Hannebery cast a perpetual negative shadow on the club from the day of his recruitment. Every second press conference included a question about his injury time line, around once a month the club had to announce a new injury or setback, he was just a net drain on the optimism around the club at all times.
Discussion 2022 General AFL Discussion
- Thread starter SaintsSeptember
- Start date
- Tagged users None
sammm
Premium Platinum
Why didn't we take him? When we had the chance to?
By the sounds of it , no one wants to front up to give interviews.
StFly
Space to Rent
- Moderator
- #9,754
As one that has zero faith in anything the commission does, utterly pointless to scream into that vacuum as nothing will happen outside of faux sympathy and you reliving hurt. So entirely understandable if they don't, these guys are a protected species by and large as they are the actual product for consumption in this phase and not people who screw up sometimes.
Realistically, places like Worksafe should have the means to beat the ever loving crap out of people involved in this with books, as much like the Bombers saga of "we dunno what you were injected with, beats us." that employment has the scope for direct prolonged harmful action on people. Much like that Bombers saga however, where all it took was 3 blokes going "lalalalala not telling" wet lettuce leaf outside of AFL shit and boy wasn't next week just a grand week of footy and whaddabout dat final series boy oh boy...
Clarko being the sort to maybe sit at a door until the hostages say sorry and comply, should have no position of authority over anyone or anything for a very long time.
Fagon, who at best sat in a chair and nodded along and at worst was at Clarkos level, either has the same, or many peoples with gloves and cold instruments in immediate futures with eyes for any further F up.
Instead, much like the actual standover king doing the whipping of those hostages Burt, who got to leave the AFL join another org and well, not much can be done in league and now has to be civil with evidence and what have you and timings and such for anything to happen.
So whilst everyone affected should speak, should get closure, should get recompense, should get all the goodness that they can, the amount of work where you might have that zero faith instance, just not worth it if that's your first port of call for resolution, as wet lettuce leaf is simply deflating that no one actually gives a damn and they just state it to feel better about themselves and move on.
And what's happened since the ABC piece? Well the AFL has rushed, the Hawks have said "not saying it's bad but... why media?" Why not trust us?" and it's all a tad convenient at AFL level given the amount of lawyers on ze books to create a narrative outta this. Bit like Lovett being deserving of that contract and how dare we tell him to GTFO of that system and sort himself out...
- Thread starter
- #9,755
If Clarkson has had racist tendencies than its only indigenous people who would have a problem with him, and only in a one on one environment.
If you made a rule that an indigenous liaison person should be present when there was a meeting between Clarkson and any indigenous player, then that should surely negate any risk.
Further, if an indigenous player wanted to opt out of the above , it should be their call.
If such a system was in place , what would be the issue?
If you made a rule that an indigenous liaison person should be present when there was a meeting between Clarkson and any indigenous player, then that should surely negate any risk.
Further, if an indigenous player wanted to opt out of the above , it should be their call.
If such a system was in place , what would be the issue?
George
Premium Platinum
St Kilda - Marcus Windhager Player Sponsor 2023
St Kilda - Marcus Windhager Player Sponsor 2022
St Kilda - James Frawley Player Sponsor 2021
Saints Pledge Contributor
St Kilda - Doulton Langlands Player Sponsor 2020
St Kilda - Nathan Freeman Player Sponsor 2018
St Kilda - Robbie Young Player Sponsor 2019
Reimagine Moorabbin
- Aug 17, 2015
- 45,307
- 127,300
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- Phi Eagles & Phillies, Liverpool, PAO FC
- Banned
- #9,757
In the spirit of the ANZAC's
- May 8, 2017
- 9,227
- 24,976
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- Red sox
The things that stood out to me were mediation and of course an “independent“ afl appointed panel. Clearly imo their thinking is time, disputed versions on events, mediation to muddy the waters and money will be sufficient to leave critics grasping at thin air.
George
Premium Platinum
St Kilda - Marcus Windhager Player Sponsor 2023
St Kilda - Marcus Windhager Player Sponsor 2022
St Kilda - James Frawley Player Sponsor 2021
Saints Pledge Contributor
St Kilda - Doulton Langlands Player Sponsor 2020
St Kilda - Nathan Freeman Player Sponsor 2018
St Kilda - Robbie Young Player Sponsor 2019
Reimagine Moorabbin
- Aug 17, 2015
- 45,307
- 127,300
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- Phi Eagles & Phillies, Liverpool, PAO FC
- Banned
- #9,759
They made a big deal about it to start off with, surely the families care more about it than just a payoff. This has to be the biggest story the AFL has had to deal with surely? I just can't see how they can sweep it under the rug with how vocal those affected have been about it.
- May 8, 2017
- 9,227
- 24,976
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- Red sox
At first I thought the same thing but there’s a massive power imbalance here. When you add that to some of the things I’ve read together with Fagan and Clarkson returning/starting work I’d say the afl is very confident. The quick apology to Sonia hood was telling as well, I think the reporter has overplayed his hand.
Nobody here is saying this at all so don't think I am pointing fingers, but I do get the feeling there is a bit of victim blaming on this subject.
The people bringing up the allegations were approached by the Hawthorn review and did not come forward on their own violation, but they were asked by the review and they told them their recollections.
Is it the truth? Three sides to every story, yours, mine and the truth? However the people who made the allegations should not be punished for speaking out or dismissed as I have read on other media.
The people bringing up the allegations were approached by the Hawthorn review and did not come forward on their own violation, but they were asked by the review and they told them their recollections.
Is it the truth? Three sides to every story, yours, mine and the truth? However the people who made the allegations should not be punished for speaking out or dismissed as I have read on other media.
Diehard Saint
Brownlow Medallist
I think that Cyril breaking ties completely with the club also tells a tale.
- Thread starter
- #9,763
If we are going by past actions, it would seem he's willing to pick indigenous players that everyone else has passed on.
So i guess everyone is racist.
- Thread starter
- #9,766
Clubs already discriminate based on real or imagined "go home factors". Who knows what else they consider.
Employers in the private and corporate sector discriminate on all sorts of things, in the end it often depends who they like in an interview.
I don't know the answer to that.
- Thread starter
- #9,767
Is punishment a solution to racism?
Or would you achieve the opposite affect , underground racism and resentment?
He hasn't been proven to be racist, so I'm not sure why you're so determined to paint him as one.
It seems from all the evidence, that while he acted in a certain way - it wasn't specific to Indigenous players. He treated all his players the same.
It just so happens the report was only asking specific players how their time was at Hawthorn. It's a one sided view of a mans character, and I find it hard to believe only few can see it for what it is.
No white (or non-indigenous) player was asked if they had any bad experiences.
- Thread starter
- #9,771
If I'm an arseh*le , and an investigation finds out i was an arseh*le at my former employment, can i be sacked from my current employment on that grounds?
Putting Clarkson aside for a second, is there any evidence that Fagen has been an arseh*le at his current club?
If he hasn't broken the law or something in the AFL guidelines, I'm not sure what can be done.
The AFL has put a process into place that looks balanced, reputable and fair, at least to the "footy industry." I don't expect it to produce any findings that "punish" anyone for anything. Of course, that is entirely different to trying to find out the "truth" of not only what occurred, but what it actually meant to those directly affected by a particular event. A specific incident and an individual reaction to that "thing" doesn't have to be what a "normal" person might expect to be a standard or "universal" response for it to be real, profound or harmful. The question to be asked is what the prime actor would expect might happen if I did this or that? How would someone feel, would they think this was a reasonable price to pay to be, or remain, a member of an elite group?
We see this same pattern in the military, police, SES, fire services, ambos - first responders everywhere. We constantly hear new stories of sportswomen in nearly all elite sports programs being subject to sexual, physical, emotional and mental abuse. For years and years, despite the practices being known at the highest levels of those sports.
Appalling behaviour is excused because the "culture" of elite, special or unique environments is regarded as requiring, or allowing, special treatment of those involved that ranges from outright abuse to complete neglect. The inexcusable belief that our success, or our very existence, depends on doing things our own way, and that continued membership of our group means putting up with it or shutting up about it.
This form of abuse can only be stopped by the perpetrators being subject to public sanction and by those who have ignored, or condoned, it being held to account. I would love this to be the eventual outcome of this AFL "review" but I very much doubt it. I don't believe they genuinely want to know. More importantly, I don't think they even understand the nature of the problem.
- Aug 30, 2017
- 16,425
- 67,920
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
It’s become apparent that based on the information available, the allegations will be found unsubstantiated. The findings from the investigation won’t use that type of language due to cultural & political sensitivities, & not to upset or undermine anyone interviewed during the investigation. Meanwhile, clubs, coaches & the AFL are quietly moving forward while the process that already has a conclusion continues. What a complete waste of time.
phantom13
Moderator
- Moderator
- #9,775
Really depends on what your definition of arseh*le is.
From all accounts Clarko is already an arseh*le in his tenure at the hawks.
I think pressuring players to abandon their families and have their partners get abortions with threats of delisting and the like goes well past arseh*le.
Without knowing the guidelines of the AFL this sort of shit would get you sacked from any other workplace (imagine your boss pushing you to have your partner or you getting an abortion with threats of demotion/sacking etc).
Obviously a process requires proof so I can completely agree on that point but trying to say if proven it might not be against the rules is a strange defence of it to me.
“Look we’ve proved you did it but it doesn’t contravene any specific rule so carry on with managing the welfare of these 48 young men”.
Don’t think that will fly personally.
