News Adelaide Crows Camp Allegations and Rumors

[crow2crow]

You can mock the issue of players confidential matters might have been broken, or something there that may have re-triggered some mental scars. Though in a sporting camp, no actual psychologists are needed.

If anyone has a severe mental breakdown, then they should be going to the ED and get admitted in a psychiatric ward. Psychologists are usually for the non-severe cases of mental health.

the point is there are lot of pseudo psychologists who act like they are professionals not just in sports but all workplaces

 

[Soggy2112]

You can mock the issue of players confidential matters might have been broken, or something there that may have re-triggered some mental scars. Though in a sporting camp, no actual psychologists are needed.

These guys were essentially claiming to be the mental equivalent of a S&C coach. No one in their right mind would hire a S&C coach without a scientific background and the same standard should have been held here.

 

[John Who]

These guys were essentially claiming to be the mental equivalent of a S&C coach. No one in their right mind would hire a S&C coach without a scientific background and the same standard should have been held here.

Your argument would be stronger had they not been associated with us when we got to a GF in 2017. You can’t talk about their “lack of qualifications”, and completely ignore the fact they helped us to some degree to improve in 2017.

Had CM advertised themselves as actual psychologists or faked their past credentials then that’s something that they should be sued for. But if they’re promoting themselves as someone who can enhance the mental resilience, the club has a right to try things as they see fit.

I just don’t think people should equate “higher qualifications mean more guaranteed results”, that’s all. Because that’s a very big myth in reality. I see people trying psychologists and psychiatrists and some feel worse after a consultation, not necessarily better.

 

[kirky]

I just don’t think people should equate “higher qualifications mean more guaranteed results”, that’s all. Because that’s a very big myth in reality. I see people trying psychologists and psychiatrists and some feel worse after a consultation, not necessarily better.

Interesting. I go with two mates for a weekly walk, one of the mates lost his wife in a car accident nearly 6 years ago and has been seeing a psychologist every month since then trying to deal with it.

Recently he told her he gets more put of his 1.5 hour walk with us than he does seeing her. He now will only see her every 3 months, if necessary.

The issue I have is do they sometimes not ask the right questions given those closer to an individual know more about that individual than the actual professional?

 

[Soggy2112]

Your argument would be stronger had they not been associated with us when we got to a GF in 2017. You can’t talk about their “lack of qualifications”, and completely ignore the fact they helped us to some degree to improve in 2017.

Had CM advertised themselves as actual psychologists or faked their past credentials then that’s something that they should be sued for. But if they’re promoting themselves as someone who can enhance the mental resilience, the club has a right to try things as they see fit.

I just don’t think people should equate “higher qualifications mean more guaranteed results”, that’s all. Because that’s a very big myth in reality. I see people trying psychologists and psychiatrists and some feel worse after a consultation, not necessarily better.

The thing is that the stuff pre GF was mostly harmless, it may have helped some of the players, and others who it didn’t help could simply laugh it off and put it down as a dumb thing work made them do.

My analogy was meant to mean this: you wouldn’t let a S&C coach have players perform a potentially dangerous lift in the gym without them having the appropriate qualifications and demonstrate that their using a scientific evidence based approach.

Similarly, the club should not have allowed people to delve into dangerous territory by discussing childhood trauma without the appropriate qualifications or evidence behind their approach.

Interesting. I go with two mates for a weekly walk, one of the mates lost his wife in a car accident nearly 6 years ago and has been seeing a psychologist every month since then trying to deal with it.

Recently he told her he gets more put of his 1.5 hour walk with us than he does seeing her. He now will only see her every 3 months, if necessary.

The issue I have is do they sometimes not ask the right questions given those closer to an individual know more about that individual than the actual professional?

I think the key here is that your mate was allowed to decide for himself what he felt was the best way to deal with his trauma, and good on you for providing that opportunity.

However in this situation the players were not allowed to choose for themselves, it was a one size fits all approach.

 

[John Who]

The thing is that the stuff pre GF was mostly harmless, it may have helped some of the players, and others who it didn’t help could simply laugh it off and put it down as a dumb thing work made them do.

My analogy was meant to mean this: you wouldn’t let a S&C coach have players perform a potentially dangerous lift in the gym without them having the appropriate qualifications and demonstrate that their using a scientific evidence based approach.

Similarly, the club should not have allowed people to delve into dangerous territory by discussing childhood trauma without the appropriate qualifications or evidence behind their approach.



I think the key here is that your mate was allowed to decide for himself what he felt was the best way to deal with his trauma, and good on you for providing that opportunity.

However in this situation the players were not allowed to choose for themselves, it was a one size fits all approach.

I disagree with your analogy, because the weight lift thing is a foreseeable outcome if someone who is weak and is pushed to bench press a weight of Olympic proportions.

When we’re talking about mental strength training and building resilience, I bet my house no psychologist or psychiatrist can guarantee anything if they were put into the camp, instead of CM.

Please don’t take my posts as me defending wholesomely for CM and in denial that unhappiness to some players didn’t occur. However, my point stands firm that having a mental coach with credentials of PhD, triple degrees etc., will not guarantee you success and that everyone will end a happy chappy.

 

[John Who]

Interesting. I go with two mates for a weekly walk, one of the mates lost his wife in a car accident nearly 6 years ago and has been seeing a psychologist every month since then trying to deal with it.

Recently he told her he gets more put of his 1.5 hour walk with us than he does seeing her. He now will only see her every 3 months, if necessary.

The issue I have is do they sometimes not ask the right questions given those closer to an individual know more about that individual than the actual professional?

Your friend’s story is the perfect analogy here. ‘Psychologist’ versus ‘going for walks with mates’.

With regard to your friend, the psychologist (more qualification) sessions can only get you so far in the recovery. Going for a walk with you and another mate (less qualifications, more mental benefit). For other people it might be the opposite.

The issue with the camp how I see it, was that private information was broken, and that was the main crux of the unhappiness in some players, nothing to do with how much credentials there were or weren’t.

 

[Ramify]

I disagree with your analogy, because the weight lift thing is a foreseeable outcome if someone who is weak and is pushed to bench press a weight of Olympic proportions.

When we’re talking about mental strength training and building resilience, I bet my house no psychologist or psychiatrist can guarantee anything if they were put into the camp, instead of CM.

Please don’t take my posts as me defending wholesomely for CM and in denial that unhappiness to some players didn’t occur. However, my point stands firm that having a mental coach with credentials of PhD, triple degrees etc., will not guarantee you success and that everyone will end a happy chappy.

Life, Business, motivation coaching is a huge booming industry and bugger all of them are qualified Psychs. They don't need to be as most people know what they are getting into when they sign up.
Mandatory attendance is a different story though and I doubt you would see a much different outcome if you made a whole team visit certain Psychiatrist,Psychologists or Yogis ashrams as a group. Some will always benefit, some will always think they don't need it and some will always take umbrage to something.

A lot if it comes down to an individuals wants, needs, open mindedness and preconceived notions.

In saying that, any of the above practitioners have the capacity to be unethical and nothing excuses that.

 

[Soggy2112]

The issue with the camp how I see it, was that private information was broken, and that was the main crux of the unhappiness in some players, nothing to do with how much credentials there were or weren’t.

I think you’re missing my point.

Someone qualified, acting in the role of a psychologist or psychiatrist would not have done that because among other reasons, it would have been illegal for them to do so. That’s the point, we trusted unqualified people to delve into areas that only qualified people should be.

 

[crow2crow]

I think you’re missing my point.

Someone qualified, acting in the role of a psychologist or psychiatrist would not have done that because among other reasons, it would have been illegal for them to do so. That’s the point, we trusted unqualified people to delve into areas that only qualified people should be.

You nailed it

 

[Ramify]

I think you’re missing my point.

Someone qualified, acting in the role of a psychologist or psychiatrist would not have done that because among other reasons, it would have been illegal for them to do so. That’s the point, we trusted unqualified people to delve into areas that only qualified people should be.

Hang on, what Is an AFL coach and how are they formally "qualified" to play the role of motivator?

And I think you are putting a lot of weight in a formal qualification here.
Plenty of unethical/unscrupulous card carrying mental heath professionals out there.

 

[Soggy2112]

Hang on, what Is an AFL coach and how are they formally "qualified" to play the role of motivator?

How many AFL coaches do you know that use childhood trauma to motivate their players?

 

[Mego Red]

How many AFL coaches do you know that use childhood trauma to motivate their players?

Well, it's a number larger than zero.

I'm sure coaches use what they know about their player's past and private life to motivate them.

 

[Ramify]

How many AFL coaches do you know that use childhood trauma to motivate their players?

I'm not sure what AFL Coaches use to motivate players. That's not the point.The point is that they are by your definition unqualified to do the exact same thing that we employed CM to do. The fact that CM had some dodgy operators shouldn't disqualify everyone bar certified Psychos from trying to get the best out of people.

 

[Soggy2112]

I'm not sure what AFL Coaches use to motivate players. That's not the point.The point is that they are by your definition unqualified to do the exact same thing that we employed CM to do. The fact that CM had some dodgy operators shouldn't disqualify everyone bar certified Psychos from trying to get the best out of people.

Do you need to have formal qualifications to motivate players or run a footy camp?

No.

Do you need to have formal qualifications to administer a camp where players will have sensitive personal information used to “build resilience” and will be deliberately physically exhausted in order to effectively brainwash them?

Yes.

 

[Ramify]

Do you need to have formal qualifications to motivate players or run a footy camp?

No.

Do you need to have formal qualifications to administer a camp where players will have sensitive personal information used to “build resilience” and will be deliberately physically exhausted in order to effectively brainwash them?

Yes.

Why don't we just agree that there is no qualification that justifies the above methodology.

 

[Soggy2112]

Why don't we just agree that there is no qualification that justifies the above methodology.

My point is this:

The camp and it’s activities were kept secret from the club, which should have been a red flag in itself.

IMO, after that phone call where we know that CM was deliberately seeking out personal information related to potentially dangerous topics to use on the camp. The club should have asked itself, are these people qualified to be doing so? The answer was no and at that point the camp shouldn’t have gone ahead.

 

[kirky]

Any we any further advanced on the class action?

 

[1970crow]

Any we any further advanced on the class action?

yes, is my understanding.

 

[John Who]

How many AFL coaches do you know that use childhood trauma to motivate their players?

It depends on the context of how information was used. I think you’re being caught up with clinical trauma and that it needs a qualified clinician to help get through it. However, anyone without qualifications can still talk about past traumas with anyone as long as the intent is to give moral support and encouragement.

What people do with such private information isn’t directly related to their qualifications. There are some bad eggs out there who are legit qualified mental health workers, and abuse their powers. Conversely, I know some with less qualifications, but can be as good as anyone to be good counselors as well as motivators.

 

[John Who]

Take Blighty for example, likely to be one of the greatest AFL motivators of all time. The man can make cats play like lions!

However, I doubt Malcolm would make a very good psychologist. “Pathetic Pittman”..

 

[Soggy2112]

It depends on the context of how information was used. I think you’re being caught up with clinical trauma and that it needs a qualified clinician to help get through it. However, anyone without qualifications can still talk about past traumas with anyone as long as the intent is to give moral support and encouragement.

What people do with such private information isn’t directly related to their qualifications. There are some bad eggs out there who are legit qualified mental health workers, and abuse their powers. Conversely, I know some with less qualifications, but can be as good as anyone to be good counselors as well as motivators.

Fair, as you say there are some very crooked people out there with those qualifications. And yes, anyone, including a coach could discuss past trauma and offer support and have a very positive impact.

I guess the difference here is these were not people with exisiting relationships and roles within the club who were simply offering support. These were people brought into the club with the specific purpose of building mental strength, who sought out information about personal trauma to use as a part of their program. That’s where I feel you need to be qualified and using evidence based methods to even consider doing something like that.

Take Blighty for example, likely to be one of the greatest AFL motivators of all time. The man can make cats play like lions!

However, I doubt Malcolm would make a very good psychologist. “Pathetic Pittman”..

Of course, but a football coach making a comment about a footballers on field performance is hardly comparable.

If all that happened was Eddie and Josh were told how shit they played in the GF I doubt we end up where we are.

 

[Interloperer]

Of course, but a football coach making a comment about a footballers on field performance is hardly comparable.

If all that happened was Eddie and Josh were told how s**t they played in the GF I doubt we end up where we are.

People act like Blight just randomly decided to talk shit about Pittman for no reason. Out of context it would still be a 100% accurate summary of Pittman's game (5 hitouts and no other stats at all, first ruck who played all game)

Jenkins' Grand Final game was a 3 brownlow vote performance compared to Pittman's game that day.

 

[MRB37]

People act like Blight just randomly decided to talk s**t about Pittman for no reason. Out of context it would still be a 100% accurate summary of Pittman's game (5 hitouts and no other stats at all, first ruck who played all game)

Jenkins' Grand Final game was a 3 brownlow vote performance compared to Pittman's game that day.

To be fair to Pittman, he'd pinged a calf of something like that early in the game and could barely run or jump. Blight didn't get a chance to drop him cause he missed the next few weeks with injury.

 

[Rabish Binney]

To be fair to Pittman, he'd pinged a calf of something like that early in the game and could barely run or jump. Blight didn't get a chance to drop him cause he missed the next few weeks with injury.

Correct, he did injure himself early in the 1st quarter.

Stand to be corrected, but wasn't Blighty's quote along the lines of 'a pathetic effort by Pitman in the ruck'.........he never actually called Pitman pathetic??