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.

 

[lioninthesand]

They jumped straight in. It was not good.

But now that he's stood aside and there's a potentially lengthy inquiry underway it's put the club into a situation where it has to make a choice as to how we handle this from a player/season preparation perspective.

Went and re-read the first 3-4 pages of this thread. I didn’t see anyone jump straight in and say he was guilty.

Nathan Barley was strong on his comments.

Some people said it was tough reading and IF it’s true he will find it hard to hold his position as head coach.

I saw concerns about the allegations and overall optics. Which is completely reasonable.

I saw proably 40-50% of posts call for facts, support Fagan, say they found it hard to believe etc.

This strong position you are taking that there was a torch bearing, irrational mob on here eager to take Fagan down is untrue.

The arguments have been about process, validity of claims and whether or not the alleged victims are credible, not that Fagan is 100% guilty.

What I think you are feeling is, ‘not enough people jumped into Fagan support/defense mode’ - which given the allegations is just as dangerous and assuming he is guilty.

 

[mattsmob]

Went and re-read the first 3-4 pages of this thread. I didn’t see anyone jump straight in and say he was guilty.

Nathan Barley was strong on his comments.

Some people said it was tough reading and IF it’s true he will find it hard to hold his position as head coach.

I saw concerns about the alleged allegations and overall optics. Which is completely reasonable.

I saw proably 40-50% of posts call for facts, support Fagan, say they found it hard to believe etc.

This strong position you are taking that there was a torch bearing, irrational mob on here eager to take Fagan down is untrue.

The arguments have been about process, validity of claims and whether or not the alleged victims are credible, not that Fagan is 100% guilty.

What I think you are feeling is, ‘not enough people jumped into Fagan support/defense mode’ - which given the allegations is just as dangerous and assuming he is guilty.

100%, most things I read on here were about how horrible the allegations were, not people suggesting they were true or false. I didn’t see any personal attacks or defences of any of the parties involved. There’s really not much anyone can say or do without more information being provided.

 

[Maboo]

Went and re-read the first 3-4 pages of this thread. I didn’t see anyone jump straight in and say he was guilty.

Nathan Barley was strong on his comments.

Some people said it was tough reading and IF it’s true he will find it hard to hold his position as head coach.

I saw concerns about the alleged allegations and overall optics. Which is completely reasonable.

I saw proably 40-50% of posts call for facts, support Fagan, say they found it hard to believe etc.

This strong position you are taking that there was a torch bearing, irrational mob on here eager to take Fagan down is untrue.

The arguments have been about process, validity of claims and whether or not the alleged victims are credible, not that Fagan is 100% guilty.

What I think you are feeling is, ‘not enough people jumped into Fagan support/defense mode’ - which given the allegations is just as dangerous and assuming he is guilty.

I think it was my post that caused this Segway and there was no insinuations about anyone being part of an irrational mob,
just that there didn’t seem to be any real support from a lot of people. As for the bolded, really, as we sit here today he is innocent and that is the way it stays until proven otherwise.

 

[PertRoosOsborne]

Well having read this for what seems forever - talk about dog eat dog. ….my gosh!

Agreed, it’s like the Collingwood board where they regularly turn on each other.

There is so much emotion circulating around the unknown

 

[Sausages]

Apologies, but it’s not strange because in order to have the players speak honestly they were told that they their names would not be used.

They’ve been “de-identified” in the report as a consequence.

No, I get that aspect.

What I find difficult to accept, is that in the day/s since the AFL received the report, which could have been up to a week ago, they haven't been allowed to determine the names of the people. Clearly that information is being withheld by the authors of the report and the journo.

I'm sorry, but I find that unconscionable at best.

I'm not suggesting those names be made public NOW, but the AFL should have the opportunity, without needing to appoint special counsel, to confirm the identities of the persons making the allegations, given the gravity of same.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

No, I get that aspect.

What I find difficult to accept, is that in the day/s since the AFL received the report, which could have been up to a week ago, they haven't been allowed to determine the names of the people. Clearly that information is being withheld by the authors of the report and the journo.

I'm sorry, but I find that unconscionable at best.

I'm not suggesting those names be made public NOW, but the AFL should have the opportunity, without needing to appoint special counsel, to confirm the identities of the persons making the allegations, given the gravity of same.

Why, so they can then lean on those making the allegations?
The AFL would love to be able to control the story.

No, the very right thing to do is for the AFL to form an panel of independent people to investigate further and get to the bottom of this.

 

[Sausages]

Why, so they can then lean on those making the allegations?
The AFL would love to be able to control the story.

No, the very right thing to do is for the AFL to form an panel of independent people to investigate further and get to the bottom of this.

What stops the independant panel doing likewise?

 

[Section 5]

With the enquiry to go until November/December someone will have to oversee the pre christmas training sessions
These sessions are usually for 1st to 4th year players. But some older guys often attend
Then the full squad training usually resumes early January.
So, thats only 14 weeks away

Lawyers are now involved with one party, so, that leads me to assume other parties will lawyer up also
The AFL needs to protect there brand so who know what they will do.

For the life of me i can not see this being sorted out for 6 months to possibly years

I have mentioned before the Lions are a business first. Eventually they will protect the business over anything else
The story is also overseas not just Australia
Our sponsors, our bank, the 3 tiers of government that funded Springfield to the tune of $50-$70 million
All these investors will not like what is happening

Because of time frames i just can not see any way forward that does not involve Fagan or Clarkson leaving their respective clubs

The question is will Fagan resign stating it is in the best interest of the club. Also declaring i will fight the alligations to clear my name
Or will the club be forced at some stage to pressure him to resign or sack him if he is not willing to resign.
Pressure will come from different parties at some stage for this to happen

These decisions will be made not because of Fagan or Clarksons innocence or guilt but on protecting the business

Just about everyone likes Fagan including me.
He has done his job well and got us regularly into the top half of the ladder

 

[Scubaveg]

In woolies just now, chatting to a very senior player. **** said to him he knows nothing of it, not involved in any way. No chance of affecting Dunkley or Ashcroft.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Required]

All the talk here is pretty negative in one way or another. Id prefer to see people look to positive outcomes that may help all parties, and in particular Indigenous kids be able to follow their dream, and for clubs to take a chance on them.

The current situation, In trying to do the right thing by these players, it may have the opposite effect with clubs now more hesitant to engage Indigenous kids going forward. Not the high draft picks, but the 50/50 ones? Im going to 'assume' that may end up being the case as businesses always lean towards less risk, be it stated or not. In which case we need to ensure that this doesnt happen and put something in place to prevent it.

I dont know about others, but id be happy for the AFL to allow clubs to add 2 spots in their rookie list for Indigenous kids in the future? I know this is a slippery slope in giving one group an 'advantage' over the many other cultures in Australia that play AFL. But Indigenous kids historically have been a part of the game, and i think what is currently transpiring shows we havent done our best to support them. This in some way may help clubs to give more of these kids an opportunity?

My 2c?

 

[RoyBoy17]

This has the potential to backfire on the claimants and journo. And I think it will big time. The only thing that will save them from the people embroiled taking action (Fagan anyway) is their personal issues.

It’s sad it has got to the point of people having to stand down as opposed to being investigated properly first behind closed doors.

Journalist should never have published the article let alone the names. Just like he didn’t with those aggrieved. Absolute hypocrite.

 

[FLVanLandingham]

haha I can imagine just trying to get some milk and a nice healthy apple and getting asked about your potentially racist coach on a friday morning

 

[Maboo]

Why, so they can then lean on those making the allegations?
The AFL would love to be able to control the story.

No, the very right thing to do is for the AFL to form an panel of independent people to investigate further and get to the bottom of this.

Yeah right, but it is ok to trash reputations based on allegations, I supposed that’s fair based on how the media and society as a whole likes to punish and cancel.

 

[Scubaveg]

haha I can imagine just trying to get some milk and a nice healthy apple and getting asked about your potentially racist coach on a friday morning

Nothing like that at all. See him and chat most weeks and I didn’t raise it.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[BangyBangy]

In woolies just now, chatting to a very senior player. **** said to him he knows nothing of it, not involved in any way. No chance of affecting Dunkley or Ashcroft.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Selfie with the player, or it never happened

 

[carnthemlions]

No, I get that aspect.

What I find difficult to accept, is that in the day/s since the AFL received the report, which could have been up to a week ago, they haven't been allowed to determine the names of the people. Clearly that information is being withheld by the authors of the report and the journo.

I'm sorry, but I find that unconscionable at best.

I'm not suggesting those names be made public NOW, but the AFL should have the opportunity, without needing to appoint special counsel, to confirm the identities of the persons making the allegations, given the gravity of same.

What do you want to happen to those people? I see two possible options here- you're awfully naive, or you want them to be held to account (i.e. subject to a media circus, legal action, threats from racists and deranged fans). If they wish to remain anonymous, that must be respected.

 

[Sanchez365]

Selfie with the player, or it never happened

Personally I want a signed watermelon.

 

[carnthemlions]

Yeah right, but it is ok to trash reputations based on allegations, I supposed that’s fair based on how the media and society as a whole likes to punish and cancel.

What do the power dynamics in this scenario look like to you? Are Clarkson, Fagan and co in the same situation as these former players?

 

[carnthemlions]

This has the potential to backfire on the claimants and journo. And I think it will big time. The only thing that will save them from the people embroiled taking action (Fagan anyway) is their personal issues.

It’s sad it has got to the point of people having to stand down as opposed to being investigated properly first behind closed doors.

Journalist should never have published the article let alone the names. Just like he didn’t with those aggrieved. Absolute hypocrite.

Do you think the afl would've investigated this properly, or binned the report and had a few people sign non-disclosure agreements? You must've been born yesterday.

 

[Lions time]

This has the potential to backfire on the claimants and journo. And I think it will big time. The only thing that will save them from the people embroiled taking action (Fagan anyway) is their personal issues.

It’s sad it has got to the point of people having to stand down as opposed to being investigated properly first behind closed doors.

Journalist should never have published the article let alone the names. Just like he didn’t with those aggrieved. Absolute hypocrite.

The outcome might be a set back for what they are actually fighting for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lions time]

What do you want to happen to those people? I see two possible options here- you're awfully naive, or you want them to be held to account (i.e. subject to a media circus, legal action, threats from racists and deranged fans). If they wish to remain anonymous, that must be respected.

Just like the accused …. Hang on a minute.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[carnthemlions]

Just like the accused …. Hang on a minute.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The key word here is accused, although the emerging consensus here appears to be that they're the real victims.

 

[Sausages]

What do you want to happen to those people? I see two possible options here- you're awfully naive, or you want them to be held to account (i.e. subject to a media circus, legal action, threats from racists and deranged fans). If they wish to remain anonymous, that must be respected.

How do we know they wish to remain anonymous? The individuals in question could well be happy to come forward publicly, but are being advised not to, potentially for the reasons you put forward and/or to solidify their position.

This is the issue - there is such limited visibility surrounding the whole saga.

If there's a media circus, a racist Q-Anon pile on, I'm sympathetic. But I'm not responsible for what other people do. And my position is that were that to occur, it would only strengthen their case anyway.

You'd take short odds on the possibility for a venomous email or two having been dropped on the Lions inbox, or North's inbox, if not directly to Fagan or Clarkson. Certainly there is acrimony and vitriol currently largely held in abeyance, but primed to be unleashed should there not be a satisfactory explanation forthcoming.

But if part of that explanation cannot be delivered to the public due to privacy concerns, some people will have been crucified potentially unjustly.

And for some reason, wide avenues of people are ok with that, because they fear on behalf of the victims.

My fear is for neither the victims nor the accused, rather it is for the capacity of facts to be buried behind closed doors.

For those old enough to remember, recall the Fitzgerald Inquiry. Over 2 years, 238 public hearings were held. Imagine the difference in the outcomes had the entirety of that process been held in similar, shadowy circumstances as this investigation.Imagine had those ABC reporters not handed over the fulsomeness of their investigation, preferring instead to "protect the anonymity" of informers and information.

In supporting anonymity, you risk undermining the very values you are trying to protect.

 

[Gadzorks]

All the talk here is pretty negative in one way or another. Id prefer to see people look to positive outcomes that may help all parties, and in particular Indigenous kids be able to follow their dream, and for clubs to take a chance on them.

The current situation, In trying to do the right thing by these players, it may have the opposite effect with clubs now more hesitant to engage Indigenous kids going forward. Not the high draft picks, but the 50/50 ones? Im going to 'assume' that may end up being the case as businesses always lean towards less risk, be it stated or not. In which case we need to ensure that this doesnt happen and put something in place to prevent it.

I dont know about others, but id be happy for the AFL to allow clubs to add 2 spots in their rookie list for Indigenous kids in the future? I know this is a slippery slope in giving one group an 'advantage' over the many other cultures in Australia that play AFL. But Indigenous kids historically have been a part of the game, and i think what is currently transpiring shows we havent done our best to support them. This in some way may help clubs to give more of these kids an opportunity?

My 2c?

I stayed away for a day. This post bought me back.

Love the idea and this is my 2c to add to yours.

Use the mega dollar media deal to create the additional two list spots per team and make the spots valid for two years not one. Can call it a rookie C category or whatever.

Means from year two of the program there are four kids in these positions. While they won't all be best mates it's a group that hopefully can work together.

Apply the standard rookie rules re moving onto the main list.

Each club now has a indigenous liaison person so their welfare will be monitored and supported.

Even if these players don't make it into the main list they have learnt how it works and that knowledge goes back to their families and communities.

So the communities of both the clubs and the players are learning about each other.

That's gotta be a good thing right?

 

[Kernel Kurtz]

Don't think people are assuming he's guilty but the chances of him coming out completely clean would seem very seem so from the clubs point of view we have to look at what's best for the club

Reading some pages in this thread proves otherwise.
Posters have been questioned or attacked due to saying things like let's wait and see what comes from further investigation, let's hear both sides .
That would suggest some are pretty quick to back the accusers in.
How this thread festered before the full story has been revealed is quite alarming and just shows there are many in society clearly not confident on the integrity of the findings or systems that judge on these matters.
There was a wall built in this thread , if you didn't side with the accusers ,people where outraged.
I stand where I always have stood and that is wait until the matter has been investigated properly, otherwise how do you make a judgement.

Went and re-read the first 3-4 pages of this thread. I didn’t see anyone jump straight in and say he was guilty.

Nathan Barley was strong on his comments.

Some people said it was tough reading and IF it’s true he will find it hard to hold his position as head coach.

I saw concerns about the allegations and overall optics. Which is completely reasonable.

I saw proably 40-50% of posts call for facts, support Fagan, say they found it hard to believe etc.

This strong position you are taking that there was a torch bearing, irrational mob on here eager to take Fagan down is untrue.

The arguments have been about process, validity of claims and whether or not the alleged victims are credible, not that Fagan is 100% guilty.

What I think you are feeling is, ‘not enough people jumped into Fagan support/defense mode’ - which given the allegations is just as dangerous and assuming he is guilty.

See my post above, I was going to post earlier today.
Pretty much how I read the room with some posters.