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DO NOT QUOTE THREADS FROM OTHER BOARDS

 

[Maddo11]

Wonder where that leaves the human rights commission that some posters are banking on ?

I don't see how it would be relevant to the HRC, if the complainants are going there directly they'll be issuing submissions directly instead of just passing on the report hawthorn commissioned

 

[sr36]

Wonder where that leaves the human rights commission that some posters are banking on ?

Sydney.


Doubt they'd consider it relevant that someone who isn't any part of the claim has been arrested.

 

[H00t]

Just remember this was all brought into the public eye from Russel Jackson doing his own work interviewing ex players and their partners.

These claims have made beyond just the scope of the review Phil Egan did. If Egan did what was alleged it’s casts serious dispersions on himself.

Shouldn’t be used as a get out clause though for the accused and they still should have the right to have their story heard. Egan’s behaviour is ultimately unrelated to the accusations especially as they are also being made outside of the report.

 

[HairyO]

And yet there hasn't been a hint of that.

Probably because the accusers have refused to take part in anything at all. I assume it will all be tested by the HRC.

Though that assumes they went to the HRC after saying they would. We wont know for up to a year.

 

[sr36]

Though that assumes they went to the HRC after saying they would. We wont know for up to a year.

It's been widely reported that the claim was lodged.

 

[Engimal v3]

Phil Egan is innocent until proven guilty you have to use the same analogy that people did with Clarkson.

I believed Clarkson was guilty, but luckily he was exonerated

 

[Maddo11]

I believed Clarkson was guilty, but luckily nobody wanted to talk to the boys club of old white dudes at the AFL so nothing is being done about it

Is what you're really saying

 

[Engimal v3]

Is what you're really saying

No that's what you're saying. My post had different words

 

[perplexed]

Just remember this was all brought into the public eye from Russel Jackson doing his own work interviewing ex players and their partners.

These claims have made beyond just the scope of the review Phil Egan did. If Egan did what was alleged it’s casts serious dispersions on himself.

Shouldn’t be used as a get out clause though for the accused and they still should have the right to have their story heard. Egan’s behaviour is ultimately unrelated to the accusations especially as they are also being made outside of the report.

The Jackson article was based on the report. He just reinterviewed some of the witnesses. I could be wrong, but I don't think anyone he interviewed is involved with the HRC complaint or was with the AFL investigation. Unless these players take their cases to another authority, I don't see how their interviews can be given any weight if Egan is convicted for fraud. The entire contents of his report would be tainted.

As for the HRC complaint, we'll just have to wait and see where that goes.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

The Jackson article was based on the report. He just reinterviewed some of the witnesses. I could be wrong, but I don't think anyone he interviewed is involved with the HRC complaint or was with the AFL investigation. Unless these players take their cases to another authority, I don't see how their interviews can be given any weight if Egan is convicted for fraud. The entire contents of his report would be tainted.

As for the HRC complaint, we'll just have to wait and see where that goes.

The ABC have stated that this is not true.

"While Russell Jackson’s story reports on the existence of the external review commissioned by Hawthorn, and some allegations made within it, his story was not based on that review and does not quote its contents. His reporting was based entirely on original interviews conducted with primary sources after he was alerted to this difficult and important story. "

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Thats bending the truth. They asked to participate and got told they weren’t needed really

Is Cyril lying?

"All we ever wanted was to sit with the coaches and officials we looked up to, and who had such control over our lives and our futures, and make them understand what we heard.
What impact it had on our lives. And to listen to them tell us their own truths – even why they thought they were helping us. And we are gutted that these so-called AFL role models weren’t prepared to listen to our truths through mediation.
We have always had the courage to listen to their truths too. That is our way.
We were never scared of being named. We were never scared of what they would throw at us. We were worried about impacts on others.
It doesn’t change our truth. None of us deserved this public shitshow – including them. But they have made their choice, and we will now bring them to a Human Rights Commission conciliation to listen to the truths that they don't want to hear. And if they still won't listen and learn then it will end up in the Federal Court where we will tell our truths in the witness box. But they will hear us one way or another."

 

[perplexed]

The ABC have stated that this is not true.

"While Russell Jackson’s story reports on the existence of the external review commissioned by Hawthorn, and some allegations made within it, his story was not based on that review and does not quote its contents. His reporting was based entirely on original interviews conducted with primary sources after he was alerted to this difficult and important story. "

I probably didn't word it as well as I could have. I don't think Jackson had a copy of the review but he had clearly been briefed on its contents and its witnesses. It wasn't an independant piece of investigative journalism would be better way of putting it.

 

[sr36]

I probably didn't word it as well as I could have. I don't think Jackson had a copy of the review but he had clearly been briefed on its contents and its witnesses. It wasn't an independant piece of investigative journalism would be better way of putting it.

No idea how it went down, but I'd call what you're describing an independent piece of investigative journalism in response to a tip off.

 

[perplexed]

No idea how it went down, but I'd call what you're describing an independent piece of investigative journalism in response to a tip off.

He got given a story, including the witnesses, and then published. As far as I can tell he didn't independently investigate anything. Reinterviewing the witnesses doesn't count for anything.

 

[Sharaz Jek]

I can't believe that there are any defenders of Russell Jackson at this stage.

Throughout this saga, he has behaved in ways that are wildly inappropriate and totally unprofessional.

• Use of the phrase "First Nations" when he knew that the public would assume that he was referring to Indigenous Australians only. While not dishonest, this omission is disingenuous in the extreme and does not give us suitable context surrounding the allegations.
• Naming and shaming of the accused while keeping the accusers nameless. You really can't have it both ways.
• Attempting to smear Sonya Hood with a ridiculous (and defamatory) misreading of her statements.
• No mention of Phil Egan's connection to the club i.e. that Leon Egan was the indigenous liaison officer at Hawthorn during the period being investigated. The conflict of interest should have been addressed.
• An unwillingness (or inability) to challenge some of the recommendations and demands of the report.
• Radio silence in the face of Phil Egan's arrest.

I don't know what the truth is. No one does and Jackson is partially to blame for muddying the waters with his politicised reporting, unwillingness to provide necessary context and overall grandstanding.

You will never convince me or anyone else that the ABC absolutely HAD TO publish in Grand Final week.

Give me a break.

It's no surprise that none of these people would ever want to interact with one another or engage with the process.

The only thing I want to hear from Jackson is an honest answer to the question of who leaked the report.

 

[Daka]

I can't believe that there are any defenders of Russell Jackson at this stage.

Throughout this saga, he has behaved in ways that are wildly inappropriate and totally unprofessional.

• Use of the phrase "First Nations" when he knew that the public would assume that he was referring to Indigenous Australians only. While not dishonest, this omission is disingenuous in the extreme and does not give us suitable context surrounding the allegations.
• Naming and shaming of the accused while keeping the accusers nameless. You really can't have it both ways.
• Attempting to smear Sonya Hood with a ridiculous (and defamatory) misreading of her statements.
• No mention of Phil Egan's connection to the club i.e. that Leon Egan was the indigenous liaison officer at Hawthorn during the period being investigated. The conflict of interest should have been addressed.
• An unwillingness (or inability) to challenge some of the recommendations and demands of the report.
• Radio silence in the face of Phil Egan's arrest.

I don't know what the truth is. No one does and Jackson is partially to blame for muddying the waters with his politicised reporting, unwillingness to provide necessary context and overall grandstanding.

You will never convince me or anyone else that the ABC absolutely HAD TO publish in Grand Final week.

Give me a break.

It's no surprise that none of these people would ever want to interact with one another or engage with the process.

The only thing I want to hear from Jackson is an honest answer to the question of who leaked the report.

Russell Jackson apparently contacted Chris Fagan & Clarkson they didn't answer

 

[Drought Break]

I can't believe that there are any defenders of Russell Jackson at this stage.

Throughout this saga, he has behaved in ways that are wildly inappropriate and totally unprofessional.

• Use of the phrase "First Nations" when he knew that the public would assume that he was referring to Indigenous Australians only. While not dishonest, this omission is disingenuous in the extreme and does not give us suitable context surrounding the allegations.
• Naming and shaming of the accused while keeping the accusers nameless. You really can't have it both ways.
• Attempting to smear Sonya Hood with a ridiculous (and defamatory) misreading of her statements.
• No mention of Phil Egan's connection to the club i.e. that Leon Egan was the indigenous liaison officer at Hawthorn during the period being investigated. The conflict of interest should have been addressed.
• An unwillingness (or inability) to challenge some of the recommendations and demands of the report.
• Radio silence in the face of Phil Egan's arrest.

I don't know what the truth is. No one does and Jackson is partially to blame for muddying the waters with his politicised reporting, unwillingness to provide necessary context and overall grandstanding.

You will never convince me or anyone else that the ABC absolutely HAD TO publish in Grand Final week.

Give me a break.

It's no surprise that none of these people would ever want to interact with one another or engage with the process.

The only thing I want to hear from Jackson is an honest answer to the question of who leaked the report.

Pretty standard for someone working at “their” ABC to not do any investigation and just write rubbish to suit their own narrative

 

[gouki88]

Pretty standard for someone working at “their” ABC to not do any investigation and just write rubbish to suit their own narrative

If it is pretty standard then I'm sure you'll have plenty of examples readily on hand

 

[Sharaz Jek]

No idea how it went down, but I'd call what you're describing an independent piece of investigative journalism in response to a tip off.

So it's just a coincidence that stories from the ABC and Herald Sun (which posted direct - but redacted - extracts from the report) both happened to censor Leon Egan's involvement?

Rubbish.

Independent journalism is about reporting without fear or favour.

Russell Jackson clearly had an agenda going into his reporting and was clearly taking his cues from Phil Egan's recommendations - despite whatever weasel words that he and the ABC choose to use.

As much as AFL Media is a cesspool of cronyism and hackery, I do trust that the top AFL journos have a pool of sources that they can rely on, built on a lifetime of institutional knowledge and experience.

They can go to any number of people and get briefings that give wider context to what they are hearing.

Did Jackson speak to other Indigeneous players at Hawthorn or elsewhere? Did he speak to non-Indigenous players?

And his sole contact with the coaches referenced were via the generic contact info of their new clubs i.e. something that anyone could have done.

It's a joke.

It's not enough to throw up your hands and say "well, I tried." You have to actually be successful in speaking to people.

God, did this idiot ever consider why he was selected for a tip-off and not someone with actual experience within the industry?

 

[VinnieB]

Russell Jackson apparently contacted Chris Fagan & Clarkson they didn't answer

Only an absolute idiot would agree to speak to a journo on accusations they weren’t even aware of.

If he had waited a week or two before publishing to give them an opportunity to digest the info and speak to their lawyers it may be different.

But this guy knew exactly what he was doing and would have known Fagan and Clarkson would not comment. Just adds to the controversy which is obviously what he wanted.

The fact is there was absolutely no reason to name them.

When you are to be interviewed by a journo, your employer briefs you before hand on the journo etc. Both would have had media training and known to not comment.

 

[sr36]

I can't believe that there are any defenders of Russell Jackson at this stage.

Throughout this saga, he has behaved in ways that are wildly inappropriate and totally unprofessional.

• Use of the phrase "First Nations" when he knew that the public would assume that he was referring to Indigenous Australians only. While not dishonest, this omission is disingenuous in the extreme and does not give us suitable context surrounding the allegations.
• Naming and shaming of the accused while keeping the accusers nameless. You really can't have it both ways.
• Attempting to smear Sonya Hood with a ridiculous (and defamatory) misreading of her statements.
• No mention of Phil Egan's connection to the club i.e. that Leon Egan was the indigenous liaison officer at Hawthorn during the period being investigated. The conflict of interest should have been addressed.
• An unwillingness (or inability) to challenge some of the recommendations and demands of the report.
• Radio silence in the face of Phil Egan's arrest.

I don't know what the truth is. No one does and Jackson is partially to blame for muddying the waters with his politicised reporting, unwillingness to provide necessary context and overall grandstanding.

You will never convince me or anyone else that the ABC absolutely HAD TO publish in Grand Final week.

Give me a break.

It's no surprise that none of these people would ever want to interact with one another or engage with the process.

The only thing I want to hear from Jackson is an honest answer to the question of who leaked the report.

Accusations were made. They have continued to be made and have been lodged with AHRC. A journo reported on the accusations and some appear to view the reporting as the story? Are we living in Trump's America?

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

• No mention of Phil Egan's connection to the club i.e. that Leon Egan was the indigenous liaison officer at Hawthorn during the period being investigated. The conflict of interest should have been addressed.
• An unwillingness (or inability) to challenge some of the recommendations and demands of the report.
• Radio silence in the face of Phil Egan's arrest.

Why does Jackson have to address any of this?
As has been said a hundred times now the players stories were told to Jackson directly, it doesn’t matter if the Hawthorn report was written by Satan himself, the players stories and claims that Jackson’s reported are all that matter.

"While Russell Jackson’s story reports on the existence of the external review commissioned by Hawthorn, and some allegations made within it, his story was not based on that review and does not quote its contents. His reporting was based entirely on original interviews conducted with primary sources after he was alerted to this difficult and important story. "

 

[Maddo11]

I can't believe that there are any defenders of Russell Jackson at this stage.

Throughout this saga, he has behaved in ways that are wildly inappropriate and totally unprofessional.

• Use of the phrase "First Nations" when he knew that the public would assume that he was referring to Indigenous Australians only. While not dishonest, this omission is disingenuous in the extreme and does not give us suitable context surrounding the allegations.
• Naming and shaming of the accused while keeping the accusers nameless. You really can't have it both ways.
• Attempting to smear Sonya Hood with a ridiculous (and defamatory) misreading of her statements.
• No mention of Phil Egan's connection to the club i.e. that Leon Egan was the indigenous liaison officer at Hawthorn during the period being investigated. The conflict of interest should have been addressed.
• An unwillingness (or inability) to challenge some of the recommendations and demands of the report.
• Radio silence in the face of Phil Egan's arrest.

I don't know what the truth is. No one does and Jackson is partially to blame for muddying the waters with his politicised reporting, unwillingness to provide necessary context and overall grandstanding.

You will never convince me or anyone else that the ABC absolutely HAD TO publish in Grand Final week.

Give me a break.

It's no surprise that none of these people would ever want to interact with one another or engage with the process.

The only thing I want to hear from Jackson is an honest answer to the question of who leaked the report.

So it's just a coincidence that stories from the ABC and Herald Sun (which posted direct - but redacted - extracts from the report) both happened to censor Leon Egan's involvement?

Rubbish.

Independent journalism is about reporting without fear or favour.

Russell Jackson clearly had an agenda going into his reporting and was clearly taking his cues from Phil Egan's recommendations - despite whatever weasel words that he and the ABC choose to use.

As much as AFL Media is a cesspool of cronyism and hackery, I do trust that the top AFL journos have a pool of sources that they can rely on, built on a lifetime of institutional knowledge and experience.

They can go to any number of people and get briefings that give wider context to what they are hearing.

Did Jackson speak to other Indigeneous players at Hawthorn or elsewhere? Did he speak to non-Indigenous players?

And his sole contact with the coaches referenced were via the generic contact info of their new clubs i.e. something that anyone could have done.

It's a joke.

It's not enough to throw up your hands and say "well, I tried." You have to actually be successful in speaking to people.

God, did this idiot ever consider why he was selected for a tip-off and not someone with actual experience within the industry?

Oh look, Simpkin is back

 

[phantom13]

They said they wanted a copy of the allegations so they could formulate a response and got told they were no longer needed and not to bother participating

It wasn’t reported much I found that part so maybe you missed it

From everything I read they asked for a copy of the report, completely unredacted with names and allegations coupled and were told that wouldn’t be provided. This was their request to be involved in mediation. When they were told that wouldn’t be provided they refused to be involved in the mediation process. We discussed this at length some pages back (mostly around a disagreement on opinion about whether they should or shouldn’t have been willing to engage in the mediation process).

I think most can see why the complaininants were unwilling to furnish the report and most can see why they didn’t want to engage in mediation.

I’m not aware at all of them being told they weren’t required anymore. As someone else linked Cyril Rioli at a minimum just wanted to discuss the incidents with Fagan, Clarkson etc .

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

Is Cyril lying?

"All we ever wanted was to sit with the coaches and officials we looked up to, and who had such control over our lives and our futures, and make them understand what we heard.
What impact it had on our lives. And to listen to them tell us their own truths – even why they thought they were helping us. And we are gutted that these so-called AFL role models weren’t prepared to listen to our truths through mediation.
We have always had the courage to listen to their truths too. That is our way.
We were never scared of being named. We were never scared of what they would throw at us. We were worried about impacts on others.
It doesn’t change our truth. None of us deserved this public shitshow – including them. But they have made their choice, and we will now bring them to a Human Rights Commission conciliation to listen to the truths that they don't want to hear. And if they still won't listen and learn then it will end up in the Federal Court where we will tell our truths in the witness box. But they will hear us one way or another."

Cyril isnt the head of the report and wasnt the blocker in this case

The situation is. Clarkson and Fagan are telling the truth when they say they were blocked from contributing to the investigation and Cyril is telling the truth when he says he wanted them to be involved

Its the 3rd party who caused the situation. Said 3rd party is looking at prison time.... so maybe the third party is more of a issue here then people want to admit?