Coach Alastair Clarkson IV - HFC Racism Investigation Discussion

[The Dingrel]

For me the crux of the issue is still that coaches and staff encroach on player's personal lives all the ******* time and there doesn't seem to be any guidance or limit to it coming from the AFL. If there was such a thing then surely the Clarkson, Fagan, and Burt would have been found culpable of breaching them with at least some of these accusations.

For some players this stuff works out wonderfully. For others, terribly. Some cultures and backgrounds seem more susceptible to these types of approaches resulting in the latter, and that's part of what we see here.

IDK if I've heard any journalist approach the AFL from this direction. Everyone knows that clubs try to micromanage players' lives outside of the club. It feels like because there's this vague racism hanging over it all that even when people say they don't think it was racist they still can't take that extra step back and ask why the things happened if they weren't motivated by racism, and how many other players in the league (not just Hawthorn FFS) have had similar tales.

Bah. I'm just in a grouchy mood this evening. Nothing with this saga has played out in an acceptable way for any of the parties. I'm so pissed with the self serving AFL nonsense from yesterday.

I hear what you're saying. A point I'd make is some very talented players may come from backgrounds that lack guidance from the home environment. Clubs fill that void via a structured environment, role models, guidance, and perhaps coaching father figures. A generalization I know but typically such kids come from a poorer socio economic background. An interesting parallel is seeing kids from poor backgrounds and/or broken homes , given scholarships at my kids school. Live with teachers and or board because the home environment is so bad, play sport for the school, but at the end of the day, resent any form of structure and discipline and end up getting expelled. I think this whole fiasco forces clubs to ramp up their due diligence more, as the clubs increasingly see it as risky trying to influence young peoples lives and provide strong guidance. There is already a strong trend toward selecting private school kids and I think over time this whole fiasco will exacerbate that even more, doing a great disservice to talented kids who may see an AFL career as a route to a better life.

 

[Tiberius]

The ABC seems to be playing semantics here in order to defend their reporter. Which is understandable. This bit interested me:

Further, the stories of the Hawthorn families were not “leaked” to the ABC. Nobody interviewed by Hawthorn for its cultural safety review was bound by confidentiality – they were free to speak to the ABC or anyone else. The ABC’s reporting was based on its own interviews with three Hawthorn families.

The question then becomes, had Jackson seen the review before going with the story? And if not, how did he know who to interview? The "stories of the Hawthorn families" might not have been leaked to the ABC, but the findings of the review seemingly were.

 

[Hojuman]

The ABC seems to be playing semantics here in order to defend their reporter. Which is understandable. This bit interested me:

Further, the stories of the Hawthorn families were not “leaked” to the ABC. Nobody interviewed by Hawthorn for its cultural safety review was bound by confidentiality – they were free to speak to the ABC or anyone else. The ABC’s reporting was based on its own interviews with three Hawthorn families.

The question then becomes, had Jackson seen the review before going with the story? And if not, how did he know who to interview? The "stories of the Hawthorn families" might not have been leaked to the ABC, but the findings of the review seemingly were.

48 hrs, not 24.

Veritable mountain of time.

 

[GeordieRoo]

Have you listened to the Malcolm Speed interview? He disagrees and makes some really good points.

Malcolm Speed also said Jackson’s ABC article was brilliant and likely award winning so eh.

I may have misheard, probably because I was still in shock at the above remark, that Hawthorn won’t face sanctions because of racism as there was no adverse findings against the individuals… but that’s separate from sanctions for the cluster**** of a report becoming public.

 

[Tiberius]

48 hrs, not 24.

Veritable mountain of time.

And in Fagan's case, it was the 48 hours immediately before and after his team played in a preliminary final from memory.

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

AFL: The kings of the Chewbacca defence.

 

[see see]

The ABC seems to be playing semantics here in order to defend their reporter. Which is understandable. This bit interested me:

Further, the stories of the Hawthorn families were not “leaked” to the ABC. Nobody interviewed by Hawthorn for its cultural safety review was bound by confidentiality – they were free to speak to the ABC or anyone else. The ABC’s reporting was based on its own interviews with three Hawthorn families.

The question then becomes, had Jackson seen the review before going with the story? And if not, how did he know who to interview? The "stories of the Hawthorn families" might not have been leaked to the ABC, but the findings of the review seemingly were.

"Playing semantics" is one way of describing it.

Personally, I prefer to describe it as "p*ssing up our backs and telling us it's raining". Very poor form by the ABC.

 

[Mav]

Malcolm Speed also said Jackson’s ABC article was brilliant and likely award winning so eh.

I may have misheard, probably because I was still in shock at the above remark, that Hawthorn won’t face sanctions because of racism as there was no adverse findings against the individuals… but that’s separate from sanctions for the cluster* of a report becoming public.

Re the article, interesting take rom someone who's not emotionally attached to the saga.

Not sure AFL HQ is in a position to sanction anyone for leaks!

 

[Tiberius]

48 hrs, not 24.

Veritable mountain of time.

And back to the semantics, it doesn't actually say 48 hours, it says "across two days." So if I contact someone at 11.59pm on wednesday and again at 12.01am on thursday, then I've contacted them "across two days." The spin doctors have been hard at work here!

 

[Zondor]

Yep. I wonder what you Namby-Pamby, Tree Hugging, Left Leaning, Pinko, Colours of the Rainbow, Climate Alarmist, Communist Loving Flogs think of your ABC now. :stern look

 

[gokangas]

48 hrs, not 24.

Veritable mountain of time.

I suppose their point is despite many contacts they received zero response from any party. Also interesting their note that no party was under a confidentiality agreement so not a leak. If the dog whistling is right it shoots down the strong belief that JK leaked the doc.

 

[DuckYeah]

Lol 2 days notice ABC. 2 ****ing days. Are they sweating or what?

 

[Hojuman]

And back to the semantics, it doesn't actually say 48 hours, it says "across two days." So if I contact someone at 11.59pm on wednesday and again at 12.01am on thursday, then I've contacted them "across two days." The spin doctors have been hard at work here!

• 4 business days
• 10 working days

Good point.

 

[The Anvil]

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/news/hawthorn-racism-scandal-jeff-kennett-hits-back-at-afl-ceo-gill-mclachlans-suggestion-the-hawks-could-be-punished/news-story/435bfc91f6ea60c4fb27c7fef3e7fd1a

Hawthorn could be stripped of draft picks and fined over its handling of its racism investigation with the AFL weighing up whether to charge the club for bringing the game into disrepute.

As the AFL terminated the independent investigation without laying charges against Alastair Clarkson, Chris Fagan or Jason Burt the league also dropped a potential bomb on the Hawks.

AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan said the club’s failure to give Clarkson, Fagan and Burt a right of reply would form the basis of a potential charge.

“The process whereby allegations were aired without anybody having the ability to respond to them has provided an environment where there has been many parties – complainants and the defendants – put in a hugely vulnerable situation, and it’s had an impact across the industry for all First Nations people and others,” McLachlan said.

“I think that’s something that needs to be contemplated.”

The loss of draft picks would be disastrous for Hawthorn’s rebuild under coach Sam Mitchell, with the club’s first pick currently No.3.

Former Hawthorn president Jeff Kennett declared there was no basis for the Hawks to be punished by the AFL for undertaking its cultural review.

“I am profoundly disappointed at the comments by the AFL CEO tonight that they are contemplating taking action against the Hawthorn Football Club,” Kennett said.
“What Hawthorn did in trying to establish whether racial discrimination was widespread in the club was absolutely the correct thing to do.”

Kennett said the club was not responsible for the devastating leak of the report to the ABC in Grand Final week last year.

“That was the trigger that caused the firestorm and the attack on the reputations of the three who stood accused,” he said.

McLachlan said the decision whether to charge Hawthorn would be made by the AFL’s “general counsel (Stephen Meade) and or the Commission”.

Under rule 1.6 the Hawks could be charged with engaging in conduct that is “unbecoming or likely to prejudice the interests or reputation of the Australian Football League or to bring the game of football into disrepute”.

In 2013 the AFL kicked Essendon out of finals, fined the club $2 million and stripped the club of early draft picks in the next two drafts under that rule.

The Binmada review was commissioned by the Hawks board in April last year after favourite son Cyril Rioli and wife Shannyn made claims of racial incidents at the club.

“Gillon McLachlan can’t have his cake and eat it,” Kennett said.

“He can’t on the one hand say it was wrong to find out whether the allegations of the Riolis were widespread or not - and then on finding that there was no substance against any of the three Hawthorn officials - he can’t then say that the club has done anything but the right thing in the interests of a safe workplace.

​

“We did what any employer would do when something is brought to their attention. We tried to find out whether it was widespread or just isolated. We got the stories, a number of startling, disappointing responses - they have now been investigated and (it was) found that those stories had no substance.”

Kennett said he “trusted” that the current Hawthorn board would have “the courage to actually defend the actions it has taken” and will “argue the case very strongly”.

The majority of the damage came from ole mate Rusty and his interviews with the players, rather than the report itself.

Unless a Hawthorn official leaked said information to Rusty whilst working for them, I assume there's an out clause for the Hawks. If we assume that Egan is the one who leaked it, he was a consultant to the Hawks and not part of the Hawks organisation themselves.

Without the ABC article, all of this may have quietly occurred in the background.

Personally though, I hope the Hawks cop sanctions that cripple them for years to come and some form of karma comes the way of old mate Rusty.

As for the AFL Media dogs who grabbed onto the report and ran with it, I would hope the club puts up a very frosty response to them going forward.

 

[hilly]

Yep. I wonder what you Namby-Pamby, Tree Hugging, Left Leaning, Pinko, Colours of the Rainbow, Climate Alarmist, Communist Loving Flogs think of your ABC now. :stern look

As a tree hugging slightly left-leaning confirmed flog I think being a self-taught journalist has its shortcomings.

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Del28562]

"Playing semantics" is one way of describing it.



Personally, I prefer to describe it as "p*ssing up our backs and telling us it's raining". Very poor form by the ABC.


Do you have a journalism degree? 48 hours is plenty, they were also asked if they'd like an extension of time to respond, which they didn't reply, they wanted the story to go away

 

[hilly]

Go get another taxpayer funded stand Trent.

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Zebrah]

I suppose their point is despite many contacts they received zero response from any party. Also interesting their note that no party was under a confidentiality agreement so not a leak. If the dog whistling is right it shoots down the strong belief that JK leaked the doc.

The actual reported ended up in the Herald Sun, so it was leaked to someone.

 

[Tiberius]

Yep. I wonder what you Namby-Pamby, Tree Hugging, Left Leaning, Pinko, Colours of the Rainbow, Climate Alarmist, Communist Loving Flogs think of your ABC now. :stern look

We think its once reliable integrity has been eroded by the constant attacks of Morrison and Murdoch and their fascist cardre of bile spewing rightist simpletons.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

I don’t have a journalism degree. And I know someone else who doesn’t. What’s your point exactly?

 

[franjon]

More to play out. Afl have basically wiped their hands of it.

Isn't that surprising.

 

[Zondor]

We think its once reliable integrity has been eroded by the constant attacks of Morrison and Murdoch and their fascist cardre of bile spewing rightist simpletons.

Rightio Old Codger from the Roman Olden Days. The ABC's integrity has been eroded by Namby-Pamby, Tree Hugging, Left Leaning, Pinko, Colours of the Rainbow, Climate Alarmist, Communist Loving Flogs. Don't go blaming the Turkeys you mentioned for what is at fault with the current ABC. :stern look

 

[justroyal]

Lmao the abc ended that by saying it was in the public’s interest to be informed of these issues.

Lmao. Was it? We didn’t learn anything? The people remained faceless and it was a big smoke screen.

Public’s interest is to be told incomplete truth’s or one sides account? This isn’t a newspaper it’s a gossip blog if that’s how they base it

 

[franjon]

The other aspect of timing is that as I recall, the Jackson article blew this whole thing up when Jeff was overseas.

The Morrison approach? One thing about the Liberals, they're consistent, if not predictable.

 

[franjon]

Public’s interest is to be told incomplete truth’s or one sides account? This isn’t a newspaper it’s a gossip blog if that’s how they base it

When you look at the modern day media, what do you expect? They're, in the main, just glorified paparazzi. Printing lies, no accountability and keeping paid positions when most of them should be collecting the dole. Muck raking parasites.