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

[52Goals4inGranny]

So as I understand it;

Hawthorn commission a report on how the club has treated its indigenous younger players. Tells said players that they can say whatever they feel to be true without any repercussions as they will not be interviewing any of the coaches.

Hawthorn gets said report and realises its a mess. Dumps it on the AFL, who think that we can quickly put an independent body together and get it sorted.

Said indigenous players say wait on - you said that there would be no repercussions. We are not prepared to release our statements or anything further to the coaches.

Coaches say hang on - how can we answer the claims when we dont know what they are.

Stalemate achieved .

Hawthorn have acted incredibly badly throughout. There is literally an episode if the American version of the Office where Michael Scott offers immunity to anyone who wants to spill secrets that backfires that this has been modelled on.

The funniest thing is seeing Jeff Kennett (president at the time of the club who created this mess) now weigh in saying the investigation should be stopped. Usual contemptible behaviour from a contemptible nan.

The mail I have is the players / family members in question don't want their accusations attributed to them by name. Not too keen on being sued for defamation.

Read into it what you will

 

[BigFrizz36]

https://nit.com.au/11-05-2023/5931/where-is-this-going-clarkson-slams-investigation-panel-hawthorn-in-explosive-response-to-racism-saga-fractures

So interesting that Clarko feels he has to claw back his reputation.
What damage has there actually been for him?
He's coaching with full support of North and AFl, and all his media mates isn't he?
He hasn't suffered an iota of loss in status or power, and now he lays into the club that fed and nursed him. Weird guy.
As far as anyone could tell it's already all over and the waiting is just reinforcing 'nothing to see here.'
Whole thing has been sickening but not in the way Clarko says it has.
There's no way people make up the things that were said. But they've been turned into disreputable and dishonorable villains by a few well placed lawyer driven stories. And now Clarko wants to make Hawks the villain, but he WAS the Hawks!
Obviously this is just my take and I'm sure plenty disagree.
It's taken months for me not to get overwhelmed with anger thinking about what those involved said took place.
Yes, I believe them.

I assume that you are having a laugh.

Clarkson, Fagin and Burt have been accused of some terrible things, all of which are linked to being institutionally racist. Clarkson and Fagan were stood down from their positions (kind of like guilty till proven innocent) till it was realised how long the investigation would take. Many such as yourself have already found them guilty without any knowledge of the facts.

None of them have had any opportunity to respond to these allegations. In fact, as I understand, they have not yet been given the full list of the allegations.

You have every right to determine whether you believe the allegations (although I suspect your conclusions may be more based on your previous perceptions about Clarkson than the evidence).

However it is disgraceful that people's reputations have been diminished without them having a right of reply (so far).

Hypothetical situation - if carlton ran a similar thing many years ago would you automatically believe Lawrence Angwin and Justin Murphy if they made accusations (whilst not being named as the accusers) against a coaching panel without the coaching panel being given the right of reply?

 

[BigFrizz36]

The mail I have is the players / family members in question don't want their accusations attributed to them by name. Not too keen on being sued for defamation.

Read into it what you will

As I understand it the players were told by Hawthorn that they could make their accusations with full anonymity and without fear of repercussions.

If true Hawthorn have put a lot of people in an invidious position.

I dislike clarkson more than most but he has been put in a lose/lose position. Can't see any other outcome than some sort of legal action.

 

[myblueroan]

I assume that you are having a laugh.

Clarkson, Fagin and Burt have been accused of some terrible things, all of which are linked to being institutionally racist. Clarkson and Fagan were stood down from their positions (kind of like guilty till proven innocent) till it was realised how long the investigation would take. Many such as yourself have already found them guilty without any knowledge of the facts.

None of them have had any opportunity to respond to these allegations. In fact, as I understand, they have not yet been given the full list of the allegations.

You have every right to determine whether you believe the allegations (although I suspect your conclusions may be more based on your previous perceptions about Clarkson than the evidence).

However it is disgraceful that people's reputations have been diminished without them having a right of reply (so far).

Hypothetical situation - if carlton ran a similar thing many years ago would you automatically believe Lawrence Angwin and Justin Murphy if they made accusations (whilst not being named as the accusers) against a coaching panel without the coaching panel being given the right of reply?

And is it not disgraceful that you want to tarnish the accusers by comparing them to Lawrence Anguin?
What are you saying exactly?
It's so obvious the accusers have no hope. And your reply just confirms it.

 

[BigFrizz36]

And is it not disgraceful that you want to tarnish the accusers by comparing them to Lawrence Anguin?
What are you saying exactly?
It's so obvious the accusers have no hope. And your reply just confirms it.

Cool work turning a hypothesis into a comparison and a tarnishing. I, like you, have no idea who the accusers are. The accusations may well be true.

What I am saying exactly is that for any sort of procedural fairness to take place both parties have to be aware of what the allegations are and have to be given the right to answer said allegations. So far this hasn't happened.

It is staggering that you have passed judgement without hearing both sides of the story. Not sure that you would be a good juror- the prosecution would present their case and you would just yell out GUILTY.

 

[myblueroan]

Cool work turning a hypothesis into a comparison and a tarnishing. I, like you, have no idea who the accusers are. The accusations may well be true.

What I am saying exactly is that for any sort of procedural fairness to take place both parties have to be aware of what the allegations are and have to be given the right to answer said allegations. So far this hasn't happened.

It is staggering that you have passed judgement without hearing both sides of the story. Not sure that you would be a good juror- the prosecution would present their case and you would just yell out GUILTY.

I appreciate good dialogue but this isn't it.
I appreciate you have different pov which I expected and wrote in o.p.
I just wanted to express how I felt about Clarko going off.
You say fair, but it already isn't. Accusers have been disparaged in the press and by you here. I say I believe rhem and you disparage me.
And on it goes.
The accused say they didn't say or do things they are accused of.
The accusers have tried to speak out, but nothing will come of it.
The accused will continue to coach and be paid tons of money.
It's already over!!!
Except Clarko will probably make millions suing whoever he can
. So who in this, are the ones that have truly suffered?

 

[BigFrizz36]

I appreciate good dialogue but this isn't it.
I appreciate you have different pov which I expected and wrote in o.p.
I just wanted to express how I felt about Clarko going off.
You say fair, but it already isn't. Accusers have been disparaged in the press and by you here. I say I believe rhem and you disparage me.
And on it goes.
The accused say they didn't say or do things they are accused of.
The accusers have tried to speak out, but nothing will come of it.
The accused will continue to coach and be paid tons of money.
It's already over!!!
Except Clarko will probably make millions suing whoever he can
. So who in this, are the ones that have truly suffered?

It's strange that you can't/won't understand that a basic tenet of justice is that both accuser and accused have the same basic rights - to be able yo make accusations and to be able to defend themselves against these accusations.

Not much point in going any further with this.

 

[My Hat]

So as I understand it;

Hawthorn commission a report on how the club has treated its indigenous younger players. Tells said players that they can say whatever they feel to be true without any repercussions as they will not be interviewing any of the coaches.

Hawthorn gets said report and realises its a mess. Dumps it on the AFL, who think that we can quickly put an independent body together and get it sorted.

Said indigenous players say wait on - you said that there would be no repercussions. We are not prepared to release our statements or anything further to the coaches.

Coaches say hang on - how can we answer the claims when we dont know what they are.

Stalemate achieved .

Hawthorn have acted incredibly badly throughout. There is literally an episode if the American version of the Office where Michael Scott offers immunity to anyone who wants to spill secrets that backfires that this has been modelled on.

The funniest thing is seeing Jeff Kennett (president at the time of the club who created this mess) now weigh in saying the investigation should be stopped. Usual contemptible behaviour from a contemptible nan.

Good summary.

Thing is, this should all have been pretty clear to the panel a few weeks in. What exactly have they been doing for the other seven months?

 

[The Toad]

There's obviously some very smart peeps on here, ( of which I am not one) but i would like some of you smart peeps to explain something to me regarding Eddie Bett's comment regarding the booing of Buddy. He said, "If Buddy thinks it's racist, it's racist, if he thinks its not racist its not racist"

I don't understand this statement at all. Please help!!!

 

[myblueroan]

Cool work turning a hypothesis into a comparison and a tarnishing. I, like you, have no idea who the accusers are. The accusations may well be true.

What I am saying exactly is that for any sort of procedural fairness to take place both parties have to be aware of what the allegations are and have to be given the right to answer said allegations. So far this hasn't happened.

It is staggering that you have passed judgement without hearing both sides of the story. Not sure that you would be a good juror- the prosecution would present their case and you would just yell out GUILTY.

Upon reflection ,
I feel a need to address why you chose not to answer but deflected, when I asked why you'd use a person with a poor reputation like Lawrence. Someone who was a victim of his upbringing.
It's funny how in my original post I referred to a campaign of lawyers through media to tarnish reputations and you did the same thing.
Because the accusations come from more than one party they should not be easily refuted.
Obviously the accused will all deny.
Will there be any hard evidence?
Probably not and so it comes down to what?
Integrity?
Reputation?
Power?
Like I said, it's all over and you come on all blustery and talk of fairness. I put it to you that this long delay plays right into the accused's hands and we are witnessing a carefully managed play of Shakesperean proportions. Clever and cunningly designed to win the public battle for Clarko and cohorts.
There IS no fairness in this. Everything is skewed against the accusers.
(Again, just my take.)

 

[BigFrizz36]

Upon reflection ,
I feel a need to address why you chose not to answer but deflected, when I asked why you'd use a person with a poor reputation like Lawrence. Someone who was a victim of his upbringing.
It's funny how in my original post I referred to a campaign of lawyers through media to tarnish reputations and you did the same thing.
Because the accusations come from more than one party they should not be easily refuted.
Obviously the accused will all deny.
Will there be any hard evidence?
Probably not and so it comes down to what?
Integrity?
Reputation?
Power?
Like I said, it's all over and you come on all blustery and talk of fairness. I put it to you that this long delay plays right into the accused's hands and we are witnessing a carefully managed play of Shakesperean proportions. Clever and cunningly designed to win the public battle for Clarko and cohorts.
There IS no fairness in this. Everything is skewed against the accusers.
(Again, just my take.)

I'll try another hypothetical for one last time. This has no relevance whatsoever to the case or any of the people involved.

Imagine you work in a dysfunctional workplace where no one appears happy and people are sniping at one another all of the time. Management hire a company to come in and do a review. This company talks to some staff and not others (invluding you). They release a preliminary report.

The company calls you in to tell you that people have made some allegations about you but they are not in a position to give you the details. Rather than get your side of the story they have decided that you are probably guilty and that they are going to stand you down from your position.

Would you consider that to be "fair"?

That, in effect, is what has happened here. It has nothing to do with who has the most power, money or anything else.

That's all on this from me. Let's agree to disagree.

 

[52Goals4inGranny]

I appreciate good dialogue but this isn't it.
I appreciate you have different pov which I expected and wrote in o.p.
I just wanted to express how I felt about Clarko going off.
You say fair, but it already isn't. Accusers have been disparaged in the press and by you here. I say I believe rhem and you disparage me.
And on it goes.
The accused say they didn't say or do things they are accused of.
The accusers have tried to speak out, but nothing will come of it.
The accused will continue to coach and be paid tons of money.
It's already over!!!
Except Clarko will probably make millions suing whoever he can
. So who in this, are the ones that have truly suffered?

So you believe the annonymous and secret accusations?

What do you base your beliefs on?

 

[katmanblue]

There's obviously some very smart peeps on here, ( of which I am not one) but i would like some of you smart peeps to explain something to me regarding Eddie Bett's comment regarding the booing of Buddy. He said, "If Buddy thinks it's racist, it's racist, if he thinks its not racist its not racist"

I don't understand this statement at all. Please help!!!

It's the vibe

On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[thylacine60]

There's obviously some very smart peeps on here, ( of which I am not one) but i would like some of you smart peeps to explain something to me regarding Eddie Bett's comment regarding the booing of Buddy. He said, "If Buddy thinks it's racist, it's racist, if he thinks its not racist its not racist"

I don't understand this statement at all. Please help!!!

a very short history of colonialism in the colonies - hi, we live here now, you never existed, in the future if we haven't managed to end your race through disease, starvation, murder or forced sterilization, then the ones remaining will be grateful for anything given them - in time, that will be reduced to money from the benevolent government of australia - you don't get to say how you feel, think or what you reckon might help your people - that's for us to decide - this also means we decide what's racist and how you get to feel about racist insults, abuse & intimidation - thanks, and stay safe.........

 

[Wickzki]

Posted on Reddit but what in all seriousness is this?

Grippo is a different colour.

 

[Wickzki]

 

[BM123]

There's obviously some very smart peeps on here, ( of which I am not one) but i would like some of you smart peeps to explain something to me regarding Eddie Bett's comment regarding the booing of Buddy. He said, "If Buddy thinks it's racist, it's racist, if he thinks its not racist its not racist"

I don't understand this statement at all. Please help!!!

Honestly you'd need Betts to clarify this statement himself to get any decent insight into it.

One of those statements that is easy to take out of context. I suspect they aren't just booing Buddy though if Betts is standing up for him. I've seen plenty of people who say the most foul things whenever someone of colours "dares" to play well against their team or play poorly for their own team. Humans in general are extremely good at filtering out things that aren't "relevant" to them though so we tend to understate how often this happens.....

I have fond memories of going to the MCG for the first time in 2011 and seeing Betts kick 8 goals. Bless that Carlton supporter who was blue collar as it gets sitting next to me with his lovely family just screaming "KICK IT TO EDDIE PLEASE" while the Essendon supporters looked so sour.

So I'd like to believe Eddie has a stronger case than "Buddy can read minds".

 

[Stamos]

‘I don’t miss it one bit’: Why the AFL is losing one of its best resources

Coaches are not happy and some have decided that despite club support and a love for the job, there are better options outside the AFL.

www.theage.com.au

Good article, a fair bit about Dan O'Keefe

https://archive.md/XexmK

 

[BigFrizz36]

Not specific Carlton in the media but sad to hear about Sandy Roberts cancer diagnosis. A great commentator the likes of which we don't see anymore.

 

[Coona Blues]

‘I don’t miss it one bit’: Why the AFL is losing one of its best resources

Coaches are not happy and some have decided that despite club support and a love for the job, there are better options outside the AFL.

www.theage.com.au

Good article, a fair bit about Dan O'Keefe

https://archive.md/XexmK

This is actually alarming in the extreme.

There is little wonder the standard of some teams is on the decline. Where are tomorrow’s coaches coming from if the scope to pay assistants is so limited?

It is an interesting exercise comparing coaching groups by club.

I am not a “Jack” Russell detractor, but it would be interesting to see how much of the soft cap his contract eats up.

 

[Gethelred]

Devils vs Demons. AFL Satan spectacular on Friday night football..

Otherwise known as the Blood War...

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

This is actually alarming in the extreme.

There is little wonder the standard of some teams is on the decline. Where are tomorrow’s coaches coming from if the scope to pay assistants is so limited?

It is an interesting exercise comparing coaching groups by club.

I am not a “Jack” Russell detractor, but it would be interesting to see how much of the soft cap his contract eats up.

Not just pay but outline a coaching pathway that doesn't involve 'be an ex pro player'. Doesn't exist. I would think people training to be coaches and such would be a good mix to include with those ex players. Anyway. Sad

 

[Pixelshooter]

Caught a bit of the sports show on 3AW last night. Sam McClure and Richo...McClure is such an arrogant turd talking about the starting time for the GF. It was pointed out to him that virtually every poll on the start time showed at least 75%+ support for a 2:30pm start...and his response..."look at the last Victorian state election and you'll see the majority aren't always very smart". Dickhead.

Then went on to say we'd get hundreds of thousands of extra people in Sydney watching the game if it was held at night. Who cares? If someone is that disinterested in the grand final that the only time they'd watch the game is at night...why the hell would we want to change over a hundred years of tradition and go against the will of the vast majority of true footy supporters just to cater for a few Sydneysiders that aren't really interested in the game.

He's an absolute tool and rivals Cornes for "rent a quote" of the day.

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

Caught a bit of the sports show on 3AW last night. Sam McClure and Richo...McClure is such an arrogant turd talking about the starting time for the GF. It was pointed out to him that virtually every poll on the start time showed at least 75%+ support for a 2:30pm start...and his response..."look at the last Victorian state election and you'll see the majority aren't always very smart". Dickhead.

Then went on to say we'd get hundreds of thousands of extra people in Sydney watching the game if it was held at night. Who cares? If someone is that disinterested in the grand final that the only time they'd watch the game is at night...why the hell would we want to change over a hundred years of tradition and go against the will of the vast majority of true footy supporters just to cater for a few Sydneysiders that aren't really interested in the game.

He's an absolute tool and rivals Cornes for "rent a quote" of the day.

Agree. Why are Sydney Siders unable to watch during the day? Do we have a reverse curfew? I'd say if people up here aren't interested at 2.30 they won't be at 7

 

[FRUMPY]

Caught a bit of the sports show on 3AW last night. Sam McClure and Richo...McClure is such an arrogant turd talking about the starting time for the GF. It was pointed out to him that virtually every poll on the start time showed at least 75%+ support for a 2:30pm start...and his response..."look at the last Victorian state election and you'll see the majority aren't always very smart". Dickhead.

Then went on to say we'd get hundreds of thousands of extra people in Sydney watching the game if it was held at night. Who cares? If someone is that disinterested in the grand final that the only time they'd watch the game is at night...why the hell would we want to change over a hundred years of tradition and go against the will of the vast majority of true footy supporters just to cater for a few Sydneysiders that aren't really interested in the game.

He's an absolute tool and rivals Cornes for "rent a quote" of the day.

Its the same as the argument for 'we can have fireworks and lights for the pre game and half time shows'.......who really gives a shit?

People who compared it to the superbowl wouldnt know which teams were playing that day and the score but could tell you the performer of the half time show. There is no reason to make the change for these types of people who arent interested in the game.

But then again, the argument from others that 'the kids get to watch it if its during the day' - so these kids are so interested in it, but going by that excuse, would have only watch 1 or 2 finals up to that point? ........as every other final is held at night.....

I dont really care what time it is on tbh. If its a good game ill watch it, if it turns into a borefest my mates and i will be in the backyard sinking tinnies and having a laugh. Just changes if its in sunlight or under a night sky.