-
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Opinion Hawthorn - Clarkson - Fagan Racism Investigation
- Thread starter WaynesWorld19
- Start date
- Tagged users None
1. It speaks to their reliability as witnesses and accusers. It would be perfectly normal to seek compensation for damage incurred. What’s not is making a song and dance about not doing do if you are actually doing so.
2. Total irrelevance, nothing at all to do with this issue. You need to move on from your persecution complex.
Nothing at all to suggest they are, in fact t it’s the opposite right now. 3 people had their reputations destroyed by accusations that have been refused to be repeated. Now, that’s not the fault of the ex-players, but as it stands right now, only the accused are certain victims.
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
Moderator
- May 24, 2006
- 79,511
- 161,036
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Redbacks, Sturt, Liverpool, Arizona
- Moderator
- #1,656
When did the accusers seek financial compensation? And who from?
- Aug 9, 2019
- 35,634
- 62,230
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Panthers, GWV Rebels, Central Augusta
Yes they did.
The three families were involved in the review.
]Hawthorn racism review to allege that former coaches separated First Nations players from families and demanded a pregnancy termination - ABC News
They were not obliged to be involved in the AFL investigation as they had already been involved with the initial Hawthorn review.
The obvious next step should have been to go to a truly independent body. As is happening now.
The AFL were not independent, so you can't blame the accusers not participating. We all know the AFL is a sham organisation, and no doubt their investigation was merely an attempt at rug covering
Burt said.
One of the accused trying to discredit the claims by suggesting it is a cash grab.....
On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
Moderator
- May 24, 2006
- 79,511
- 161,036
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Redbacks, Sturt, Liverpool, Arizona
- Moderator
- #1,660
Yes, I saw Burt's statement
But I'm wondering where/when the accusers sought financial compensation and who it was directed towards. I hadn't seen it reported previously and it's not clear from the Burt statement.
The Age say they've seen a statement Rioli submitted to the Hawthorn review suggesting possible compensation would be payment for the lost 3 years of his contract, and that Jermaine Miller-Lewis suggested he might be entitled to medical expenses caused by his treatment at Hawthorn.
Ex-Hawks star Cyril Rioli sought ‘compensation’ during racism inquiry
Cyril Rioli and his wife Shannyn accused former club president Jeff Kennett of fuelling a campaign of “psychological and spiritual warfare” against them.
So Burt also claims the AFL had all of the data from Hawthorn's investigation.
The one the accusers were part of. So again, no need for them to be interviewed again.
Also worth noting that even with that, the AFL exonerated Clarkson, Fagan and Burt.
What happens if the Safework Vic and HRC investigations find otherwise?
On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
The one the accusers were part of. So again, no need for them to be interviewed again.
Also worth noting that even with that, the AFL exonerated Clarkson, Fagan and Burt.
What happens if the Safework Vic and HRC investigations find otherwise?
On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Except their legal costs are covered by the AFL.
How is it possible to not know that by now.
Again, until you understand the difference between a unilateral claim and a review/investigation, you’ll continue to be way off here.
I guess natural justice issues foreign concept to you.
I do understand the difference. And understand what you are saying. The Hawthorn review had no input from the Accused. It was one sided.
I never said it was definitive. It was merely a starting point.
The AFL have no more investigative powers than Hawthorn. You guys seem to think an AFL investigation has more stock than the review Hawthorn did. It wouldn't have.
All I am saying is that it is now being handled properly, and the AFL investigation was nothing more than attempt to bury this.
This is basically a case of whistleblowing. The AFL are the employers of all AFL players. Player contracts are between the AFL and the players.
How can they truly be independent in such an investigation?
As you said earlier, Safework Victoria is already investigating, and that is a process that will take time.
I will say I am unsure of the HRC relevance here. But at least they are truly independent.
On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
The AFL have a set process for such hearings and conduct them without bias?
The basic principle of Natural Justice being that a standardised process free of bias is followed.
You believe the AFL investigation followed this?
If you do I know of a Nigerian Prince who can make you rich....
On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
mcnulty
Norm Smith Medallist
- Sep 18, 2019
- 6,374
- 9,386
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Banned
- #1,669
What would you have had the AFL do? This is their jurisdiction, and Hawthorn basically dropped it in their lap. They granted the four members of the panel independence. Unless one of the parties took it to court I’m not sure what else they could have done.The AFL have a set process for such hearings and conduct them without bias?
The basic principle of Natural Justice being that a standardised process free of bias is followed.
You believe the AFL investigation followed this?
If you do I know of a Nigerian Prince who can make you rich....
On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
The AFL didn’t ‘exonerate’ the coaches, they concluded the investigation without any adverse findings. And that’s because no accusations were made to the investigation. It’s likely and perfectly normal for the other investigations to arrive at a different outcome should they be presented with substantiated claims.
The AFL have a set process for such hearings and conduct them without bias?
The basic principle of Natural Justice being that a standardised process free of bias is followed.
You believe the AFL investigation followed this?
If you do I know of a Nigerian Prince who can make you rich....
On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Geez, you reckon natural justice is simply following a standardised process. It’s sweet that you try to keep up.
Correct not exonerated. I should not have said that.
And the AFL even agree with my point. They can only rule if parties have breached AFL specific rules.
AFL statement on Hawthorn independent investigation
The AFL today announced outcomes in relation to the Independent Panel Investigation into allegations of inappropriate conduct at the Hawthorn Football Club
www.afl.com.au
Code:
The purpose of the Independent Panel Investigation was to investigate relevant matters and make recommendations to the AFL including as to whether any persons should be the subject of disciplinary action for breach of AFL Rules and the resolution today should be viewed through that lens.
The AFL is only able to impose sanctions for breaches of AFL Rules on persons subject to the AFL Rules and respects the right of the various parties to the Investigation (and those who decided not to participate) to pursue claims in other legal forums. Today’s outcomes do not interfere with those rights.AFL has no real jurisdiction here. Which is what I have been saying.
The AFL investigation pretty pointless.
On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Agree more to it than standard process. However it is the one principle I see where the AFL investigation falls down.
Given the AFL have no jurisdiction here, how can they claim a proper standardised process in testing the claims.
They can't.
As I said earlier, basically just a case of whistleblowing. Employers mistreating employees. Safework Victoria would have a process in place that follows all principles of Natural Justice.
The AFL don't.
I am not saying the claims are true or not. Just that the AFL trying to investigate it was a farce.
On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
AFL could have deferred to the Safework Victoria investigation.
I agree the AFL had a rough deal with the journo breaking the story. Personally think the story should not have been broken or at least identifies suppressed until after the proper Safework Victoria investigation.
That was the next logical step after the Hawthorn report.
AFL had no jurisdiction to investigate this matter, they admitted to as much in the press statement when they concluded the investigation.
On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Similar threads
