News Hawthorn Racism Review - No player name speculation - opposition posters tread very carefully

[Strapping Young Lad]

Wrong. Hawks did what they had to do by the rules of the AFL.

Correct. For reference below, once the HFC had the report outlining serious allegations they were duty bound by the AFL’s protocol to hand over the report to the AFL integrity unit.

I will pin this post, as it seems to be a constant query.

 

[DogDaySonny]

Fail.

There is no libel claim, when the players did not publicly make or publish any statements regarding the coaches and no outcome was found in any court.

And if you want to suggest that the media did make libel claims then once again it will be explained to you that media reporting on allegations is just that.

Sigh. I’m trying to figure out if you’re ignoring what I say on purpose of if you genuinely have selective detail recollection.

I said in my original post that if we believe that the players’ hurt feelings, despite a lack of evidence (in fact evidence to the contrary of their recollections) are valid, then we must also concede validity the coaches’ hurt feelings at having unproven accusations thrown at them of being racist, baby killing nut jobs. That is, we must concede this if we have any claim to a principled instead of tribal world view. Maybe you don’t care about principles. That is an assumption we haven’t tested.

If you’re going to play a narrow semantic game on the word “libel” in order to create some sort of internet win, then I guess we have an answer to the untested assumption after all.

 

[TONYC3163]

Sigh. I’m trying to figure out if you’re ignoring what I say on purpose of if you genuinely have selective detail recollection.

I said in my original post that if we believe that the players’ hurt feelings, despite a lack of evidence (in fact evidence to the contrary of their recollections) are valid, then we must also concede validity the coaches’ hurt feelings at having unproven accusations thrown at them of being racist, baby killing nut jobs. That is, we must concede this if we have any claim to a principled instead of tribal world view. Maybe you don’t care about principles. That is an assumption we haven’t tested.

If you’re going to play a narrow semantic game on the word “libel” in order to create some sort of internet win, then I guess we have an answer to the untested assumption after all.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Sigh. I’m trying to figure out if you’re ignoring what I say on purpose of if you genuinely have selective detail recollection.

I said in my original post that if we believe that the players’ hurt feelings, despite a lack of evidence (in fact evidence to the contrary of their recollections) are valid, then we must also concede validity the coaches’ hurt feelings at having unproven accusations thrown at them of being racist, baby killing nut jobs. That is, we must concede this if we have any claim to a principled instead of tribal world view. Maybe you don’t care about principles. That is an assumption we haven’t tested.

If you’re going to play a narrow semantic game on the word “libel” in order to create some sort of internet win, then I guess we have an answer to the untested assumption after all.

You were quite literally talking about libel, yet you continue to ignore its definition.

 

[TONYC3163]

You were quite literally talking about libel, yet you continue to ignore its definition.

Looks like DDS thinks they are in a Monty Python ‘Argument Sketch’

 

[Manila_Hawk]

Looks like DDS thinks they are in a Monty Python ‘Argument Sketch’

No, he doesn't

 

[eldorado]

No, he doesn't

 

[HedgeFund]

The news paper that chose to print peoples names might be in strife.

What - the one with which Jason Burt did an open interview where he named names?

That one? ☝

 

[Alite]

Yep, don’t know why there needed to be a winner

As in war, the only winners are those who supply the weapons... in this case, the lawyers. Everyone else loses. The only question is who loses the most.

When sifting through the aftermath for something positive, it might be found that a certain level of arrogance has been leached out of management (JK) and replaced with a more considerate and kind approach.

With luck, the phrase "Time heals all wounds" will prove true... or, at the very least, leave scars that heal well enough for friendship and engagement to resume.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

You are trying to live the classic cliche of trying to have your cake and eat it too. Of course, you won’t recognise this or even concede the possibility that you were wrong about something, but nonetheless you are.

This is exactly how you post ALL the time so getting miffed about others doing it is genuinely amusing.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

What - the one with which Jason Burt did an open interview where he named names?

That one? ☝

And corroborated some of the accusers stories also.

 

[Mississippi]

Sigh. I’m trying to figure out if you’re ignoring what I say on purpose of if you genuinely have selective detail recollection.

I said in my original post that if we believe that the players’ hurt feelings, despite a lack of evidence (in fact evidence to the contrary of their recollections) are valid, then we must also concede validity the coaches’ hurt feelings at having unproven accusations thrown at them of being racist, baby killing nut jobs. That is, we must concede this if we have any claim to a principled instead of tribal world view. Maybe you don’t care about principles. That is an assumption we haven’t tested.

If you’re going to play a narrow semantic game on the word “libel” in order to create some sort of internet win, then I guess we have an answer to the untested assumption after all.

I think this post should be framed as the most incoherent and just plain dumb post for 2024.
And the real shame is that the poster has no idea why

 

[Alite]

Sigh. I’m trying to figure out if you’re ignoring what I say on purpose of if you genuinely have selective detail recollection.

I said in my original post that if we believe that the players’ hurt feelings, despite a lack of evidence (in fact evidence to the contrary of their recollections) are valid, then we must also concede validity the coaches’ hurt feelings at having unproven accusations thrown at them of being racist, baby killing nut jobs. That is, we must concede this if we have any claim to a principled instead of tribal world view. Maybe you don’t care about principles. That is an assumption we haven’t tested.

If you’re going to play a narrow semantic game on the word “libel” in order to create some sort of internet win, then I guess we have an answer to the untested assumption after all.

I think this post should be framed as the most incoherent and just plain dumb post for 2024.
And the real shame is that the poster has no idea why

It is far from incoherent. I understand exactly what he is saying. You just don't like it.

Clarko, Fagan and Burt should be free of the yoke around their neck, as those with a grievance have decided to finish the matter. To continue it would be to go against the intent of those aggrieved.

DogDaySonny goes further to say compensation should be given to all who were hurt, including those that were accused. I don't agree with that but it is a point in principle, based on the question "Have any of you been accused of something that you did not do?" If so, how did you feel?

Reputational-loss drives some to an early grave.

DogDaySonny should be free to make his point without being derided (edit: invalidated) His point has merit.

 

[TONYC3163]

It is far from incoherent. I understand exactly what he is saying. You just don't like it.

Clarko, Fagan and Burt should be free of the yoke around their neck, as those with a grievance have decided to finish the matter. To continue it would be to go against the intent of those aggrieved.

DogDaySonny goes further to say compensation should be given to all who were hurt, including those that were accused. I don't agree with that but it is a point in principle, based on the question "Have any of you been accused of something that you did not do?" If so, how did you feel?

Answer: I have been accused, it was ridiculous and obviously provably wrong, was resolved within 30 minutes as my Father was there to laugh that the mother with a butterfly knife, and my wife in the house to which I asked for them to talk to, but they declined, yet the question haunted me for a month: what if people actually believe it. The cost of a destruction of reputation is real. The hurt of a destruction of reputation is real.

What I am saying is that, DogDaySonny should be free to make his point without being derided. It has merit.

Yep, all posters are free to make points, and all posters are free to deride those posts.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Those now saying that the summation of proceedings has somehow vindicated in full the accused is just those who’ve wanted that to be the case the entire time wanting their final ‘see I was right!!’ victory lap. The simple fact is - the accusers and the accused have not changed their positions - mercifully the proceedings have just come to a close. There was no day in court to test the evidence in front of a judge/jury.

In an ever depressing world where the ideologically driven have to constantly ‘own’ the other side - there are absolutely no winners in this one. Its a sad chapter.

How about everyone stop looking for a victory lap and let’s hope the club is working behind the scenes to get to a point where both Clarko and Cyril can be present at the 2015 premiership reunion to allow more healing for the club.

 

[HedgeFund]

And corroborated some of the accusers stories also.

Yep - it’s clear conversations were had, words exchanged, meetings happened.

Exactly what was said and what was perceived was largely the factual issue in dispute (which will never be determined for sure).

Doesn’t change the fact that club coaching staff had discussions with indigenous players regarding their welfare, in the absence of the welfare liaison - which is ordinary.

The outcome of those discussions was player and/or partner distress and pain.

On that, it appears, all can agree.

 

[Alite]

Yep, all posters are free to make points, and all posters are free to deride those posts.

Agreed: my objection was not to the derision, but to the invalidation. To call a persons point of view delusional is to dismiss it as not being valid due to diminished mental capacity. And that, in this case, was clearly wrong.

 

[peetoo]

Those now saying that the summation of proceedings has somehow vindicated in full the accused is just those who’ve wanted that to be the case the entire time wanting their final ‘see I was right!!’ victory lap. The simple fact is - the accusers and the accused have not changed their positions - mercifully the proceedings have just come to a close. There was no day in court to test the evidence in front of a judge/jury.

In an ever depressing world where the ideologically driven have to constantly ‘own’ the other side - there are absolutely no winners in this one. Its a sad chapter.

How about everyone stop looking for a victory lap and let’s hope the club is working behind the scenes to get to a point where both Clarko and Cyril can be present at the 2015 premiership reunion to allow more healing for the club.

The improved way forward, for all past present emerging, is the win

 

[Randy Campbell]

Just like a Geelong vs Essendon game.
Their are no winners.

 

[Lickmesocks]

What - the one with which Jason Burt did an open interview where he named names?

That one? ☝

No, private and confidential information was leaked to a news paper well before Burt did an interview trying to defend himself and others.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

No, private and confidential information was leaked to a news paper well before Burt did an interview trying to defend himself and others.

Presuming you didn’t mind when journalists were reporting the nitty gritty details of the * doping regime?

 

[Mississippi]

Agreed: my objection was not to the derision, but to the invalidation. To call a persons point of view delusional is to dismiss it as not being valid due to diminished mental capacity. And that, in this case, was clearly wrong.

What are you talking about?
I didn't use the word "delusional" and its nonsense to refer to 'diminished mental capacity'. So let's not make up some other nonsense.

I called the post 'incoherent' which, of course, is precisely what it was.

 

[Mississippi]

Aside from all the other stuff about this sad affair, the $3 million dollar question is who's paying the massive legal costs of Clarkson's and Fagan's legal firms.

 

[arupist]

Aside from all the other stuff about this sad affair, the $3 million dollar question is who's paying the massive legal costs of Clarkson's and Fagan's legal firms.

One would think that unless they could prove the club is at fault, they would/should pay for it themselves.

 

[CHUBBSS]

Aside from all the other stuff about this sad affair, the $3 million dollar question is who's paying the massive legal costs of Clarkson's and Fagan's legal firms.

North Melbourne and co

 

[Alite]

What are you talking about?
I didn't use the word "delusional" and its nonsense to refer to 'diminished mental capacity'. So let's not make up some other nonsense.

I called the post 'incoherent' which, of course, is precisely what it was.

I was responding to Tony3163. Do you have multiple accounts? If so, which account should I respond to?

Whatever the answer, I don't care.