News Hawthorn Racism Review - No player name speculation - opposition posters tread very carefully

[Strapping Young Lad]

Wrong. Hawks did what they had to do by the rules of the AFL.

Correct. For reference below, once the HFC had the report outlining serious allegations they were duty bound by the AFL’s protocol to hand over the report to the AFL integrity unit.

I will pin this post, as it seems to be a constant query.

 

[Crankyhawk]

I could understand losing draft picks, if there was systemic cheating going on. Ie salary cap, doping regime, things that give an unfair advantage over the rest of the comp.

This is more of a reflection of a poor toxic cultural environment at the time which is more of a governance issue. The more fitting punishment would be not take away draft picks, but a huge fine, and a certain percentage of our soft cap has to be spent on cultural awareness programs.

I can however see why essenscum supporters would be seeking draft penalties as they believe they only lost draft picks for poor governance as well (sure it was poor governance around at the time an alleged doping program subsequently found to be a doping program)

 

[HairyO]

I can however see why essenscum supporters would be seeking draft penalties as they believe they only lost draft picks for poor governance as well (sure it was poor governance around at the time an alleged doping program subsequently found to be a doping program)

Essendon cheated and got the #1 draft pick out of it.

Then Dodoro wasted it of course.

What financial offer did Hawthorn make which the former players rejected ?

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

I could understand losing draft picks, if there was systemic cheating going on. Ie salary cap, doping regime, things that give an unfair advantage over the rest of the comp.

This is more of a reflection of a poor toxic cultural environment at the time which is more of a governance issue. The more fitting punishment would be not take away draft picks, but a huge fine, and a certain percentage of our soft cap has to be spent on cultural awareness programs.

I think it’s far more likely that the club receive financial penalties, but I also can see why that may not happen as strongly as opposition fans may hope, due to how this situation occurred at a time when plenty of clubs and coaches would have quite possibly deemed it to be best practice(obviously relating not the allegations surrounding abortion) taking kids away from families and telling them to remove themselves from outside influences.

I also think it serves the AFL no favors to wack Hawthorn when the players and lawyers have directly said that they don’t want that, as they instead want the AFL to own their own shortcomings and to have a widespread review of ALL clubs.
Penalising Hawthorn will not encourage other clubs to come forward and own their mistakes, it will do the opposite.

This might seem like a pro-Hawthorn take, but I’ve read fans of other clubs state the exact same thing on the main board.

 

[fairdinks]

The AFL will need to be very careful about what precedent they are set in penalising Hawthorn. If the outcome of the investigation is that we had been poor & insensitive in handling our indigenous player's during the period in focus, it will be difficult to come down too hard. Categoric proof of deliberate and malicious wrongdoing will be hard to find.

There will be a competition wide investigation resulting from this and I suspect most clubs are similarly at risk of adverse findings. What then?

Of course, I am naively assuming the Hawks issue is mostly lack of awareness and some interference/overstepping into private lives (with best intentions in regard to football outcomes). Please don't assume I am underplaying the seriousness of the matter nor impacts on the players/families affected. I am not questioning the players complaints at all nor the gravity. I am not, but I fail to see how this is a one club only problem.

All clubs have the same objective. That is to get the best out of their players and to win flags. Overstepping in that pursuit would be common....see salary cap rorts (Carlton), PED programs' (Essendon), tanking games (Melbourne), draft manipulation (Adelaide Tippet) etc

 

[Off The Couch]

Do the report, whack the hawks with a fine, mark it done and lift the carpet and sweep it under.

This is exactly what the families are referring to when they refused to sit at the table with the AFL and it’s “terms of reference”.

It’s not enough

Systemic change needs to take place and that starts at the top and that’s not what the AFL wanted to hear.

 

[tommyk72]

Why would we receive penalties if collingwood never did following their review?

 

[Mississippi]

Talk about sweeping under the carpet, I hope the various enquires or mediations or WorkSafe reports (just one of them) provide us with a full and proper explanation of the scandalous (in the literal sense of the word) situation that related to the Hawthorn indigenous family emailing then president Andrew Newbold outlining their issues regarding them being the subject of racist conduct and mistreatment by the club.

That family emailed a detailed and empassioned 2 or 3 page account of their concerns and the treatment they had received. That email was apparently sent to Newbold’s personal email address at the club. A heartfelt appeal like that (call it a cry for help) should trigger lights flashing and alarms ringing not just with the HFC president but at board level and also involving the CEO.

What apparently happened then was a sympathetic reply from Andrew Newbold via his club email address and further exchanges of emails between Newbold and the family. That email dialogue apparently came to nothing when Newbold said something to the effect that the matter is best dealt with by someone else with more expertise.

But when this incident was raised by the Hawthorn indigenous family in the context of the current racism review, Newbold has said he never saw the emails, had absolutely no knowledge of the initial appeal from the family (sent to his email address, and replied to from his email address).

This is a really distressing situation and all HFC members, as well as the family of course, should expect a full account of how this situation could possibly happen.

This scandal absolutely and definitely must not be side-stepped or swept under carpet.

 

[Klem]

Wise men giving kids sage advice. When did this become a crime.
Seriously I weep for humanity.

 

[The hands of stone]

A week ago I had the pleasure of meeting a first nations community leader at a work app.
This guy is pretty well known , which I found out after ( thanks Dr Google ) .
But I got to spend about half an hour with him and his passion for his people was absolute brilliant .
He was good enough to tell his story to me and did it in such a nice way , like I say it was my pleasure to get that time with him .

Anyway footy came up , he has 3 nephews in the AFL at different clubs.
I sheepishly probably for the first time ever mentioned I was a Hawthorn supporter when asked.

He told me it was a sad situation but very much an AFL , comptition and society issue .
He told me the complainent and also community concerns are at the system ( AFL) in general and not so much the club.
He also assured me his recent dealings ( last 18-24 months) with HFC had been excellent , but required work as all do.

I did feel better hearing him but there is a lot of work to do to mend things that have occurred over a long period of time .

 

[corporal]

The untold story in all of this are the Hawthorn first nation players who played under Clarkson & Fagan and still respect and support them. It's totally understandable that they are staying out of it and their opinions or truth don't automatically absolve any accusations however there are clearly many aspects to this complex issue.

 

[brad sue well]

The untold story in all of this are the Hawthorn first nation players who played under Clarkson & Fagan and still respect and support them. It's totally understandable that they are staying out of it and their opinions or truth don't automatically absolve any accusations however there are clearly many aspects to this complex issue.

Where these players the 'better' ones? I don't know. I guess not necessarily with Cyril being upset with the club that I assume is not all down to Kennett.

Everyone will have their own experience as you say.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

I sheepishly probably for the first time ever mentioned I was a Hawthorn supporter when asked.

Never, ever be afraid to declare your passion for the Hawthorn Football Club, under any circumstances. I'm only too pleased to tell people I'm a Hawk and wear a club cap often.

 

[Simon Crawshay]

A week ago I had the pleasure of meeting a first nations community leader at a work app.
This guy is pretty well known , which I found out after ( thanks Dr Google ) .
But I got to spend about half an hour with him and his passion for his people was absolute brilliant .
He was good enough to tell his story to me and did it in such a nice way , like I say it was my pleasure to get that time with him .

Anyway footy came up , he has 3 nephews in the AFL at different clubs.
I sheepishly probably for the first time ever mentioned I was a Hawthorn supporter when asked.

He told me it was a sad situation but very much an AFL , comptition and society issue .
He told me the complainent and also community concerns are at the system ( AFL) in general and not so much the club.
He also assured me his recent dealings ( last 18-24 months) with HFC had been excellent , but required work as all do.

I did feel better hearing him but there is a lot of work to do to mend things that have occurred over a long period of time .

Its getting pretty obvious that now that the accusations are turning away from being Hawthorn based and towards more general AFL wide / community / societal concerns (i.e. getting more and more broad, wide sweeping and non specific).

I am seeing this in all the reporting and how even (some/all?) of the indigenous families concerned want it to be treated (i.e. wanting a AFL wide review not just Hawthorn).

Which to my mind makes the initial attacks on Clarkoson, Fafan and Burt by the ABC even more galling and legally dubious.

If there was solid evidence to back up some of those sensationalist claims (the abortion one in particular) I am certain we would have heard about it by now and Caro, ABC journalists, etc would be doubling down big time. Th ABC chose the tabloid approach (seems to be how they operate these days when they want to push an agenda that they believe in).

In fact I think the opposite has happened and they have done their own digging, found little evidence to back up some of those headline grabbing claims (maybe even found evidence to dispute them) and are back peddling at a rate of knots in the other direction towards the more general "broader AFL / society issue" stream. This is all conjecture on my part of course but it seems to fit.

All of this is telling me that Clarkson, Fagan and Burt are going to have very, very, very solid cases for defamation. You cant make accusations against indivuals like the ABC did and not back it up with evidence. Freedom of the press is a good thing but its not a blank cheque to make allegations without proof.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

The untold story in all of this are the Hawthorn first nation players who played under Clarkson & Fagan and still respect and support them. It's totally understandable that they are staying out of it and their opinions or truth don't automatically absolve any accusations however there are clearly many aspects to this complex issue.

Yes, I'm just hoping that the matter gets resolved and any adjustments to be made are swift and positive. My main hope is, after it is all said and done, we as members are actually told what in hell has been going on. There's so much speculation, it's impossible to know what to believe.

I know we are talking about the greatest indigenous Hawk of all time and not a fringe player, but when Buddy first came to the club, he was nurtured like you wouldn't believe. People may recall Clarko being criticized for not playing him early on, but he was concerned about Buddy's welfare and didn't want to risk him.

Another thing I know is Silk Burgoyne specifically chose the Hawks because of his relationship with Clarko when they were both at Port Adelaide. Somehow, I just doubt if there are any deep-seated racism issues with Clarko.

Seems to me there's a middle ground here somewhere, perhaps even some misunderstandings. Let's hope it gets worked out soon.

 

[HedgeFund]

Its getting pretty obvious that now that the accusations are turning away from being Hawthorn based and towards more general AFL wide / community / societal concerns (i.e. getting more and more broad, wide sweeping and non specific).

I am seeing this in all the reporting and how even (some/all?) of the indigenous families concerned want it to be treated (i.e. wanting a AFL wide review not just Hawthorn).

Which to my mind makes the initial attacks on Clarkoson, Fafan and Burt by the ABC even more galling and legally dubious.

If there was solid evidence to back up some of those sensationalist claims (the abortion one in particular) I am certain we would have heard about it by now and Caro, ABC journalists, etc would be doubling down big time. Th ABC chose the tabloid approach (seems to be how they operate these days when they want to push an agenda that they believe in).

In fact I think the opposite has happened and they have done their own digging, found little evidence to back up some of those headline grabbing claims (maybe even found evidence to dispute them) and are back peddling at a rate of knots in the other direction towards the more general "broader AFL / society issue" stream. This is all conjecture on my part of course but it seems to fit.

All of this is telling me that Clarkson, Fagan and Burt are going to have very, very, very solid cases for defamation. You cant make accusations against indivuals like the ABC did and not back it up with evidence. Freedom of the press is a good thing but its not a blank cheque to make allegations without proof.

You keep saying this with no legal experience or actual insight into the investigation process which is currently being implemented.

The fact it’s not being reported on is likely a product of:

1. the main AFL scribes being on holidays;
2. Cultural sensitivity on the issue being properly appreciated by the media (for a change); and
3. the understanding that the process needs to be seen throughout without a blow by blow commentary from the (skeleton) football media.

If the ABC thought for a moment they were exposed to any potential defamation litigation (which would be the focus of their very experienced and respected lawyers) there would have been a retraction by now.

 

[Simon Crawshay]

You keep saying this with no legal experience or actual insight into the investigation process which is currently being implemented.

The fact it’s not being reported on is likely a product of:

1. the main AFL scribes being on holidays;
2. Cultural sensitivity on the issue being properly appreciated by the media (for a change); and
3. the understanding that the process needs to be seen throughout without a blow by blow commentary from the (skeleton) football media.

If the ABC thought for a moment they were exposed to any potential defamation litigation (which would be the focus of their very experienced and respected lawyers) there would have been a retraction by now.

True I am not a lawyer.

But I would have thought that given the seriousness of the allegations made against the three individuals in question (Clarkson, Fagan and Burt) the people making the allegations (familes in question) and probably more importantly the news channel that aired the allegations (the ABC) will need to back them up with some form of evidence eventually.

I know we have been through this already and you have pointed out the ABC used the term "allegedly" during their reporting.

But if I had a greivance against a former employer and made up some story about my former boss being a puppy murderer (it's the best example I can think of) and the ABC went with this I doubt them using the term allegedly would save them if my boss took them to court for libel.

Either the three men in question did what the ABC accused them off or they didn't. If they did then they should get the book thrown at them but if they didn't do those specific actions (separate families, make a player's partner get an abortion) then they have been slandered 100% and should go their absolute hardest in the courts.

Clarko I particular I think is absolutey fuming about what has happened and given his personality I doubt he will let this one through to the keeper and be satisfied with being labelled a racist by the media without his retribution.

 

[SSSSSS]

Wise men giving kids sage advice. When did this become a crime.
Seriously I weep for humanity.

We are at least a few steps separated from asking someone to terminate a child and sage advice.

 

[Mississippi]

Its getting pretty obvious that now that the accusations are turning away from being Hawthorn based and towards more general AFL wide / community / societal concerns (i.e. getting more and more broad, wide sweeping and non specific).

I am seeing this in all the reporting and how even (some/all?) of the indigenous families concerned want it to be treated (i.e. wanting a AFL wide review not just Hawthorn).

Which to my mind makes the initial attacks on Clarkoson, Fafan and Burt by the ABC even more galling and legally dubious.

If there was solid evidence to back up some of those sensationalist claims (the abortion one in particular) I am certain we would have heard about it by now and Caro, ABC journalists, etc would be doubling down big time. Th ABC chose the tabloid approach (seems to be how they operate these days when they want to push an agenda that they believe in).

In fact I think the opposite has happened and they have done their own digging, found little evidence to back up some of those headline grabbing claims (maybe even found evidence to dispute them) and are back peddling at a rate of knots in the other direction towards the more general "broader AFL / society issue" stream. This is all conjecture on my part of course but it seems to fit.

All of this is telling me that Clarkson, Fagan and Burt are going to have very, very, very solid cases for defamation. You cant make accusations against indivuals like the ABC did and not back it up with evidence. Freedom of the press is a good thing but its not a blank cheque to make allegations without proof.

What utter presumptive nonsense.
Aside from all the other conjecture, there will be no defamation claims.

 

[HedgeFund]

True I am not a lawyer.

But I would have thought that given the seriousness of the allegations made against the three individuals in question (Clarkson, Fagan and Burt) the people making the allegations (familes in question) and probably more importantly the news channel that aired the allegations (the ABC) will need to back them up with some form of evidence eventually.

I know we have been through this already and you have pointed out the ABC used the term "allegedly" during their reporting.

But if I had a greivance against a former employer and made up some story about my former boss being a puppy murderer (it's the best example I can think of) and the ABC went with this I doubt them using the term allegedly would save them if my boss took them to court for libel.

Either the three men in question did what the ABC accused them off or they didn't. If they did then they should get the book thrown at them but if they didn't do those specific actions (separate families, make a player's partner get an abortion) then they have been slandered 100% and should go their absolute hardest in the courts.

Clarko I particular I think is absolutey fuming about what has happened and given his personality I doubt he will let this one through to the keeper and be satisfied with being labelled a racist by the media without his retribution.

The ABC didn’t accuse them of anything. That’s what you keep overlooking.

 

[Simon Crawshay]

What utter presumptive nonsense.
Aside from all the other conjecture, there will be no defamation claims.

Everything about this whole sorry saga has been presumptive. Also isn't your no conjecture claim also a presumption?

Have we names of those making the accusations, or dates that these events took place or who was present when these events occured? Not to my knowledge. Just vague accusations.

This goes to my point that the seriousness of the accusations levelled at Clarkson, Fagan and Burt does not appear to be backed up with the kind of hard evidence and rigorous procedural application you would require to justify naming and shaming these men in a national media outlet like the ABC.

Can you imagine the DPP/WorkSafe taking a case like this to trial in this manner? I mean they haven't even interviewed the accused (I still can't get my head around that).

Here is something also to ponder what will be the working relationship of Clarkos and Fagan with the ABC reporters at end of game press conferences? Will those two be expected to take questions from an organisation that has tried to destroy their reputations/careers if they don't get a retraction from the ABC? I just can't see Clarko copping that.

I have said before that if these accusations are indeed true (especially the abortion one) then these guys deserve to be toast.

But if they turn out to be untrue and the worst they did was a lack of cultural awareness/sensitivity then they have every right to go after those that made the accusations in question.

I'm not going to comment on this topic anymore until we see what findings come out of the review as we need to hear from the accused as well.

 

[HedgeFund]

Everything about this whole sorry saga has been presumptive. Also isn't your no conjecture claim also a presumption?

Have we names of those making the accusations, or dates that these events took place or who was present when these events occured? Not to my knowledge. Just vague accusations.

This goes to my point that the seriousness of the accusations levelled at Clarkson, Fagan and Burt does not appear to be backed up with the kind of hard evidence and rigorous procedural application you would require to justify naming and shaming these men in a national media outlet like the ABC.

Can you imagine the DPP/WorkSafe taking a case like this to trial in this manner? I mean they haven't even interviewed the accused (I still can't get my head around that).

Here is something also to ponder what will be the working relationship of Clarkos and Fagan with the ABC reporters at end of game press conferences? Will those two be expected to take questions from an organisation that has tried to destroy their reputations/careers if they don't get a retraction from the ABC? I just can't see Clarko copping that.

I have said before that if these accusations are indeed true (especially the abortion one) then these guys deserve to be toast.

But if they turn out to be untrue and the worst they did was a lack of cultural awareness/sensitivity then they have every right to go after those that made the accusations in question.

I'm not going to comment on this topic anymore until we see what findings come out of the review as we need to hear from the accused as well.

I thought when we initially started discussing this that your viewpoint was only slight askew from objective.

Frankly given the above you really have made up your mind that a highly respected sports journalist reporting allegations made in the course of an inquiry commissioned by our club somehow has a vendetta.

That’s patently wrong. I’m not going to engage anymore. You clearly have your fixed view and can’t be convinced otherwise.

 

[Adrian Dodoro]

Its getting pretty obvious that now that the accusations are turning away from being Hawthorn based and towards more general AFL wide / community / societal concerns (i.e. getting more and more broad, wide sweeping and non specific).

I am seeing this in all the reporting and how even (some/all?) of the indigenous families concerned want it to be treated (i.e. wanting a AFL wide review not just Hawthorn).

Which to my mind makes the initial attacks on Clarkoson, Fafan and Burt by the ABC even more galling and legally dubious.

If there was solid evidence to back up some of those sensationalist claims (the abortion one in particular) I am certain we would have heard about it by now and Caro, ABC journalists, etc would be doubling down big time. Th ABC chose the tabloid approach (seems to be how they operate these days when they want to push an agenda that they believe in).

In fact I think the opposite has happened and they have done their own digging, found little evidence to back up some of those headline grabbing claims (maybe even found evidence to dispute them) and are back peddling at a rate of knots in the other direction towards the more general "broader AFL / society issue" stream. This is all conjecture on my part of course but it seems to fit.

All of this is telling me that Clarkson, Fagan and Burt are going to have very, very, very solid cases for defamation. You cant make accusations against indivuals like the ABC did and not back it up with evidence. Freedom of the press is a good thing but its not a blank cheque to make allegations without proof.

They are turning the attention to the entire AFL because they care about their people and children and want change more than reparation, not because they were hyperbolic or dishonest in their claims

It's pretty simple

 

[QuietB]

I could understand losing draft picks, if there was systemic cheating going on. Ie salary cap, doping regime, things that give an unfair advantage over the rest of the comp.

This is more of a reflection of a poor toxic cultural environment at the time which is more of a governance issue. The more fitting punishment would be not take away draft picks, but a huge fine, and a certain percentage of our soft cap has to be spent on cultural awareness programs.

There is zero chance Hawthorn lose draft picks. The media are idiots.

 

[flinchfree]

Everything about this whole sorry saga has been presumptive. Also isn't your no conjecture claim also a presumption?

Have we names of those making the accusations, or dates that these events took place or who was present when these events occured? Not to my knowledge. Just vague accusations.

This goes to my point that the seriousness of the accusations levelled at Clarkson, Fagan and Burt does not appear to be backed up with the kind of hard evidence and rigorous procedural application you would require to justify naming and shaming these men in a national media outlet like the ABC.

Can you imagine the DPP/WorkSafe taking a case like this to trial in this manner? I mean they haven't even interviewed the accused (I still can't get my head around that).

Here is something also to ponder what will be the working relationship of Clarkos and Fagan with the ABC reporters at end of game press conferences? Will those two be expected to take questions from an organisation that has tried to destroy their reputations/careers if they don't get a retraction from the ABC? I just can't see Clarko copping that.

I have said before that if these accusations are indeed true (especially the abortion one) then these guys deserve to be toast.

But if they turn out to be untrue and the worst they did was a lack of cultural awareness/sensitivity then they have every right to go after those that made the accusations in question.

I'm not going to comment on this topic anymore until we see what findings come out of the review as we need to hear from the accused as well.

Mate, you've gone super hard super often and mostly without really listening to those whose legal background at least gives some professional overview.
Perhaps you should give it a slight rest, reading your shtick on this has gotten to tedious levels.......

 

[Dewnior]

So, when is the right time to approach Silk and offer him the new full-time Indigenous liaison officer role?