies brought in afterwards, if appropriate / necessary. Not the other way around.

There are grounds for Worksafe to investigate... but doubtful the Police at this stage.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Wouldn't be the worst Idea.

They may learn something...

 

[Ramify]

It will be a whitewash.


I understand only one side of story yadda yadda.

But it is too detailed and precise in naming the two coaches.

Even removing race from the equation the allegations are abhorrent if only partially true. Especially for guys whose job it is to be leaders of young men. Many of whom living in a different state to their families.

And they will be allowed to keep their jobs.


So in the future why is anyone going to bother calling out foul play when a senior AFL figure is involved.

Especially when after these guys get cleared every Aboriginal player (except Shaun Burgoyne) who was at Hawthorn during the period will most likely cop it and labelled liars.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

I'm not convinced they get off outright if the AFL get their way.
Whitewashing to protect 2-3 of their own vs the backlash/damage to brand yada yada yada of any perceived whitewash or no case to answer finding. I can seen them throwing the Coaches under the bus in a heartbeat to protect their own interests/be seen to be doing the right thing.

Its a Damned if you do,damned if you don't situation for them where either way you look at it, the AFL are compromised.


Back to my original question(which wasn't clear).
What more would you have the AFL do to be considered "inclusive"?
I see it as way more inclusive than most industries.

 

[Geoffa32]

I'm not convinced they get off outright if the AFL get their way.
Whitewashing to protect 2-3 of their own vs the backlash/damage to brand yada yada yada of any perceived whitewash or no case to answer finding. I can seen them throwing the Coaches under the bus in a heartbeat to protect their own interests/be seen to be doing the right thing.

Its a Damned if you do,damned if you don't situation for them where either way you look at it, the AFL are compromised.


Back to my original question(which wasn't clear).
What more would you have the AFL do to be considered "inclusive"?
I see it as way more inclusive than most industries.

Hand the investigation over to a truly independent body.

Safework Victoria? Or whoever is most relevant.


No AFL involvement at all.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Ramify]

Hand the investigation over to a truly independent body.

Safework Victoria? Or whoever is most relevant.


No AFL involvement at all.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Agreed.

"AFL appointed independent panel" is a complete and utter oxymoron.
Essentially a toothless Tiger to boot.

 

[jenny61_99]

I'm not convinced they get off outright if the AFL get their way.
Whitewashing to protect 2-3 of their own vs the backlash/damage to brand yada yada yada of any perceived whitewash or no case to answer finding. I can seen them throwing the Coaches under the bus in a heartbeat to protect their own interests/be seen to be doing the right thing.

Its a Damned if you do,damned if you don't situation for them where either way you look at it, the AFL are compromised.


Back to my original question(which wasn't clear).
What more would you have the AFL do to be considered "inclusive"?
I see it as way more inclusive than most industries.

I think they certainly TRY to be inclusive, and sometimes it is done very clumsily (but from good intentions) and other times it is pure lip service.

 

[Ramify]

I think they certainly TRY to be inclusive, and sometimes it is done very clumsily (but from good intentions) and other times it is pure lip service.

Yeah I'm a bit like that myself.
I think they are, and have to be when it comes to actual football operations due to their ideal player demographic, but I think a lot of the other stuff is nothing more than brand polishing.

At the end of the day it all comes down to $$$.

 

[Ramify]

Now another hurdle it seems..

Surely the players and their families knew when they made such strong accusations against Clarkson, Fagan and Burt's reputations and characters that was only just the start of what would follow?

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/hawthorn/hawthorn-racism-investigation-afl-coaches-association-makes-panel-request/news-story/7237d788015857ff8aa6515e41f3c278?rsf=syn:news:nca:hs:spa:edm&utm_source=HeraldSun&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Editorial&utm_content=HS_PREM-AM_CUR_01&net_sub_id=288692219&type=free_text_block&position=1&overallPos=2

Hawthorn racism investigation: More complications in probe​

With AFL still navigating the sensitivities of assembling a four-person panel to investigate the disturbing allegations at Hawthorn, another development could derail the whole process.

Anyone else think 4 is a crappy number of Panel members?
Why not 3 or 5?