No Oppo Supporters General AFL Discussion #12 - Carlton Posters ONLY!

[Arr0w]

You reckon from 10 years ago to the past 6 months when they made these allegations, they never had a chance to talk?

You reckon it's impossible that a guy could think, "*, I wanna get rid of my ex to chase tail, and I don't want this baby at 20" then later on tell her the nah the club made me do it. Because he ended up back with her.

Mate, let me tell you this whole thing stinks. If it's true, it's completely *ed and they should be decimated.

You can't make assumptions of guilt like this. It's disgusting. Anyone could ruin anyone's life at any time

Any number of reasons why it hasn't surfaced earlier, just like the Collingwood racism

Allegations have been made, both coaches have issued statements and both will have their opportunity to deal with the allegations

Taking the word of an ex player, that was probably never in ear shot of these possible conversations, is just an opinion, not fact

 

[BigBreakfast]

Messy situation which should be afforded the fullness of time to assess the merits of any claims.

I’m curious how long the AFL has sat on this information yet allowed the Clarkson train to chug full steam ahead?

I’m also cautious based on skeletons in closets. I reckon most clubs would have a few!

 

[rp84]

My guess is they gave the AFL a certain amount of time to release the information. And when it became clear it was going to get swept under the rug as usual, they pulled the trigger on releasing it just before the biggest day of the year.

Well played.

 

[carlton_99]

find it hard to believe Jackson didn't contact Clarkson and Fagan for comment

"ABC Sport put detailed questions about the allegations in this story to Clarkson, Fagan and Burt but at time of publication none had responded.
The Hawthorn Football Club did not respond to detailed questions provided by ABC Sport, but has issued a statement."

 

[Choc Milk]

Any number of reasons why it hasn't surfaced earlier, just like the Collingwood racism

Allegations have been made, both coaches have issued statements and both will have their opportunity to deal with the allegations

Taking the word of an ex player, that was probably never in ear shot of these possible conversations, is just an opinion, not fact

Funny because that is exactly wqhat you and many others on here are doing

 

[Arr0w]

Funny because that is exactly wqhat you and many others on here are doing

I ain't doing anything but absorbing what has been released

Anything I have heard outside of this forum, at this stage is also opinion

 

[agro]

Remember the Essendon* saga, same shite they spewed out then.

The same shite the whole AFL “mates” industry spewed out - all great blokes that you could sit down and have a beer with.

 

[HarryFlashman]

But until he is PROVEN guilty he isn’t and has the right of presumed innocence until he is.

Basic fabric of a democratic process.

This isn’t click bait or tabloid- it’s investigative journalism by professionals- it’s been vetted and checked. We do need the full context of what they uncovered- not just snippets to draw a full conclusion

 

[Blues_1864]

"ABC Sport put detailed questions about the allegations in this story to Clarkson, Fagan and Burt but at time of publication none had responded.
The Hawthorn Football Club did not respond to detailed questions provided by ABC Sport, but has issued a statement."

Yep. And that's all Jackson needed to do. His objectives are different to those of the review commissioned by Hawthorn; I myself would be quite interested to know why that review didn't interview Clarkson or Fagan. Maybe they didn't want it to degenerate into "he said, she said", but I imagine the club itself would have wanted to hear both sides.

As stated by others, no question that Jackson's article was triggered by the realisation that Hawthorn and the AFL were going to bury this report. Same old story: vulnerable people make terrible allegations, but rather than exposing and addressing the issues in a de-identified way, everything gets swept under the rug in the name of "confidentiality for victims". It's increasingly clear that this is not what the victims actually want - they want their stories told in a de-identified way, and they are prepared to risk being unmasked in order to be heard. It's very possible that the interviewees in this story actually approached Jackson (after his Robbie Muir story), and not the other way round.

So Jackson drops the bomb in Grand Final week, and I say well done. [I wonder if he would have done it if Brisbane won last Friday night.] It's important that it triggers frank conversations within all footy clubs (certainly all AFL clubs!) to expose this behaviour so it can be rooted out.

For me, I think the worst part of the stories - worse than the control freaks and psychological abuse, and even worse than the breaking of these vulnerable young men - is the predicaments of the young women. Most of them have lost everything, and no amount of AFL-industry reaction to this story will bring it back.

I am saddened, horrified, and also ashamed. People can point the finger at Hawthorn, but is the AFL system and culture that is to blame (I'm certain we will now hear more stories from other clubs). I am deeply invested in the AFL, and I feel dirty because of this, because of my emotional involvement in a sporting industry that allows these sorts of things to happen.

It feels a little bit like the sandpaper affair with the Australian cricket team (I used to be a fervent supporter; but I was just a fool, for caring more about the game than our national team did). But this Hawthorn things feels much worse, because of the young lives ruined along the way.

 

[MacReady]

Cannot believe how many have just given all 3 guys the guilty verdict without hearing their side of the story! What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

If guilty, all 3 should be absolutely gone forever with possible jail time (I’m no law expert so I’m not sure of the ramifications here) but if they did nothing wrong, well let me tell you some people ought to learn to wait until ALL facts are out there before deciding themselves.

A little bit of calm is needed here. Let it all play out and just see what happens.

 

[myblueroan]

Bloody shocking allegations. Also staggering that Fagan and Clarkson weren't interviewed as part of the report. And please don't take this as any defence of these guys. I would have just expected that based on such serious allegations, the authors would want to speak to those alleged to have committed such unspeakably bad things.

So this is the story and interviews by ABC reporter. Not the actual report comissioned by Hawks.
The journo did invite them to speak but they declined.

 

[CaptainCharisma]

It’s extremely weird Clarkson and Fagan were not involved in the internal review at Hawthorn (not the ABC article).

Even prior to these accusations surely the club would probe them for information on how they handled indigenous footballers and their welfare, they held senior positions at the club during the time.

Were Hawthorn doing that to cover something up? Or just doing a surface level review to score PR points?

Also strange Shaun Burgoyne

9

Shaun Burgoyne

Age

42

Ht

186cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

D/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.0

4star

K

9.9

4star

HB

8.1

5star

M

3.5

4star

T

3.8

5star

MG

162.7

3star

D

10.0

3star

K

5.6

2star

HB

4.4

3star

M

1.7

2star

T

2.6

4star

MG

162.7

3star

D

6.2

2star

K

3.2

2star

HB

3.0

3star

M

1.2

2star

T

1.6

4star

himself said at a function he had no knowledge of any of this happening.

The accusations are terrible, I can’t see them holding a position in professional sport again if found to be true.

They do however have the right to due process, and an independent panel lead by a QC is a good move by the AFL to get answers.

 

[BigBreakfast]

So this the story and interviews by ABC reporter. Not the actual report comissioned by Hawks.
The journo did invite them to speak but they declined.

Correct. Interviews players involved ala McLure, Whately et al.

I would hope that this issue is given the credence it deserves and support for aggrieved parties where appropriate.

Time will tell all.

 

[lily of laguna]

Bloody shocking allegations. Also staggering that Fagan and Clarkson weren't interviewed as part of the report. And please don't take this as any defence of these guys. I would have just expected that based on such serious allegations, the authors would want to speak to those alleged to have committed such unspeakably bad things.

The Journo reached out to Clarko, Fagan and the Hawthorn club with no response from them entirely.

 

[Stamos]

The Journo reached out to Clarko, Fagan and the Hawthorn club with no response from them entirely.

Be interesting to know how long they were given to respond before publication.

 

[Arr0w]

Be interesting to know how long they were given to respond before publication.

Does it matter?

 

[Stamos]

Does it matter?

Well, a 'no response' is different if they were given a week to reply compared to if they were given 20 minutes.

 

[Blues_1864]

Does it matter?

It probably does. If Jackson sent the questions yesterday arvo, and then published the story this morning... then Clarkson, Fagan et al. were put in a difficult position (especially if completely blindsided). In their shoes, I'd want legal advice before I responded to the sorts of questions they would have been asked.

I think the whole "Jackson reached out/accused didn't respond" is a bit of a nil-all draw, to be honest. I suspect Jackson was never particularly interested in anything they might have had to say; he already had his explosive story, which we have all now read. And I think it's safe to say that Clarkson, Fagan et al. would have no interest in talking to Jackson, if that could possibly be avoided.

 

[The Blue Weirdo]

It probably does. If Jackson sent the questions yesterday arvo, and then published the story this morning... then Clarkson, Fagan et al. were put in a difficult position (especially if completely blindsided). In their shoes, I'd want legal advice before I responded to the sorts of questions they would have been asked.

I think the whole "Jackson reached out/accused didn't respond" is a bit of a nil-all draw, to be honest. I suspect Jackson was never particularly interested in anything they might have had to say; he already had his explosive story, which we have all now read. And I think it's safe to say that Clarkson, Fagan et al. would have no interest in talking to Jackson, if that could possibly be avoided.

It would be legal prudency not to respond to any journalists under the circumstances.
What would they possibly have to gain?

 

[Blues_1864]

It would be legal prudency not to respond to any journalists under the circumstances.
What would they possibly have to gain?

Yes, you are right. I guess I didn't really put myself in their shoes. I was thinking I would want to defend myself and/or take responsibility where I could, but you are right, this is a bit more serious a situation than that.

 

[Arr0w]

Well, a 'no response' is different if they were given a week to reply compared to if they were given 20 minutes.

It probably does. If Jackson sent the questions yesterday arvo, and then published the story this morning... then Clarkson, Fagan et al. were put in a difficult position (especially if completely blindsided). In their shoes, I'd want legal advice before I responded to the sorts of questions they would have been asked.

I think the whole "Jackson reached out/accused didn't respond" is a bit of a nil-all draw, to be honest. I suspect Jackson was never particularly interested in anything they might have had to say; he already had his explosive story, which we have all now read. And I think it's safe to say that Clarkson, Fagan et al. would have no interest in talking to Jackson, if that could possibly be avoided.

I should have been clearer, the timeframe would have made no difference as the response would have always been " declined to comment", due to not having seen the official findings of the report, which would have been different to how reporter questions are delivered

 

[DangerousD]

I'm quietly optimistic that we're (relatively) clean, based on the fact that Betts, a very prominent voice in the discussion around Indigenous relations, returned to Carlton after the Adelaide fiasco.

If he was aware of anything approaching this magnitude at the Blues then I can't see any scenario in which he entertains the move back. And given his standing in the Indigenous playing ranks it would be hard to imagine anything serious going down without him finding out about it through unofficial channels if not direct from the players affected.

No doubt there'd have been some questionable interactions at times, but hopefully they were dealt with appropriately.

Replace the name Betts with the name Burgoyne and see the events today, Burgoyne was there the whole time, is a champion of the game and claims that he knew nothing about what came out today. He speaks glowingly of Hawthorn and Clarkson, Eddie returning to the Blues and his admiration of the club doesn’t make it any less likely this stuff happened at our club.

 

[The Blue Weirdo]

My thought's at this stage of information revealed are that Clarkson and/or others are probably guilty of some kind of improper manipulation.
The level depends on the reliability of all the details of the accusers allegations.
They might be totally guilty or only responsible for some of it.

 

[Stamos]

Goyder and McLachlan need to take responsibility

The AFL have had plenty of warning signs that issues surrounding Indigenous people were not being properly considered, yet little has been done to ensure Indigenous people have a real voice in the game.

www.theage.com.au

Good article.

 

[AB_Blue]

Just read the ABC article….pretty heavy stuff

Gonna be a few heads roll after this me thinks



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk