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.

 

[DogDaySonny]

I do think there will be a last ditch attempt to resolve the dispute by mediation.

I believe the previous attempts have fallen over on admissions of racism. The named individuals, I believe, have denied many of the claimed events (no specifics, of course, just the general press vibe) and refused to acknowledge any of it was driven by racism. That’s why it’s in court.

And I guess that now the attempt is to get the club to admit being (or be found) racist, rather than the individuals as per the previous AFL and HRC discussions which were primarily focused on the people involved.

Given the lawyers are driving now, the claim that is filed is the one most likely to have a positive outcome for the client (which is the lawyer’s actual objective), I guess we can conclude the odds of getting a “you’re a racist” finding against Clarkson, et al, was slim. So instead they are going for a racist environment finding in which Clarkson, etc, participated unwittingly? Maybe it’s easier to get an “Oops, we had no idea” admission when there are no actual people involved in the finding, just “whoever did these bad things and didn’t mean it”. I dunno. That’s what the lawyers plot.

 

[DogDaySonny]

As I think about it, the “Oops, didn’t mean it, our bad” is probably the outcome everyone is looking for. Collingwood had similar and dropped the president and CEO in addition to creating some sort of plan (that solution seems to have worked wonders). Collingwood didn’t need to cut the organisation any deeper than that.

We, conveniently, no longer have the president or CEO around so that step is taken care of. Plus anyone named in the report isn’t at the club anymore. Maybe the club is just negotiating over how much money to pay and what sort of action plan is needed, as per Collingwood (for all the good those plans seem to do in achieving reconciliation of grievances).

Anyways, hopefully this all comes out of the courts after we play (and win) this year’s Grand Final.

 

[RoughysMullet]

Not doubt the culture in footy clubs (+ society more broadly) has been terrible over the history of our game- I’d hope things have changed for the better now…

Ultimately- I think this case will come down to Cyril + co’s version of events vs Clarkson + co’s who will deny everything. I’m not sure they’re really going to be able to prove these allegations are true- unless they have tape recordings of the conversations- how can anything really be proven?? It’s innocent until proven guilty

If they’re offered a settlement in mediation I’d be taking it with both hands but it seems like they want to go down the federal court line. I think the club would apologise but that would mean taking all financial responsibility for any damages caused by the claims which they can’t do. I don’t really know the ins and outs of the case other than what’s been reported in the media but just can’t see how they’ll have sufficient evidence to prove their claims in a court of law and win the case- guess we’ll see

 

[brad sue well]

Does anyone know how much ( if any ) Hawks have offered so far ? During mediation at HRC perhaps ?

It seems to me if they have rejected a financial offer then there is more to this.

I can’t recall the media reported figure but they mentioned the club compensating the coaches as well. I imagine that peed off the families. So, it’s more than money. From their perspective I imagine it is rewarding the people who they say caused hurt.

 

[Lickmesocks]

Does anyone know how much ( if any ) Hawks have offered so far ? During mediation at HRC perhaps ?

It seems to me if they have rejected a financial offer then there is more to this.

50k per person was reported.

 

[Kanga Commando]

50k per person was reported.

thanks

Lets hope there is mediation. I really doubt a judge's verdict will make anyone happy.

 

[brad sue well]

Agreed, TylerDurden is a respected poster, but there is stuff you are missing out on in your own country. Your knowledge shows your proximity to the industry, if you have had time with players have a think about if you were close or not. Not easy in a fleeting superficial place. These families are pleading for understanding. I learnt a lot of this as an adult, like Strapping Young Lad i am sure I did and said stupid things.

As the report says, Do Better.

I know this sounds preachy and I get peed at things said, there is a fair message here though.

 

[Mercy Seat]

I do think there will be a last ditch attempt to resolve the dispute by mediation.

It would make the most sense.

I know from talking about it first hand with a few people connected with this that the club is somewhat aligned with the coaches versions of events.

But they are former employees and ultimately at some point the greater good for HFC would be to negotiate something and avoid having it play out publicly.

The threat of the accused then suing the club is still a real possibility in that scenario however they would probably throw a bunch of money in their direction too.

 

[Lickmesocks]

It's points like that which hurt a lot of the more serious and legitimate accusations. Clearly given the name due to his shy nature, which does show a bit of the mean spirited nature of Clarkson and the work place cultural in place, but racism it's clearly not.

I am starting to wonder whether the days of coming up with nicknames at footy clubs are over. The days of nicknames in the workforce are over so perhaps footy clubs will follow.

Calling someone Humphrey Bear because they are quiet and shy probably seemed harmless enough at the time but is now coming back up as a racist comment that hurt the individual.

If you are a young person entering an AFL system and have some anxiety around your body, or your features or whatever it might be, having the coach belt out a nickname even like “shaggy” for DGB for a few laughs might also be in the past.

 

[RobHawk]

He's suing the club yeah? For money right?

I think Cyril is not the type to worry too much about money.
My annoyance is the greedy ,slimey lawyers having a field day over this case

 

[brad sue well]

I think Cyril is not the type to worry too much about money.
My annoyance is the greedy ,slimey lawyers having a field day over this case

Pro bono.

 

[brad sue well]

I am starting to wonder whether the days of coming up with nicknames at footy clubs are over. The days of nicknames in the workforce are over so perhaps footy clubs will follow.

Calling someone Humphrey Bear because they are quiet and shy probably seemed harmless enough at the time but is now coming back up as a racist comment that hurt the individual.

If you are a young person entering an AFL system and have some anxiety around your body, or your features or whatever it might be, having the coach belt out a nickname even like “shaggy” for DGB for a few laughs might also be in the past.

Cyril grows up until 15(?) with probably little understanding or lived experience of being prejudice. Lands in a white institution culture shock, wants to go home. Was there a day to day Indigenous mentor? Drafted, no day to day Indigenous mentor at that time?

He is experiencing a new culture and how he is being treated. Some makes sense, some not, he is literally 18 with a league of adulation. Recounting those things as you were learning can look a lot different as an adult.

The club you loved and were told would look after you.


JML, been through a lifetime of trauma before getting to HFC.

Nicknames… Nash’s debut announcement was of the same type of banter in the club video.

 

[brad sue well]

It would make the most sense.

I know from talking about it first hand with a few people connected with this that the club is somewhat aligned with the coaches versions of events.

But they are former employees and ultimately at some point the greater good for HFC would be to negotiate something and avoid having it play out publicly.

The threat of the accused then suing the club is still a real possibility in that scenario however they would probably throw a bunch of money in their direction too.

Was the new advisory committee brought into the conversation? If not, appears performative.

Did the club want Buddy, Gowers, Klein and Albo in a group shot this week? Call me cynical.

 

[TylerDurden]

Calling someone Humphrey Bear because they are quiet and shy probably seemed harmless enough at the time but is now coming back up as a racist comment that hurt the individual.

This is a great point. I know for a fact it was used as a joke due to Cyril being quiet. I witnessed it with my own eyes. He used to laugh along as an acceptance that he was shy.

It's now being used in a court case as a tool, with its context completely twisted.

All I witnessed, with my own eyes, was a happy footballer who got along with everyone at the club, and loved his coach.

As for those questioning my character in this thread, you know who you are. I speak from first hand observations, and would know more than anyone here about the goings on in those 4 walls at the time. Pull your heads in!

 

[RobHawk]

Pro bono.

Well that makes me feel better.
By the way your reply made me want to get out some U2 albums

 

[DogDaySonny]

Pro bono.

Not the club’s lawyers. Also, how do you know the players are being served gratis?

 

[SJT76]

thanks

Lets hope there is mediation. I really doubt a judge's verdict will make anyone happy.

There will not be further formal mediation - that was finished when the HRC gave permission to go to court. There will be settlement offers prior to court though. As was posted previously, there can be financial consequences to rejecting these if you end up doing worse than what was offered.

 

[Yardie]

I believe the previous attempts have fallen over on admissions of racism. The named individuals, I believe, have denied many of the claimed events (no specifics, of course, just the general press vibe) and refused to acknowledge any of it was driven by racism. That’s why it’s in court.

And I guess that now the attempt is to get the club to admit being (or be found) racist, rather than the individuals as per the previous AFL and HRC discussions which were primarily focused on the people involved.

Given the lawyers are driving now, the claim that is filed is the one most likely to have a positive outcome for the client (which is the lawyer’s actual objective), I guess we can conclude the odds of getting a “you’re a racist” finding against Clarkson, et al, was slim. So instead they are going for a racist environment finding in which Clarkson, etc, participated unwittingly? Maybe it’s easier to get an “Oops, we had no idea” admission when there are no actual people involved in the finding, just “whoever did these bad things and didn’t mean it”. I dunno. That’s what the lawyers plot.

Clarkson is digging in and I'm not sure it is going to play out as he would want. I think the outcome will be that HFC didn't have the necessary protections in place to protect its employees. That would bring in those named as having been implied to have carried out those actions.

 

[brad sue well]

Not the club’s lawyers. Also, how do you know the players are being served gratis?

Pretty sure it was reported and mentioned here. Happy to be corrected.

 

[DogDaySonny]

Clarkson is digging in and I'm not sure it is going to play out as he would want. I think the outcome will be that HFC didn't have the necessary protections in place to protect its employees. That would bring in those named as having been implied to have carried out those actions.

You could be right but I don’t see how you can say the club didn’t have necessary protections in place and simultaneously not find that someone was actually racist. “Racist things happened, but the people who did it weren’t racist. Additionally, the club didn’t stop these people who aren’t racist from doing racist things.” Further, I would be interested in seeing where “necessary protections” for racial minorities is defined in the legal code or precedent (I don’t really want to read the code, I’m just saying I find it hard to believe that’s actually codified).

I mean, who knows where this will end up but it has a “it just feels right” quality to it, which is hardly a good legal standard.

 

[brad sue well]

This is a great point. I know for a fact it was used as a joke due to Cyril being quiet. I witnessed it with my own eyes. He used to laugh along as an acceptance that he was shy.

It's now being used in a court case as a tool, with its context completely twisted.

All I witnessed, with my own eyes, was a happy footballer who got along with everyone at the club, and loved his coach.

As for those questioning my character in this thread, you know who you are. I speak from first hand observations, and would know more than anyone here about the goings on in those 4 walls at the time. Pull your heads in!

Earlier in this thread I am pretty sure Indigenous shyness was discussed. He was a kid, power dynamic. He is now saying, he was putting on a front. Families did love their coach, they looked up to them enormously, on record. Made plays to suit their exact skill set, their football identity. They also felt betrayed.

With respect, that is your perspective that has its place, not diminishing that. In those four walls a different view is in the Statement. As I said, a deeper understanding may be needed and that’s where my first hand knowledge comes from. Confirmed, not observed.

‘Indigenous boys’ always hang around each other… why the clique? Why the oppo chats after EVERY game? Who was welcomed into that group in the corner, non-Indigenous, on the regular?

Not having a go at your character, walking in the shoes of others, not just on the surface, can be a massive eye opener.

 

[ML4Hodgy]

This is a great point. I know for a fact it was used as a joke due to Cyril being quiet. I witnessed it with my own eyes. He used to laugh along as an acceptance that he was shy.

It's now being used in a court case as a tool, with its context completely twisted.

All I witnessed, with my own eyes, was a happy footballer who got along with everyone at the club, and loved his coach.

As for those questioning my character in this thread, you know who you are. I speak from first hand observations, and would know more than anyone here about the goings on in those 4 walls at the time. Pull your heads in!

People are complex mate. They put on a front to fit in, but that doesn’t tell you what’s going on with them privately.

It’s also possible for people to feel more than one thing about other people. Cyril may have loved parts of Clarko openly, and despaired about parts privately.

It’s clear from his early retirement and Estrangement from the club that Cyril didn’t actually love everything as much as you may have inferred from his behaviour.

Theres no judgement on you for thinking based on what you’ve seen. But when new information comes to light, it’s time to rethink rather than twist things to fit your current view (eg Cyril was happy, therefore this means his claim is just for money)

You don’t need to agree that the things in the report happened as claimed (people experiences of the same event can differ greatly), but best to look at what the players have clearly felt with empathy, rather than dismissing it.
You can feel empathy for the Coaches at exactly the same time too, as it’s obviously been hard on them.

 

[DogDaySonny]

Earlier in this thread I am pretty sure Indigenous shyness was discussed. He was a kid, power dynamic. He is now saying, he was putting on a front. Families did love their coach, they looked up to them enormously, on record. Made plays to suit their exact skill set, their football identity. They also felt betrayed.

With respect, that is your perspective that has its place, not diminishing that. In those four walls a different view is in the Statement. As I said, a deeper understanding may be needed and that’s where my first hand knowledge comes from. Confirmed, not observed.

‘Indigenous boys’ always hang around each other… why the clique? Why the oppo chats after EVERY game? Who was welcomed into that group in the corner, non-Indigenous, on the regular?

Not having a go at your character, walking in the shoes of others, not just on the surface, can be a massive eye opener.

What’s the limiting principle for this? Who doesn’t get this protection, and why not? Am I allowed to after the fact declare behaviours were, contrary to my statements and actions at the time, offensive?

This seems to be a bottomless can of worms you want to open. I’m curious if this can is open for everyone to make court claims on or only some people. And if only some people, on what basis do you judge their offense worthy of consideration?

 

[arupist]

I have not read the report, so can someone tell me if Humphrey B Bear is referenced in the court document?

 

[H00t]

I think more than just one issue (though some of those individuals issues are horrendous on their own if proven true) it’s more the pattern and number of issues cropping up.

Only speculating but Cyril may well have given benefit of the doubt to the nickname initially but as he experiences more within the club those little things that he’s been giving the benefit of the doubt to start to go the other way.

One incident may seem “minor” but added together and they make for a major issue