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.

 

[western royboy]

I have no prob with Jackson giving Fages 24 hrs to respond - at least he extended the courtesy, some don’t. The story was always going to run this week for obvious reasons. It is plausible that Fagan did not respond for various reasons. But one possibility being that he thought it was bullshit and his response since is consistent with that. There are so many issues here; racism, morals, ethics, culture, legal tell me when to stop

 

[Nathan Barley]

I guess if he gives Fages a week it gives him time to get ahead of the story

 

[Nunez]

I have no prob with Jackson giving Fages 24 hrs to respond - at least he extended the courtesy, some don’t. The story was always going to run this week for obvious reasons. It is plausible that Fagan did not respond for various reasons. But one possibility being that he thought it was bullshit and his response since is consistent with that. There are so many issues here; racism, morals, ethics, culture, legal tell me when to stop

Counterpoint: choosing to give Fagan 24 hours notice on the day/s that he is essentially delisting players and in 44+ meetings is setting him up to fail.

Not saying that was a deliberate tactic, but ultimately you can see how in this case it was not sufficient time for a response.

 

[mighty_lions]

sonja hood publicly backed Clarkson today, we should be doing the same

 

[Hollow Knight]

sonja hood publicly backed Clarkson today, we should be doing the same

I don’t think we have anything to gain by backing Clarkson.

 

[mighty_lions]

I don’t think we have anything to gain by backing Clarkson.

clearly I meant our coach but anyway...

 

[rwan566]

I have no prob with Jackson giving Fages 24 hrs to respond - at least he extended the courtesy, some don’t. The story was always going to run this week for obvious reasons. It is plausible that Fagan did not respond for various reasons. But one possibility being that he thought it was bullshit and his response since is consistent with that. There are so many issues here; racism, morals, ethics, culture, legal tell me when to stop

I am an insurance lawyer. Fagan would be covered under liability insurance for instances like these. Under the insurance terms her would not be allowed to respond for prejudice purposes.

He would need to first notify the club and then his insurers, who would then engage lawyers. No way you can do that in 24 hrs

 

[BangyBangy]

Counterpoint: choosing to give Fagan 24 hours notice on the day/s that he is essentially delisting players and in 44+ meetings is setting him up to fail.

Not saying that was a deliberate tactic, but ultimately you can see how in this case it was not sufficient time for a response.

I reckon the timing was more around getting the story out in grand final week rather than trying to catch Fagan on the hop anymore than only giving 24hours to respond to such damning claims.

I'm like RoyBoy, no problem with only giving 24hrs, it's your paper / news service, do what you want, but don't pretend that you've then presented an fair & even story.

A lot of posters here seem to put the ABC on a pillar above the other news services. Might be publicly funded but they're still biased. If you don't think they are then they are probably just biased the same way you are.

 

[Nunez]

I reckon the timing was more around getting the story out in grand final week rather than trying to catch Fagan on the hop anymore than only giving 24hours to respond to such damning claims.

I'm like RoyBoy, no problem with only giving 24hrs, it's your paper / news service, do what you want, but don't pretend that you've then presented an fair & even story.

A lot of posters here seem to put the ABC on a pillar above the other news services. Might be publicly funded but they're still biased. If you don't think they are then they are probably just biased the same way you are.

Yeah I doubt it was intentional, just unfortunate timing if you're Chris Fagan.

I trust the journalist himself more than the ABC. He has a good track record. There's enough evidence in his career to suggest he wouldn't report this unless it was genuine and had legs.

 

[martinson]

Yeah I doubt it was intentional, just unfortunate timing if you're Chris Fagan.

I trust the journalist himself more than the ABC. He has a good track record. There's enough evidence in his career to suggest he wouldn't report this unless it was genuine and had legs.

Personally I think he's gotten in over his head.

You need time for those adversely affected by this report for them to brief their lawyers/clubs and get the right advice as to how to proceed.

I'd say within 2 weeks we're going to see alternative scenarios leaking out.

 

[western royboy]

Personally I think he's gotten in over his head.

You need time for those adversely affected by this report for them to brief their lawyers/clubs and get the right advice as to how to proceed.

I'd say within 2 weeks we're going to see alternative scenarios leaking out.

I think it might be a bit longer…the AFL are walking the tightrope here…balance will be important but timing will be everything

 

[Nunez]

Personally I think he's gotten in over his head.

You need time for those adversely affected by this report for them to brief their lawyers/clubs and get the right advice as to how to proceed.

I'd say within 2 weeks we're going to see alternative scenarios leaking out.

Of course we are. Hypothetically, let's say Fagan and Clarkson are guilty. They will never come out and say "they're right, we're guilty", especially if there is lack of hard evidence. The guilty will get their ducks in a row and put out an alternative series of events that make them look innocent, or cast enough doubt on the guilty parties.

Based on the above, the journalist did the right thing releasing the victims side of things first, especially if they are factual and easily manipulated by heresay the media that sides with Clarkson etc.

 

[martinson]

I think it might be a bit longer…the AFL are walking the tightrope here…balance will be important but timing will be everything

Now that the GF is over this will be the F/T obsession.

The AFL know they can't possibly offend indigenous advocates nor the raft of politicians that are just itching to get their heads into this story if it does actually have legs. So in my view they will proceed slowly with all caution.

The advice to the accused will be sit tight and let the inquiry play out.

Somehow I don't see it playing to the script with political journos with no attachment to footy now assigned to the story. They'll find things out.

 

[mighty_lions]

Of course we are. Hypothetically, let's say Fagan and Clarkson are guilty. They will never come out and say "they're right, we're guilty", especially if there is lack of hard evidence. The guilty will get their ducks in a row and put out an alternative series of events that make them look innocent, or cast enough doubt on the guilty parties.

Based on the above, the journalist did the right thing releasing the victims side of things first, especially if they are factual and easily manipulated by heresay the media that sides with Clarkson etc.

and conversely if they are innocent their reputation and potential lively hoods have been ruined, my opinion is the journalist shouldn't run the story, there has been no investigation, its just 1 side of a story that has ruined their reputation

 

[Sherrinator]

Why do the AFL need to fix us?? We aren't broken.

It’s our own fault we don’t have a coach in waiting

 

[Mighty Lions]

From what I understand, Jackson's attempts to contact Fagan with 24hrs notice via email (and left a voicemail message offering to extend the deadline) is an industry standard time frame for such an article.

Funnily enough - and I might have missed something here - reading through Clarkson's and Fagan statements again, neither of them have denied receiving the contact for interview from the ABC prior to the article being published, only referencing the Hawthorn Commissioned External Review.

Jackson is no different to any other journo. I don't get why you want to defend any of them regardless of him being at ABC or XWZ. They all want to be relevant and make theirselves famous regardless of what damage they do to anyone else or their families.

 

[Requiem]

Jackson is no different to any other journo. I don't get why you want to defend any of them regardless of him being at ABC or XWZ. They all want to be relevant and make theirselves famous regardless of what damage they do to anyone else or their families.

So there are no news sources you trust? Is all reporting is equally false?

I think that is an absurd notion.

 

[_Gin]

Of course we are. Hypothetically, let's say Fagan and Clarkson are guilty. They will never come out and say "they're right, we're guilty", especially if there is lack of hard evidence. The guilty will get their ducks in a row and put out an alternative series of events that make them look innocent, or cast enough doubt on the guilty parties.

Based on the above, the journalist did the right thing releasing the victims side of things first, especially if they are factual and easily manipulated by heresay the media that sides with Clarkson etc.

Based on what I've seen from Fagan he will honestly engage with the inquiry.

If he has been culturally insensitive at any time I expect he will own up to it and apologise.

If he was responsible for overseeing someone else who is guilty, I expect he will apologize for not knowing and preventing it.

I'm not forming my opinion on what's happened until he's been given the chance to do the above.

 

[Sherrinator]

So there are no news sources you trust? Is all reporting is equally false?

I think that is an absurd notion.

I think he is talking regarding agendas. ABC is as left leaning as Sky is right.

 

[Mighty Lions]

So there are no news sources you trust? Is all reporting is equally false?

I think that is an absurd notion.

Absurd but real mate. You can stick your head in the sand & selectively believe what you want to but they are all scum. Make them accountable for what they say/report and then we might see some form of truth finally come back into our news & our lives. Right now it's a circus.

 

[Requiem]

I think he is talking regarding agendas. ABC is as left leaning as Sky is right.

I somehow don't think this is the case...

Absurd but real mate. You can stick your head in the sand & selectively believe what you want to but they are all scum. Make them accountable for what they say/report and then we might see some form of truth finally come back into our news & our lives. Right now it's a circus.

This is a demonstrably ignorant take.

 

[Mighty Lions]

I somehow don't think this is the case...


This is a demonstrably ignorant take.

ABC mate...ABC. Ignorance is in the eye of the beholder. I'm tired of these pen pushers having all the power but telling us crap.

 

[mighty_lions]

I somehow don't think this is the case...


This is a demonstrably ignorant take.

journalists are the most unaccountable professions until they get sued, take a minor issue buddy Franklin, Michael Atkinson channel 9 reported he had told Sydney he was leaving and had told people he was coming to Brisbane, it was absolute made up bullshit, there's no repercussions for it at all, oh well must of got that one wrong here's my next story

 

[BangyBangy]

ABC mate...ABC. Ignorance is in the eye of the beholder. I'm tired of these pen pushers having all the power but telling us crap.

journalists are the most unaccountable professions until they get sued, take a minor issue buddy Franklin, Michael Atkinson channel 9 reported he had told Sydney he was leaving and had told people he was coming to Brisbane, it was absolute made up bullshit, there's no repercussions for it at all, oh well must of got that one wrong here's my next story

Has anyone seen Mighty Lions and mighty_lions in the same room at the same time?...

Edit: One of you could've been more creative with your burner account name

 

[mighty_lions]

Has anyone seen Mighty Lions and mighty_lions in the same room at the same time?...

haha