CEY: training camp ripped the heart out of Adelaide Crows

[John Who]

So if it was as bad as they say it was shouldnt they be putting in a formal complaint witb the apla now they are no longer at the club?

It really should be as simple as this. If players belong to a club then they need to participate in all required club activities. Some will like and some won’t. That’s called “tough cookies”.

And if an activity is in breech of human rights, then it needs to be reported. If not, then it would seem like any other preseason activities we’ve had in the last 20 years (ie. failed results).

 

[Southerntakeover]

Ellis-Yoleman was lying?

Everything is a lie, what the players said, our results, the results of the review, everything. Nothing happened ever to anyone and we're still an elite club.

 

[dude316]

Everything is a lie, what the players said, our results, the results of the review, everything. Nothing happened ever to anyone and we're still an elite club.

Phew, what a relief. I was starting to think we were a shambles there for a second.

 

[skam85]

The implication was that the Camp messed up the players. This was the main emphasis of the report. If we're talking traumatic effects, then we would have to see immediate effects which often results in a decline of general output/performance. I deliberately mentioned 9 rounds, which means it's a 2 month period. A messed up team (psychologically) would be showing some sort of ill-effects during a 2 month time frame. But there was none apart from the obvious injuries.

Think back to the 2015 tragedy. Our first game after the incident I think it was against the Eagles and we absolutely got smashed with the results looking ugly by the end. This was understandable though, and that was a clear example of a team derailed mentally by a prior trauma. Can you see how 2015 after the tragedy we were looking average for a short while (mentally affected), and a stark difference to the early period of 2018 immediately after the Camp?

it's not leaking...it's overflowing

 

[rocket18]

It really should be as simple as this. If players belong to a club then they need to participate in all required club activities. Some will like and some won’t. That’s called “tough cookies”.

And if an activity is in breech of human rights, then it needs to be reported. If not, then it would seem like any other preseason activities we’ve had in the last 20 years (ie. failed results).

The AFL and AFLPA investigated the camp and concluded nothing wrong.

Knowing how the AFL likes to screw us over for anything I conclude the camp made some players uncomfortable/confronting but nothing that outlandish.

However there is no doubt it caused issues and divisions within the club - hence Burton & Pyke got the arse.

 

[LiquidCrow]

You got to be careful when you argue this “delayed traumatic effect”. Because if you simply focus this argument in isolation, then you are giving the media or any negative trolling rumours a free reign to throw at the club any rubbish they feel free to.

What the media can or can’t do isn’t particularly relevant to the argument being made. While I suspect people from the media may browse forums such as these from time to time, I don’t have any illusions about having an exaggerated sense of self-importance to believe that they would pay too much attention to anything I would write here. The issue about being able to make things up isn’t particularly relevant unless one has no grounds to think that anything occurred at all. It’s undeniable the camp happened, and we’ve had comments from CEY and others to suggest that something bad did occur. The fact that anyone can make up ridiculous examples also isn’t a sufficient reason to reject the hypothesis.

Then you also need to take into account the actual probability of a traumatic event and the immediate effects vs the delayed effects. From my experience and understanding, immediate effects are much more likely than a delayed effect. In other words reactive depression/anxiety is much more likely than depression/anxiety from a prior traumatic incident (PTSD). Think of all your experience with people who suddenly lose their jobs, major MVA, house fire, domestic abuse - most would be negatively affected immediately after the incident and usually takes 1-3 months to get over it. The delayed negative effect would be a very small percentage.

This honestly reads like something you’ve regurgitated from a textbook or googled. It also demonstrate a failure to grasp the issue at hand, which I don't find that surprising given previous discussions. While I would not disagree that delayed onset PTSD is less common, one needs to keep in mind that what we’re doing here is linking a condition that is diagnosed on an individual level and attempting to apply this to a group setting, which means that standard expectations about immediate and delayed effects would not necessarily apply in the same way. I also don’t really need to think about any of my patients with PTSD as I’m quite comfortable with managing the condition. Assuming that people only take 1-3 months "to get over it" is also hopelessly optimistic.

To illustrate my line of thinking in the previous post, we have to make some basic assumptions about human behaviour. We can assume that each player will respond and react differently to the trauma based on individual factors, and some would manage worse than others. The players less affected may have encouraged those worse off to stay the course, believing that things would change. Team performance still suffers to a slight degree, which manifests in the inconsistency which we saw in 2018 and 2019. Come the bye in 2019, it becomes apparent that it’s not going to happen, so even those previously less affected give up on the club direction. Mind you, this is all speculative which is all one can really do given that public details of the camp are unlikely to be released any time soon.

Also, if you want to get technical, a “traumatic event” isn’t up to the non-qualified such as the likes of McNure or Caro to report. It can only be up to the individual and their GP/psychologist/psychiatrist. By the mere fact that they were talking up rumours to suggest players were mentally fried, and no qualified persons to back their claims to confirm “trauma”, it really is more a non-ethical approach in using exaggerated words and not caring about its implications

This argument is incoherent. Whether the media reports the traumatic event and perceptions about their reporting behaviour being unethical is irrelevant. The description of the fake hijacking scenarios or the dick holding exercise described by an earlier poster as something the Mankind Project does would definitely fit the bill for what constitutes emotional trauma. If for instance it were reported that the genitals of a child were being handled inappropriately, even a doctor with minimal competence would be notifying child protection. As part of the #metoo movement we’ve seen adults reporting sexual harassment years after the event occurred. As such, it doesn’t seem particularly controversial to suggest that if similar inappropriate events like this did occur at the camp, these would be traumatic in nature.

 

[feenix67]

Did he actually say these words “training camp ripped the heart out of Adelaide Crows”?
What did he say in specifics that suggested it was a “horrific traumatising event”?

The interview is in the public domain. Go listen to it.

 

[John Who]

The AFL and AFLPA investigated the camp and concluded nothing wrong.

Knowing how the AFL likes to screw us over for anything I conclude the camp made some players uncomfortable/confronting but nothing that outlandish.

However there is no doubt it caused issues and divisions within the club - hence Burton & Pyke got the arse.

There are divisions, but was it caused from the camp, the injuries, or the media harassments of the camp? Maybe it’s a combo of all the above. But which was the bigger trigger?

Bearing in mind the media rarely touched on our injuries in 2018, why was that? If in the name of honest journalism, then they should really have investigated more on why so many hammies and who were responsible for the mismanagement.

 

[John Who]

The interview is in the public domain. Go listen to it.

Can you please share me the link?

 

[John Who]

What the media can or can’t do isn’t particularly relevant to the argument being made. While I suspect people from the media may browse forums such as these from time to time, I don’t have any illusions about having an exaggerated sense of self-importance to believe that they would pay too much attention to anything I would write here. The issue about being able to make things up isn’t particularly relevant unless one has no grounds to think that anything occurred at all. It’s undeniable the camp happened, and we’ve had comments from CEY and others to suggest that something bad did occur. The fact that anyone can make up ridiculous examples also isn’t a sufficient reason to reject the hypothesis.



This honestly reads like something you’ve regurgitated from a textbook or googled. It also demonstrate a failure to grasp the issue at hand, which I don't find that surprising given previous discussions. While I would not disagree that delayed onset PTSD is less common, one needs to keep in mind that what we’re doing here is linking a condition that is diagnosed on an individual level and attempting to apply this to a group setting, which means that standard expectations about immediate and delayed effects would not necessarily apply in the same way. I also don’t really need to think about any of my patients with PTSD as I’m quite comfortable with managing the condition. Assuming that people only take 1-3 months "to get over it" is also hopelessly optimistic.

To illustrate my line of thinking in the previous post, we have to make some basic assumptions about human behaviour. We can assume that each player will respond and react differently to the trauma based on individual factors, and some would manage worse than others. The players less affected may have encouraged those worse off to stay the course, believing that things would change. Team performance still suffers to a slight degree, which manifests in the inconsistency which we saw in 2018 and 2019. Come the bye in 2019, it becomes apparent that it’s not going to happen, so even those previously less affected give up on the club direction. Mind you, this is all speculative which is all one can really do given that public details of the camp are unlikely to be released any time soon.



This argument is incoherent. Whether the media reports the traumatic event and perceptions about their reporting behaviour being unethical is irrelevant. The description of the fake hijacking scenarios or the dick holding exercise described by an earlier poster as something the Mankind Project does would definitely fit the bill for what constitutes emotional trauma. If for instance it were reported that the genitals of a child were being handled inappropriately, even a doctor with minimal competence would be notifying child protection. As part of the #metoo movement we’ve seen adults reporting sexual harassment years after the event occurred. As such, it doesn’t seem particularly controversial to suggest that if similar inappropriate events like this did occur at the camp, these would be traumatic in nature.

Bottom line is this: are you happy just to speculate what could have happened, instead of finding out what did actually happen? It shouldn’t be up to the fans to figure out the facts to go along with an article just because it’s a news article. It should be up to the articles to give clear facts for us to have an informed opinion.

Regarding “there could be a traumatic event”, well that’s on an individual level, and should be determined by the people who did a mental state exam on the players. It really shouldn’t be guessed upon by fans/journos who weren’t there or aren’t privy to the confidential information.

Effectively the initial reports suggested significant psychological traumas inflicted. If so, why weren’t the AFLPA, player managers, lawyers involved with some class action? Also, no one could stop the players from leaving the club end of 2018. Why then did only McGovern leave and nobody else left?

 

[flashcrow]

Can you please share me the link?

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podca...lstra-trade-radio/id820692706?i=1000452555168

 

[skam85]

Bottom line is this: are you happy just to speculate what could have happened, instead of finding out what did actually happen?

Yet that's exactly what you're doing with your constant "injuries injuries injuries" pedalling.

Something we didn't have much of in 2019, yet we still were terrible on field ...as pointed out to you many, many times.

 

[jaytex]

The implication was that the Camp messed up the players. This was the main emphasis of the report. If we're talking traumatic effects, then we would have to see immediate effects which often results in a decline of general output/performance. I deliberately mentioned 9 rounds, which means it's a 2 month period. A messed up team (psychologically) would be showing some sort of ill-effects during a 2 month time frame. But there was none apart from the obvious injuries.

Think back to the 2015 tragedy. Our first game after the incident I think it was against the Eagles and we absolutely got smashed with the results looking ugly by the end. This was understandable though, and that was a clear example of a team derailed mentally by a prior trauma. Can you see how 2015 after the tragedy we were looking average for a short while (mentally affected), and a stark difference to the early period of 2018 immediately after the Camp?

Clearly your extensive experience in the medical field is not in mental health.

Your confidently expressed attempt at a trauma-informed approach is distinctly lacking. Declaring a traumatic event must be linked with immediate effects makes you look an abject fool.

 

[Samcro24]

At the end of the day, we had a side in the window, we lost a GF, thats the closest we've been in 20 years.

The administration of the club blew that up. Pure unadulterated self inflicted pain.

Again.

This board (as in BigFooty) has been lit up like a Christmas tree for months with all sorts of threads as a result. It is the most turbulent time in the club's history.

-They've lied about.
-Tried to cover it up.
-Denied its an issue.
-Assured us that everything is fine, and everyone is super at their jobs.
-Haven't rectified any issues themselves- we needed an external review to do anything (and Pyke walked, the board has literally sat on its hands except for approving the review - which only came about due to public pressure)
-They havent acknowledged any of the above as an issue.

and here's the kicker

-They are all still there, 'running the show'.

So yeah, it's hard to let go because there's been no closure. Pure incompetence and zero accountability reigns supreme.

The funniest/saddest part is that there is a huge percentage of the supporter base that can't/refuse see it. As if all of the events of the last two years are coincidence and independent of each other.

''only in Adelaide''

 

[Samcro24]

FFS.. our footy dept (the best in the land - trust us or **** off) has lost it's 3 key members.

The coach walked, while the head of the footy dept and senior assitant were sacked by outsiders.

It's just a pure shit show, a lost cause no matter how many people we bring in/move on.

 

[skam85]

At the end of the day, we had a side in the window, we lost a GF, thats the closest we've been in 20 years.

The administration of the club blew that up. Pure unadulterated self inflicted pain.

Again.

This board (as in BigFooty) has been lit up like a Christmas tree for months with all sorts of threads as a result. It is the most turbulent time in the club's history.

-They've lied about.
-Tried to cover it up.
-Denied its an issue.
-Assured us that everything is fine, and everyone is super at their jobs.
-Haven't rectified any issues themselves- we needed an external review to do anything (and Pyke walked, the board has literally sat on its hands except for approving the review - which only came about due to public pressure)
-They havent acknowledged any of the above as an issue.

and here's the kicker

-They are all still there, 'running the show'.

So yeah, it's hard to let go because there's been no closure. Pure incompetence and zero accountability reigns supreme.

The funniest/saddest part is that there is a huge percentage of the supporter base that can't/refuse see it. As if all of the events of the last two years are coincidence and independent of each other.

''only in Adelaide''

What should have happened:
AFC to players: "Sorry fellas, the camp was a big stuff up by us and we cannot apologise enough. If you have any issues with anything to do with the camp, let us know, let's talk about it and figure out how we can fix the mistake we've made here."

AFC to media: "You have heard reports about the camp - in hindsight it was the wrong decision and we are taking every step to ensure the players affected are helped and to avoid any repeats or lingering problems"

Media: move on and find a new scandal now that this has been handled professionally and maturely.

Fans: "Damn, we stuffed up but at least we're trying to fix it and move on"

Net result - over by the mid-season bye and a weird footnote on a grand final hangover.

What actually happened:
AFC to players: denial, unfulfilled promises.

AFC to media: deny, deny, deny, feign offense, eventually order an external review almost two years later.

Media: naturally keep prodding the issue because it's ...well, news.

Fans: lose faith in the football department.

Net result - two wasted seasons, a fractured playing group that has lost a lot of trust, and players leaving.

 

[Samcro24]

What should have happened:
AFC to players: "Sorry fellas, the camp was a big stuff up by us and we cannot apologise enough. If you have any issues with anything to do with the camp, let us know, let's talk about it and figure out how we can fix the mistake we've made here."

AFC to media: "You have heard reports about the camp - in hindsight it was the wrong decision and we are taking every step to ensure the players affected are helped and to avoid any repeats or lingering problems"

Media: move on and find a new scandal now that this has been handled professionally and maturely.

Fans: "Damn, we stuffed up but at least we're trying to fix it and move on"

Net result - over by the mid-season bye and a weird footnote on a grand final hangover.

What actually happened:
AFC to players: denial, unfulfilled promises.

AFC to media: deny, deny, deny, feign offense, eventually order an external review almost two years later.

Media: naturally keep prodding the issue because it's ...well, news.

Fans: lose faith in the football department.

Net result - two wasted seasons, a fractured playing group that has lost a lot of trust, and players leaving.

100%

How can we move forward with any confidence?

It's not like this is the first disaster the board has overseen and tried to cover up.

 

[Smoooothy]

''only in Adelaide''

Aurelio Vidmar was correct. Adelaide is a pissant town

 

[Samcro24]

Aurelio Vidmar was correct. Adelaide is a pissant town

All our state teams in national comps suck.

 

[feenix67]

Can you please share me the link?

Nope, you of all people should know how to google it

 

[John Who]

Nope, you of all people should know how to google it

Ouch, this always hurt - people accusing me of using google to make conversations. :*(

 

[John Who]

Clearly your extensive experience in the medical field is not in mental health.

Your confidently expressed attempt at a trauma-informed approach is distinctly lacking. Declaring a traumatic event must be linked with immediate effects makes you look an abject fool.

Can you please stop acting like a know it all and just discuss instead of trying to character assassinate all the damn time? It gets old.

Regarding your 2nd paragraph, you conveniently ignored the next post I did talking about immediate effects vs delayed effects.

Putting it very plain terms, the initial reports suggested “mentally fried” players during the Camp. This would mean players were showing signs of distress then and therefore effects in performance (negatively) should have followed. If as in what you’re saying, there was a potential latent psychological impact from a supposed traumatic incident, then players wouldn’t have shown distress during the camp but sometime after the camp to fit with the PTSD label. And if players hadn’t shown distress during the Camp, then what caused the journos to report what they reported?

 

[jaytex]

Can you please stop acting like a know it all and just discuss instead of trying to character assassinate all the damn time? It gets old.

Regarding your 2nd paragraph, you conveniently ignored the next post I did talking about immediate effects vs delayed effects.

Putting it very plain terms, the initial reports suggested “mentally fried” players during the Camp. This would mean players were showing signs of distress then and therefore effects in performance (negatively) should have followed. If as in what you’re saying, there was a potential latent psychological impact from a supposed traumatic incident, then players wouldn’t have shown distress during the camp but sometime after the camp to fit with the PTSD label. And if players hadn’t shown distress during the Camp, then what caused the journos to report what they reported?

Those first ten words are legit the most ironic ten words I have ever read, congratulations.

What gets old is trying to follow your dogmatic, illogical arguments and suppositions, in thread after thread, on topic after topic, without getting irrationally angry at how forcefully you peddle your insane leaps of logic as unarguable expert analysis.

 

[John Who]

Those first ten words are legit the most ironic ten words I have ever read, congratulations.

What gets old is trying to follow your dogmatic, illogical arguments and suppositions, in thread after thread, on topic after topic, without getting irrationally angry at how forcefully you peddle your insane leaps of logic as unarguable expert analysis.

The key difference is I don’t try and character assassinate and try to discuss around the issues of the topic. You character assassinate in the guise of a “discussion”.

And why do you keep interjecting on my dialogues with others if what I write bothers you so much? Seems like you’re a narcissist pretending to be the victim here.

 

[1970crow]

Mod notice

I'm revoking people's Freedom to Speak about civil rights in Australia, war history, clauses and acts in this thread.

Can we please steer conversation back to the subject at hand - wooden phalluses, dancing naked in the woods and other bizarre rituals.

Told you ad victoriam , no such right enshrined in law. Even a lowly mod on a meaningless discussion forum can deny you your so called ‘rights’.