NO TROLLS Hawthorn Racism Review - Sensitive issues discussed. Part 3

[Wosh]

Don’t use this thread as an opportunity to troll North or any other clubs, you’ll be removed from the discussion. Stick to the topic and please keep it civil and respectful to those involved. Keep personal arguements out of this thread.
Help moderators by not quoting obvious trolls and use the report button, please and thank you.

If you feel upset or need to talk you can call either Beyond Blue on 1300 22 4636 or Lifeline on 13 11 14 at any time.

- Crisis support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders 13YARN (13 92 76) 13YARN - Call 13 92 76 | 24 /7

This is a serious topic, please treat it as such.

Videos, statements etc in the OP here:

NO TROLLS - Hawthorn Racism Review - Sensitive issues discussed.

Don’t use this thread as an opportunity to troll North or any other clubs, you’ll be removed from the discussion. Stick to the topic and please keep it civil and respectful to those involved. Keep personal arguements out of this thread. Help moderators by not quoting obvious trolls and use the...

www.bigfooty.com

Link to Hawthorn Statement. - Link to ABC Sports article. - Leaked Report

Process Plan - https://resources.afl.com.au/afl/do...erms-of-Reference-and-Process-Plan-FINAL-.pdf

AFL Ends Investigation - 'Imperfect resolution' as Hawks probe ends, no one charged

DO NOT QUOTE THREADS FROM OTHER BOARDS

 

[sr36]

I believe it but aren’t as shocked as many.

Extreme family planning goes hand in hand with competitive sport. A chat to some of the aflw players would be illuminating

I think that reason is a little bit abhorrent - handing over family planning decisions to the boss and football coach.

I believe it for a different reason. I worked in private schools at the time with indigenous scholarship kids. In that era, we had no no respect or understanding of family and cultural connections. Community connections were seen as an obstacle likely to stop kids from succeeding in "our" society. We had such a sense of cultural superioty that it didn't even cross our minds that separation was damaging. How could it when we were certain that our way was the only good way. We still carried much of the stolen generation thinking that these kids were better off with us than with their community. Many still hold that view without realising it.

 

[Soggy2112]

In hawthorn First Nations players case, the coaches seemed to react badly to real life situations. In the Adelaide and betts case the club seemed to use first nations issues to deliberately put stressful situations for a club training camp.

Neither is a safe workplace but one case seems to have a nasty streak of premeditation to it. It may not have lasted as long though

I’m not sure what relevance the camp has to this discussion. If you’re suggesting that when Eddie discusses his experience of racism in football that he is pinpointing that one experience on the camp then I don’t think you’ve really listened to anything he’s said or read.

A ‘truth telling’ report was commissioned by Hawthorn on the back of Cyril to see if racism was isolated or systemic.

Report was run by Egan, who we now know cannot be trusted with a report of such importance that success relies entirely on confidentiality and good faith reporting.

The report did not involve any interviews with non-indigenous people and did not provide any opportunity for a right of reply.

The lack of any fair process in regards to a balanced account of what occurred might not have been an issue had the report remained confidential…. it didn’t.

And why didn’t it? Because the accusers and/or their families told their stories to the ABC, before there’d been an opportunity for the AFL’s integrity department to conduct an investigation involving fair process and an opportunity for the accusers to provide a right of reply.

From that moment this whole thing was never going to get the truth, and it was always going to result in compensation to the people who were defamed on the back of anonymous and untested accounts.

Once the media gets their teeth into a story involving legal process (Bombers drugs saga, racism review etc…) the truth will always be the first casualty.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I think not wanting to rely on the AFL’s integrity department is pretty fair.

 

[Simon Crawshay]

A ‘truth telling’ report was commissioned by Hawthorn on the back of Cyril to see if racism was isolated or systemic.

Report was run by Egan, who we now know cannot be trusted with a report of such importance that success relies entirely on confidentiality and good faith reporting.

The report did not involve any interviews with non-indigenous people and did not provide any opportunity for a right of reply.

The lack of any fair process in regards to a balanced account of what occurred might not have been an issue had the report remained confidential…. it didn’t.

And why didn’t it? Because the accusers and/or their families told their stories to the ABC, before there’d been an opportunity for the AFL’s integrity department to conduct an investigation involving fair process and an opportunity for the accusers to provide a right of reply.

From that moment this whole thing was never going to get the truth, and it was always going to result in compensation to the people who were defamed on the back of anonymous and untested accounts.

Once the media gets their teeth into a story involving legal process (Bombers drugs saga, racism review etc…) the truth will always be the first casualty.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Excellent overview

The moment old Rusty decided to make a name for himself by dropping that story before Clarko, Fagan and Burt had even had a chance to be interviewed by the AFL this whole thing was ways going to end the way it did.

Due process and right of reply are pivotal to any investigation, I can't believe our national broadcaster decided to totally junk all that in the name of pursuing an ideological viewpoint (actually depressingly enough yes I can believe it).

 

[yodellinhank]

Excellent overview

The moment old Rusty decided to make a name for himself by dropping that story before Clarko, Fagan and Burt had even had a chance to be interviewed by the AFL this whole thing was ways going to end the way it did.

Due process and right of reply are pivotal to any investigation, I can't believe our national broadcaster decided to totally junk all that in the name of pursuing an ideological viewpoint (actually depressingly enough yes I can believe it).

“On Monday 19 September and into the following day all three were contacted multiple times by the ABC, via email, phone call and text message. Also contacted were the media teams at Hawthorn and the Brisbane Lions and the personal management of one of the individuals.

“They were provided with all relevant information about the allegations. They were asked detailed and open-ended questions that gave them the opportunity to fully respond to all the allegations.

“After initially receiving no response, the ABC contacted all the parties again and offered them more time in which to respond. We again received no response to the questions."

And of course all the time that has passed since, but sure, no right of reply

 

[Simon Crawshay]

“On Monday 19 September and into the following day all three were contacted multiple times by the ABC, via email, phone call and text message. Also contacted were the media teams at Hawthorn and the Brisbane Lions and the personal management of one of the individuals.

“They were provided with all relevant information about the allegations. They were asked detailed and open-ended questions that gave them the opportunity to fully respond to all the allegations.

“After initially receiving no response, the ABC contacted all the parties again and offered them more time in which to respond. We again received no response to the questions."

And of course all the time that has passed since, but sure, no right of reply

Come on you can't honestly equate being asked for a comment by the press with being given the opportunity to respond to allegations within the process of a proper investigation.

No one with half a brain would have responded to the ABC after being blindsided like they were, that would have been an idiotic approach and none of the three accused are stupid men.

Proper process dictates that they were meant to be given a right of reply as part of the actual investigation, not as part of a response to the press investigation into the investigation. It's an obvious difference and I'm sick of people making a false equivalence between the two.

Imagine if we ran our justice system this way, it would be absolute chaos. Just skip the whole legal system and go straight to trial by media. Although it seems the ABC believes this is the way to go judging in recent behaviour.

 

[yodellinhank]

Come on you can't honestly equate being asked for a comment by the press with being given the opportunity to respond to allegations within the process of a proper investigation.

No one with half a brain would have responded to the ABC after being blindsided like they were, that would have been an idiotic approach and none of the three accused are stupid men.

Proper process dictates that they were meant to be given a right of reply as part of the actual investigation, not as part of a response to the press investigation into the investigation. It's an obvious difference and I'm sick of people making a false equivalence between the two.

Imagine if we ran our justice system this way, it would be absolute chaos. Just skip the whole legal system and go straight to trial by media. Although it seems the ABC believes this is the way to go judging in recent behaviour.

Come on, you can't honestly believe Fagan etc had any intentions of telling their side to it. They refused to participate in the AFL process and threatened to "out" the complainants before the complainants responded publicly themselves.

 

[Simon Crawshay]

Come on, you can't honestly believe Fagan etc had any intentions of telling their side to it. They refused to participate in the AFL process and threatened to "out" the complainants before the complainants responded publicly themselves.

If you read the conditions the lawyers for the players wanted to put onto the AFL investigation I am not surprised the coaches didn't want to participate.

Going by the conditions that they wanted put over the top of the AFL investigation if the three coaches had participated in the investigation it would have been basically an admission of guilt on their behalf (funny kind of investigation that). Once again no one in their right mind would front up to that kind of kangaroo court.

Essentially the ABC declared the three coaches guilty before they had even had a chance to give evidence / go to trial. Now whether or not the three accused did in deed do some or all of the things they were accused off (and to what extent and what mitigating circumstances there were around those actions) becomes almost irrelevant once proper process is so badly and flagrantly ignored.

You might think I am making a big deal about this but its a dangerous path we go down when we start to ignore the legal traditions and processes that you know, kind of underpin our entire society?

 

[sr36]

If you read the conditions the lawyers for the players wanted to put onto the AFL investigation I am not surprised the coaches didn't want to participate.

Going by the conditions that they wanted put over the top of the AFL investigation if the three coaches had participated in the investigation it would have been basically an admission of guilt on their behalf (funny kind of investigation that). Once again no one in their right mind would front up to that kind of kangaroo court.

Essentially the ABC declared the three coaches guilty before they had even had a chance to give evidence / go to trial. Now whether or not the three accused did in deed do some or all of the things they were accused off (and to what extent and what mitigating circumstances there were around those actions) becomes almost irrelevant once proper process is so badly and flagrantly ignored.

You might think I am making a big deal about this but its a dangerous path we go down when we start to ignore the legal traditions and processes that you know, kind of underpin our entire society?

It's a dangerous path when we start expecting the media to not report on anything that hasn't gone through a judicial process, which seems to be a central tenet to your view.

 

[Chief]

If you read the conditions the lawyers for the players wanted to put onto the AFL investigation I am not surprised the coaches didn't want to participate.

Those were not the conditions they were to appear under.

 

[JackOutback]

A ‘truth telling’ report was commissioned by Hawthorn on the back of Cyril to see if racism was isolated or systemic.

Report was run by Egan, who we now know cannot be trusted with a report of such importance that success relies entirely on confidentiality and good faith reporting.

The report did not involve any interviews with non-indigenous people and did not provide any opportunity for a right of reply.

The lack of any fair process in regards to a balanced account of what occurred might not have been an issue had the report remained confidential…. it didn’t.

And why didn’t it? Because the accusers and/or their families told their stories to the ABC, before there’d been an opportunity for the AFL’s integrity department to conduct an investigation involving fair process and an opportunity for the accusers to provide a right of reply.

From that moment this whole thing was never going to get the truth, and it was always going to result in compensation to the people who were defamed on the back of anonymous and untested accounts.

Once the media gets their teeth into a story involving legal process (Bombers drugs saga, racism review etc…) the truth will always be the first casualty.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

The problem with all these 'concerns' (Egan's subsequent arrest, lack of interviews of non-Indigenous people, media reporting) is none of it has any effect on whether the players' stories are real or not. They were still simply approached, years after the fact, after not having shown any intent to sue, to detail their experiences. So why would you disbelieve them?

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

No-one emerges with credit from this tawdry episode.

Kennett and his Board is deeply in the red. Setting up the exercise to exclude his own timeline and trying to catch Clarko in a gotcha moment. The failure to check Egans capacity to do the Review when there were rumblings in the Co-op he once managed was a face palm moment.

That said, the chance for Indigenous players to tell their story in a relaxed yarning model is not a bad thing per se. How well Egan did the job is open to question. Even so, the specifics raised have the air of veracity. Personally I think raising the option of a players partner having an abortion does not in itself suggest racism. Women have a right to choose and it is good that women and their partners are aware of the options available. How well the issue was raised is another question as is context.

How Hawthorn would have handled the Egan Report without it having been leaked is simply unknown. Maybe rug and broom or spade and compost bin would have been used.

The AFL, hardly a bastion of integrity has been trying to bury the story ever since it broke. It set up a poorly thought through process that went nowhere. They are still deep in deficit.

Clarko, Fagan and the other guy had a choice whether to use the process. They lawyered up and said no. Disappointing but not unexpected. They have emerged with no credit whatsoever.

Ages ago on this thread I think I mentioned how this grim episode reminded me of the novel The Slap. None of the characters in the novel were likeable or sympathetic. Those involved saw the same events with quite different perspectives. I expect the same applies here.

 

[Sherrinator]

Can’t believe there are still witch hunters in this thread. Just too stubborn to admit they are wrong and double down. Very sad

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

Can’t believe there are still witch hunters in this thread. Just too stubborn to admit they are wrong and double down. Very sad

So you seem happy to reduce a complex set of events to those vindicated and those sent to the naughty corner. I think most fair minded folk get the complexities of human behaviours.

There are no winners here, least of all Kennett. Maybe the one thing everyone can agree on is that Jeffrey Gibb Kennett should be permabanned from attending the footy.

 

[yodellinhank]

If you read the conditions the lawyers for the players wanted to put onto the AFL investigation I am not surprised the coaches didn't want to participate.

Going by the conditions that they wanted put over the top of the AFL investigation if the three coaches had participated in the investigation it would have been basically an admission of guilt on their behalf (funny kind of investigation that). Once again no one in their right mind would front up to that kind of kangaroo court.

Essentially the ABC declared the three coaches guilty before they had even had a chance to give evidence / go to trial. Now whether or not the three accused did in deed do some or all of the things they were accused off (and to what extent and what mitigating circumstances there were around those actions) becomes almost irrelevant once proper process is so badly and flagrantly ignored.

You might think I am making a big deal about this but its a dangerous path we go down when we start to ignore the legal traditions and processes that you know, kind of underpin our entire society?

The coaches have an entire AFL PR department at their disposal to tell their side of the story. Absolutely nothing to stop them sitting down for an interview of prepared questions to paint their own story the way they want. That they have been silenced and had no right of reply is absolute rubbish.

 

[Chief]

That said, the chance for Indigenous players to tell their story in a relaxed yarning model is not a bad thing per se. How well Egan did the job is open to question. Even so, the specifics raised have the air of veracity. Personally I think raising the option of a players partner having an abortion does not in itself suggest racism. Women have a right to choose and it is good that women and their partners are aware of the options available. How well the issue was raised is another question as is context.

This is what the panel were investigating.

Fagan shut the panel down with legal action.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

This is what the panel were investigating.

Fagan shut the panel down with legal action.

True.

 

[Elixuh]

This is what the panel were investigating.

Difficult to do when the complainant who had raised the most serious allegations wasn't involved in the investigation.

 

[Chief]

Difficult to do when the complainant who had raised the most serious allegations wasn't involved in the investigation.

Indeed. Same for the coaches involved.

 

[Elixuh]

Indeed. Same for the coaches involved.

Yes, all parties need to be involved for it to have worked. But your argument has been that it was somehow improper or suggesting of guilt for Fagan to use legal avenues to stop an investigation which wasn't investigating, which would never have been able to reach any conclusions and which the AFL didn't want to initiate the stop to for PR reasons.

 

[Chief]

Yes, all parties need to be involved for it to have worked. But your argument has been that it was somehow improper or suggesting of guilt for Fagan to use legal avenues to stop an investigation which wasn't investigating, which would never have been able to reach any conclusions and which the AFL didn't want to initiate the stop to for PR reasons.

These are all your opinions on it, not facts.

 

[sr36]

So you seem happy to reduce a complex set of events to those vindicated and those sent to the naughty corner. I think most fair minded folk get the complexities of human behaviours.

There are no winners here, least of all Kennett. Maybe the one thing everyone can agree on is that Jeffrey Gibb Kennett should be permabanned from attending the footy.

I've hated Jeff for decades. But what's his big misdemeanor here? Didn't he just commission someone to find out about indigenous perspectives of their time at Hawthorn?

 

[Elixuh]

These are all your opinions on it, not facts.

Not necessarily

 

[Sharaz Jek]

It's a dangerous path when we start expecting the media to not report on anything that hasn't gone through a judicial process, which seems to be a central tenet to your view.

Except Russell Jackson was so intent on burning anyone and everyone that the ABC had to instruct him into offering an apology (however petulant) to Sonya Hood.

You can't possibly tell me that Jackson has behaved professionally?

 

[western royboy]

Except Russell Jackson was so intent on burning anyone and everyone that the ABC had to instruct him into offering an apology (however petulant) to Sonya Hood.

You can't possibly tell me that Jackson has behaved professionally?

Alternatively he brought the story into the light - without him where would this be? Did we get to the actual truth of the matter? No way - Were we ever going to get there? Probably not but I don’t think he’s done anything wrong. I get it that this upsets sone people and they want to bag the abc and put pitchforks thru Russell Jackson but he got the story, researched and ran with it, what followed was a cluster**** of legal ducks and drakes but ultimately he brought the issue into the light without him it gets buried, hopefully some good comes from all of this.

 

[sr36]

Except Russell Jackson was so intent on burning anyone and everyone that the ABC had to instruct him into offering an apology (however petulant) to Sonya Hood.

You can't possibly tell me that Jackson has behaved professionally?

Other than bringing up Groundhog Day, I'm just going to say that Jacksons comment about Hood is about as relevant to what occured as Clarksons various outbursts over the years - eg. not at all.