Play Nice Hawthorn culture and Fagan

[dlanod]

This is going to be a very touchy subject.

There will be a very broad range of opinions about the correct way to handle this.

I'll remind everyone to post respectfully at this time - sniping at each other is not going to help.

Any continued pointless back and forth will get a day or more to cool off. If you want to avoid this fate, let it go.

 

[martinson]

Re fairness, interesting to note the article came out after all key parties were out of the premiership race. Totally open question, I do wonder if the article was held back for that purpose, or whether it would have been released at the same time with the Lions entering a grand final on the weekend. I suspect the former, which is at least decent form from the ABC/journo. Not commenting on the response window etc., just an observation that I haven't seen come up elsewhere.

I put it up a while ago. My take was that the AFL held back hoping like hell we didn't make the GF .

 

[Mayestro]

What material purpose does it serve for Fagan's name to be made public?

Where is the difference between the accuser and the accused insofar as provision of anonymity is concerned?

We speak about wanting a fair end equitable process....how exactly is that goal achieved in the current environment?

The only way I can see for some semblance of parity to return is for the identity of both sides to be revealed.

Fair and equitable is not really achievable when privilege and power between these two groups- the accusers and accused- is very asymmetrical. Fagan and Clarkson are well off individuals with the backing of powerful organisations. Do you think the accusers are in the same situation, or will have anywhere near that support? Anonymity protects them from targeted harassment from the supporter bases of each of the clubs involved, racists who want to have a swing and the institutions themselves in previous eras.

Whistleblower laws are also designed to protect identity from harrassment. No one would come forward ever if they had to confront the full force of this harassment.

Yassmin Abdul-Magied was harassed out of Australia, Goodes was hounded out of the game.

Do you see why anonymity is important?

 

[irel]

Have you heard of the legendary BigFooty Lions clique? Well in the Afl there is something similar. Jobs for the boys, you scratch my back I'll scratch yours, indiscretions covered up or minimized, not guilty at the tribunal. That sort of thing. Turn on Foxfooty. I'm sure you will find some examples there.

Are you saying that the reason Burgoyne did not know of these matters was because he was not respected by the Aboriginal players at Howthorn and he was thought of as belonging to the boy's club?

 

[Section 5]

The Pies falling down the ladder was much more likely centred on destroying the onfield culture and belief amongst the playing group, when players had their reputations questioned publicly by the club and were traded out, all in the name of rebalancing their salary cap.

It all played a part in their fall from grace
If big problems surround clubs be it from admin down to players it has an affect on how the team plays
Pies bounced back to a PF the following year basically with the same players

 

[martinson]

You can tag me directly, I won't be upset.

For the record I still think Zorko should no longer be captain going forward. Am I shocked that Dees players were also being F-wits? No, not really. I think that is a fair assumption about most behaviour on the footy field.

I didn't actually have you in mind .

I don't think there's any chance of him being Captain next year and would be dumbfounded if he were.

 

[Hanley]

I put it up a while ago. My take was that the AFL held back hoping like hell we didn't make the GF .

Ah sorry I missed that! Thanks martinson. Not sure the AFL would have the power to delay and ABC article but certainly possible they are least made a strongly worded request.

 

[Tom14]

I'm finding it hard to disbelieve him on the basis of that statement.

He just doesn't seem the type to outright lie on a matter that goes deep to his personal integrity.

Perhaps that's my own bias speaking.

We won't get an answer until the investigation, and potentially even then not.

But while he has denied knowledge/involvement, through my read of the article there is one former player saying that he was at the meeting where there was pressure for that players partner to seek an abortion, and separately another former player and that player's former partner allege he was at the house where they took that player's belongings away and separated them.

That's 3 separate people's accounts he will be denying across 2 separate incidents.

 

[Jeremiah001]

Are you saying that that the reason Burgoyne did not know of these matters was because he was not respected by the Aboriginal players at Howthorn and he was thought of as belonging to the boy's club?

No. I didnt mention anything about Indigenous players. You did.

 

[irel]

No. I didnt mention anything about Indigenous players. You did.

So he was not respected by all then?

 

[M Malice]

On Footy Classified it was mentioned that the Kangaroos have yet to appoint 3 coaching assistants and that it would have been largely Clarkson's decision who was appointed. Also a new CEO needs to be appointed.

What an absolute mess this is for them, can they wait the 6-8 weeks for the investigation to be completed and the findings released to make these appointments.

 

[knaf]

Fagan and Clarkson deny it and there is no proof presented yet to back up the allegations.

This is where we stand at the current and there is only two options moving forward in my mind.

1) Proof is provided. Solid proof and it’s confirmed that Fagan & Clarkson are lying, they’re punished justly.

2) No proof is provided. Fagan & Clarkson’s reputation is tarnished (Unless they can provide proof the accusers are lying) but they’re allowed to continue working.

All I will say is that if you are going to accuse people of very very serious allegations, to a reporter, you would surely have proof ready to go. Time will tell if that is the case.

Otherwise if there is no proof, there is every chance the 3 accusers conspired to lie in hopes of receiving monetary compensation. Innocent until proven guilty people, let’s not lose sight of that.

I disagreed due to this para

“Otherwise if there is no proof, there is every chance the 3 accusers conspired to lie in hopes of receiving monetary compensation. Innocent until proven guilty people, let’s not lose sight of that.”

The problem with this issue is the difficulty of proof. if Fagan can’t prove he wasn’t at the meeting is he lying to save his career? In what arena will proof be offered. A court of law? A formal AFL investigation? The court of public opinion?

the alleged victims were asked to tell their story. They did and appeared to describe at the very least a lack of cultural sensitivity. if they can’t prove what happened is their every chance they lied for financial gain?

 

[Jeremiah001]

So he was not respected by all then?

Sorry dude. Not interested in being led up the garden path by you.

 

[lioninthesand]

The same people who wanted to immediately decimate Zorko seem to be the ones taking these allegations prima facie which by implication skewers Fagan.

This is way more serious so perhaps deserves a period of reflection

Who are they mate? you often make highly inflammatory/wide sweeping comments about others on here, with a real ‘high horse’ vibe about it. Name the posters you are talking about - and allow them to defend themselves.

 

[martinson]

We won't get an answer until the investigation, and potentially even then not.

But while he has denied knowledge/involvement, through my read of the article there is one former player saying that he was at the meeting where there was pressure for that players partner to seek an abortion, and separately another former player and that player's former partner allege he was at the house where they took that player's belongings away and separated them.

That's 3 separate people's accounts he will be denying across 2 separate incidents.

Yes.

That was unequivocal on my reading of the article.

So someone's either lying or reimagining , been mistaken or forgotten what's occurred .

 

[Mighty Lions]

Any word on how the playing group are taking the last 36 hours?

Don't know about the players however some of the coaching staff at the club are in dis-belief, shock, angered & totally berwildered at the allegations. I assume the players would be similar.

 

[martinson]

Who are they mate? you often make highly inflammatory/wide sweeping comments about others on here, with a real ‘high horse’ vibe about it. Name the posters you are talking about - and allow them to defend themselves.

I don't think I do anything of the sort.

No one needs to defend themselves. They might have been happy to do it.

Have a read of the first few pages of this thread yourself if you want to know.

 

[Requiem]

Fair and equitable is not really achievable when privilege and power between these two groups- the accusers and accused- is very asymmetrical. Fagan and Clarkson are well off individuals with the backing of powerful organisations. Do you think the accusers are in the same situation, or will have anywhere near that support? Anonymity protects them from targeted harassment from the supporter bases of each of the clubs involved, racists who want to have a swing and the institutions themselves in previous eras.

Whistleblower laws are also designed to protect identity from harrassment. No one would come forward ever if they had to confront the full force of this harassment.

Yassmin Abdul-Magied was harassed out of Australia, Goodes was hounded out of the game.

Do you see why anonymity is important?

This is at the crux of the issue, victims rarely get a forum to voice their abuse in a safe environment, and when they do, they generally don't have the resources to protect themselves against the retaliation of those who maintain the power advantage in the relationship.

There's a lot of talk in this thread about 'Innocent till proven guilty', I wonder if this same appeal for a higher burden of proof applies towards allegations regarding powerful figures that are controversial/less liked?

 

[irel]

Sorry dude. Not interested in being led up the garden path by you.

You made the Burgoyne comment dude. No garden paths here. Just seeking your clarification regarding you comment about Burgoyne?

 

[lioninthesand]

Cute that you think it was a fact finding mission.

Facts are thing are known or proven to be true, neither is the case here.

It was an opportunity to tell a story

Fact finding was not the right language, I agree. No facts have been established yet, it was a tell all to this point - still didn’t need the accused involved to have legitimacy though.

 

[Jeremiah001]

You made the Burgoyne comment dude. No garden paths here. Just seeking your clarification regarding you comment about Burgoyne?

Perhaps if you were to use a more charming and agreeable sockpuppet then i may be more interested in going on this journey with you?

 

[martinson]

This is at the crux of the issue, victims rarely get a forum to voice their abuse in a safe environment, and when they do, they generally don't have the resources to protect themselves against the retaliation of those who maintain the power advantage in the relationship.

There's a lot of talk in this thread about 'Innocent till proven guilty', I wonder if this same appeal for a higher burden of proof applies towards allegations regarding powerful figures that are controversial/less liked?

That's largely true. Likewise they may not have the experience /capacity to express themselves in this situation as they would like.

 

[Sausages]

The answer you are looking for is that the media and their pals on social media cant set their dogs on these folk if they dont know who they are.

You needn't feel so defensive - this is the exact environment Fagan has lived in for....since before Twitter was a thing.

It is indeed why it is important - if every move Fagan has ever done, every recorded word and action is being used to seek justification for what is alleged, then isn't it equitable and fair to subject the other party to similar scrutiny?

I understand what you are fearful of and I acknowledge it is a by-product. But, there is a difference been relatable fact and irrelevant opinion in these matters, I'm sure you agree.

You are asking otherwise uninformed people to withhold judgement without knowing all the facts....when you won't in fact EVER know what some of those facts are.So, when is an appropriate time to assess, given that you have some omissions?

Hence, I feel this is in the public interest. We are passing some form of commentary over something that is alleged to have occurred recently.

If we want to stop the insidious rapture of racism, then WHENEVER such an allegation is made with public figures in a public forum, then EVERYONE is outed, simply as a means to achieve as close to absolute equity and visibility as possible. Or we continue to accept less than fulsome reporting and outcomes on issues of national concern.

My issue here is that by leaving any relevant details unwritten in this sort of scenario, it opens the way for any storied addition you wish to insert to justify your viewpoint. And with that comes accusations of agenda and influence, as we see ITT.

There should be no thought other than achieving broad tolerance towards every cultural group - if that isn't in the national interest, I don't know what is. There shouldn't be a hint of any agenda bar that.

Fewer assumptions will lead to better decisions.

We decry the AFL or other organisations for releasing reports without some redactions or withheld information.

And yet we appear to be satisfied in this scenario with otherwise relevant omissions.

 

[Brett C]

No, I think it shows I have a healthy respect for the journalist in question to not be making stuff up and I'm showing sympathy for those involved who allegedly have been through something truly awful. Your default seems to be that it isn't true. That's fine if that it is your opinion but equally I'm entitled to mine.

What I will call out is attacking the journalist/media organisation on spurious grounds. Or the notion that we must have a criminal trial level of proof of guilt for it to be ok to have an opinion - that is a ridiculous standard.

OJ Simpson, for example, didn't get convicted at trial but was found liable on the civil standard. Completely different situation of course that shouldn't be compared, but I feel comfortable with my personal standards, even if you want to call me wanting to 'react to a juicy story.'

I also don't think De Goey should have been playing while there was a serious criminal charge against him, and if we were to recuit him I'd cancel my membership too. So if you want to discount me as reacting to 'juicy stories,' so be it.

I didn’t realise the article was an opinion piece?

Oh that’s right it wasn’t and I’m not sure a lot of me sided hit piece should be worshipped by us all

 

[irel]

Perhaps if you were to use a more charming and agreeable sockpuppet then i may be more interested in going on this journey with you?

Not sure how charming I need to be to have a simple question answered. I openly admit I have no knowledge or understanding of Burgoyne or his standing among the Hawthorn/AFL fraternity.

All I know is what you have implied that somehow Burgoyne is viewed as belonging to the boys club clique and as such players may not have felt comfortable approaching him with any sensitive issues. Interesting as Burgoyne considered himself a leader at that club and certainly a leader among the Indigenous players.

 

[knaf]

Even If found not gulity of any of the allegations, I suspect Chris will still walk away. (just a guess) The stress & trauma of this on Chris, Ursula & the rest of his family is huge. (just an opinion) An absolute nightmare for all. In addition, like other posters before me have said, sponsors will also have their say in whether they want him back or not.

Yes this is my fear too. Strong support from our current First Nation players may prevent it happening.