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DO NOT QUOTE THREADS FROM OTHER BOARDS

 

[The Feeder Club]

So what you are saying is if a player is teased about being quiet and reserved, they should be less quiet and reserved about it?

Oh my word. A professional footballer was given a nickname by his coach because he was quiet, quick off to the federal court.
This country is so ****ed.

 

[phantom13]

Obviously there's a big slice of cultural insensitivity

So if Clarkson uses the nickname in its common form (someone who.doesnt speak much), and Rioli doesn't voice or show that he feels uncomforrable with it (for valid reasons), what is Clarkson guilty of here? I think you'd have a hard time pushing it from a tone-deaf thing to say to actually being racist in that scenario.

If Rioli was indeed uncomfortable, made it known and the nickname kept being used, that's an entirely different matter and is absolutely racist.

So it’s obviously culturally insensitive by your own admission but then there is also no way Clarko could have possibly known it maybe wasn’t a great idea.

 

[sr36]

Do Aboriginal people have a Long history of being called bears? Or black
People in general? Never heard it discussed in any capacity ever.

I'd say that Aboriginal people would struggle to keep track of all the different animals they've been referred to as over the years. Pretty easy to see why Cyril would consider it offensive as well as why Clarko would have been saying it in a friendly way without a second thought about it.

 

[Anja_Nees]

Oh my word. A professional footballer was given a nickname by his coach because he was quiet, quick off to the federal court.
This country is so ****ed.

Cameron Wight, who was not indigenous, had the same nickname at the Dogs for the same reason.

Meanwhile whenever I see reference to Clarko bringing his guitar to a meeting and singing about Rioli this image comes straight to mind.

 

[The Feeder Club]

Cameron Wight, who was not indigenous, had the same nickname at the Dogs for the same reason.

Meanwhile whenever I see reference to Clarko bringing his guitar to a meeting and singing about Rioli this image comes straight to mind.

View attachment 2070873

Or this one

 

[the big lebowski]

This could open up a can of worms

Buddy Bears



And Burgoyne won’t be happy to see silk worms can be black

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Seems to me the difference between “cultural insensitivity” and “racism” might be a subjective line, dependent on the person and that maybe a person with the lived experience of a Cyril Rioli might be better placed to determine where that line should sit.

If he had referred to him as "Mr Rioli" in all conversations , while the other players all had nicknames , would that not have been descrimination too?

 

[ferball]

My view is if the accounts are accurate, it's most likely not systemic racism - but discrimination based on culture, which is still alive and kicking and is probably a more important distinction than between direct and systemic radicm- as many discriminate based on culture, but get their backs up about the term racism because they associate that only with KKK racial superiority beliefs. I doubt the stylishly dressed, fluent Standard Australian English speaking Tony Armstrong cops much discrimination, but Derek Kickett with his cultural markers would probably cop a heap.

I think beliefs in racial superioty are mostly gone, but cultural discrimination and superiority is well and truly alive and kicking. And in that era, acceptance of Aboriginal culture hadn't even begun. Aboriginal culture was just viewed as poverty and a lack of opportunity. There was no comprehension that Aboriginal people could be better off holding onto culture. It was about giving them the opportunity to live our culture. The multicultural dream of the time, was really a multiracial dream - it was about different racial groups becoming "Aussie" saying "mate" with an Aussie accent. It was about encouraging blacks to behave more white. You're not getting pissed with the boys, lyou talk funny, you're having kids too young, you've got too many relos dropping over - be more like Hodgey.

I get what you're saying but in all honesty there was a brief period in the 90s and 00s when indigenous culture was valued and since its all about assimilation. Even now. Altho it isn't as bad as it was. But its subtler. When Noel Pearson said wtte of "caring for country is great but it also can deny our people access to economic opportunity" he made a good point.

With Clarkson and those comments - an AFL career is white culture. Its not indigenous culture. Its the corporate capitalist exploitation of sport for profit. And even now, as the latest Collingwood thing shows, old white boofheads are a massive part of football. So its not a matter of cultural superiority, its more "this is our world and if you want to be in it you play by our rules". Sometimes I look at footy and see the Dreamtime game, indigenous jumpers and naming as a form of ... blackwashing I spose - cultural appropriation to enable ongoing profit.

It doesn't come from a genuine place imo.

But at the same time its the only exposure some people get to original names for places and seeing what indigenous art means to people so its better than nothing.

As far as Clarkson in this situation goes...

When he started coaching at North he mentioned something that happened when he was young at North. His older brother was killed in an alcohol related drink driving incident and he went off the rails by his own admission. He said that Ron Joseph, Kennedy (who was coaching at the time) and Pagan who was u19 coach all did something very similar to what appears to have happened with this player.

He credits that discussion with saving his football career, giving him all the success he's had in terms of fame, footy immortality and financial success. He said that if it wasn't for them he may have lost his career and even ended up in jail. Given how volatile he can be that's probably a fair assessment. He specifically said he was glad to be coaching at North cos it gave him the chance to pay back that debt he felt he owed the club for giving him a decent life. So that's a specific cultural attitude, more football culture than white culture but as I said AFL is a white cultural artifact.

So despite what some people are saying I can see that its possible Clarkson's comments and attitude came from a more genuine place than many of the indigenous cultural artifacts we see associated with an AFL competition where the numbers of indigenous players are actually dropping.

 

[sr36]

I get what you're saying but in all honesty there was a brief period in the 90s and 00s when indigenous culture was valued and since its all about assimilation. Even now. Altho it isn't as bad as it was. But its subtler. When Noel Pearson said wtte of "caring for country is great but it also can deny our people access to economic opportunity" he made a good point.

With Clarkson and those comments - an AFL career is white culture. Its not indigenous culture. Its the corporate capitalist exploitation of sport for profit. And even now, as the latest Collingwood thing shows, old white boofheads are a massive part of football. So its not a matter of cultural superiority, its more "this is our world and if you want to be in it you play by our rules". Sometimes I look at footy and see the Dreamtime game, indigenous jumpers and naming as a form of ... blackwashing I spose - cultural appropriation to enable ongoing profit.

It doesn't come from a genuine place imo.

But at the same time its the only exposure some people get to original names for places and seeing what indigenous art means to people so its better than nothing.

As far as Clarkson in this situation goes...

When he started coaching at North he mentioned something that happened when he was young at North. His older brother was killed in an alcohol related drink driving incident and he went off the rails by his own admission. He said that Ron Joseph, Kennedy (who was coaching at the time) and Pagan who was u19 coach all did something very similar to what appears to have happened with this player.

He credits that discussion with saving his football career, giving him all the success he's had in terms of fame, footy immortality and financial success. He said that if it wasn't for them he may have lost his career and even ended up in jail. Given how volatile he can be that's probably a fair assessment. He specifically said he was glad to be coaching at North cos it gave him the chance to pay back that debt he felt he owed the club for giving him a decent life. So that's a specific cultural attitude, more football culture than white culture but as I said AFL is a white cultural artifact.

So despite what some people are saying I can see that its possible Clarkson's comments and attitude came from a more genuine place than many of the indigenous cultural artifacts we see associated with an AFL competition where the numbers of indigenous players are actually dropping.

By culture - I'm talking more about how people live, think and what they value rather than artefacts and outward expressions of culture. I'm of the view that Bachar Houli wouldn't have had much of a career if he was around a decade earlier - or even at a less open club. Simply because he wouldn't have been as accepted and embraced for being Bachar Houli with all of the cultural heritage he brought with him.

I'm actually a Clarko fan. But also think it's likely that he inadvertently imposed his cultural norms, beliefs and expectations on people with different backgrounds - quite simply because we all did or still do.

The red flag in the court papers for me that suggests that it might not have been inadvertant is persuading a young Aboriginal kid to not have a manager and to use Burt as his manager. Leaves him more vulnerable with his "manager" working for the club rather than advocating for him. Possible suggestion that control was planned and discriminatory. Would that have occurred with a non Aboriginal player? Genuine question as I really wouldn't know how common managerless players were at the time.

It's an interesting one with the declining Aboriginal numbers in the AFL. Particularly when the stereotypical skillset of dazzling smalls is in higher demand than it's ever been. What do you put it down to?

 

[Drought Break]

Latest news out of the report is that Clarko allegedly gave Cyril the nickname "Humphrey B Bear"...

Wow. That’s hard core

 

[Satan]

Wow. That’s hard core

taylor duyrea likes this

 

[Elixuh]

Regardless of the veracity of the allegations once tested, it'll be interesting to see what this means for how clubs manage and interject into the personal lives of all players - will it impact who gets drafted, the length of their career or the level of support they're afforded. Maybe nothing will happen. Who knows.

 

[sr36]

Regardless of the veracity of the allegations once tested, it'll be interesting to see what this means for how clubs manage and interject into the personal lives of all players - will it impact who gets drafted, the length of their career or the level of support they're afforded. Maybe nothing will happen. Who knows.

Clubs will or already will have de-risked by ensuring a stronger firewall between welfare department and coaching department. Makes welfare more effective as well as players are more likely to be open about and work on issues. Win/win.

 

[Elixuh]

Clubs will or already will have de-risked by ensuring a stronger firewall between welfare department and coaching department. Makes welfare more effective as well as players are more likely to be open about and work on issues. Win/win.

In an ideal world I agree and perhaps arrangements will be made which on the face of it look like this. However, I think its a pretty utopian view re how it'll work in practice, especially with the funding and expertise most welfare department's have. Welfare is also never a one shoe fits all approach.

 

[ferball]

By culture - I'm talking more about how people live, think and what they value rather than artefacts and outward expressions of culture. I'm of the view that Bachar Houli wouldn't have had much of a career if he was around a decade earlier - or even at a less open club. Simply because he wouldn't have been as accepted and embraced for being Bachar Houli with all of the cultural heritage he brought with him.

I'm actually a Clarko fan. But also think it's likely that he inadvertently imposed his cultural norms, beliefs and expectations on people with different backgrounds - quite simply because we all did or still do.

Yeah and I think those norms are dominated by AFL football culture more than "white culture" as such altho AFL football culture exists inside white culture not above or beyond it.

The way those norms were imposed, which is what people are upset about, is a bunch of older blokes putting the hard word on a younger guy. This isn't a white cultural thing. Noel Pearson who i mentioned earlier is actually an example of the same thing happening. In the mid 90s he was a media darling, talked about as the first aboriginal PM and blah blah blah. But his mob at home got no benefit from all this. He got called home, got his arse kicked, literally, by his elders, and if you notice ever since he has been very focused on his mob way up north.

Its a human behaviour in what we call tribal situations and footy is a tribal situation. Unlike alot of western culture which is mostly just corporate and consumerist. Often the closest it comes to tribalism is the brand affiliation that some people have, like Nike or Simpsons tattoos.

It's an interesting one with the declining Aboriginal numbers in the AFL. Particularly when the stereotypical skillset of dazzling smalls is in higher demand than it's ever been. What do you put it down to?

I think its down to gentrification and the corporate nature of AFL.

Its able to point to the image of footballers from indigenous mobs and nations but the actual engagement with those cultures and the situations most indigenous people find themselves in isn't there. Most indigenous people live in regional or remote areas but most of those areas are regional towns and cities and alot of them are in NSW and Qld where the AFL is kind of shit at gettinbg involved.

Something Clarkson said sticks with me... he talked about the old zone system and where he grew up in the context of the tassie side. He was in Essendon's zone and that rural area produced several VFL (at the time) players despite the relatively small population of the area. He put this down to Essendon putting resources into the area to develop young talent and used this as an example of why Tassie had a chance to become a powerhouse side relatively quickly.

I don't know the exact figures but it seems indigenous players in the AFL come from families with a strong footy culture like the Riolis or via the private school system. Or both. It makes it harder for young kids outside access to these systems to get a look in. because the resources are focused on private schools more than regional areas. I did some junior coaching in regional NSW years ago (00s) in a strong NRL area and it was bloody hard to get the AFL to take notice. Yet we ended up with four kids from a small NSW league town (Kyogle) in the NSW u15 side and one of them won the JL Williams medal.

Some good players have won that medal. LDU is probably the highest profile player right now.

It was impossible to get the AFL to take that area seriously or send good development options that way. Even now and its less than 120km SW inland from the Gold Coast where they have a team they pump heaps into.

With a bit of effort the AFL could have had two or three kids from that area in the last decade including some indigenous players who went on to play league. One even represented Australia in sevens rugby.

Its probably not just an indigenous thing either cos the private school system now dominates AFL recruiting. Three of North's better young players came from the Western Jets, outside that eastern suburbs set up and they went later in the draft (Xerri in the 70s, Ford at 56 and Paul Curtis at 35.) If those kids were in the Eastern suburbs I'd say they'd have had more access to development resources than they did in Western Melbourne.

 

[sr36]

Yeah and I think those norms are dominated by AFL football culture more than "white culture" as such altho AFL football culture exists inside white culture not above or beyond it.

The way those norms were imposed, which is what people are upset about, is a bunch of older blokes putting the hard word on a younger guy. This isn't a white cultural thing. Noel Pearson who i mentioned earlier is actually an example of the same thing happening. In the mid 90s he was a media darling, talked about as the first aboriginal PM and blah blah blah. But his mob at home got no benefit from all this. He got called home, got his arse kicked, literally, by his elders, and if you notice ever since he has been very focused on his mob way up north.

Its a human behaviour in what we call tribal situations and footy is a tribal situation. Unlike alot of western culture which is mostly just corporate and consumerist. Often the closest it comes to tribalism is the brand affiliation that some people have, like Nike or Simpsons tattoos.



I think its down to gentrification and the corporate nature of AFL.

Its able to point to the image of footballers from indigenous mobs and nations but the actual engagement with those cultures and the situations most indigenous people find themselves in isn't there. Most indigenous people live in regional or remote areas but most of those areas are regional towns and cities and alot of them are in NSW and Qld where the AFL is kind of shit at gettinbg involved.

Something Clarkson said sticks with me... he talked about the old zone system and where he grew up in the context of the tassie side. He was in Essendon's zone and that rural area produced several VFL (at the time) players despite the relatively small population of the area. He put this down to Essendon putting resources into the area to develop young talent and used this as an example of why Tassie had a chance to become a powerhouse side relatively quickly.

I don't know the exact figures but it seems indigenous players in the AFL come from families with a strong footy culture like the Riolis or via the private school system. Or both. It makes it harder for young kids outside access to these systems to get a look in. because the resources are focused on private schools more than regional areas. I did some junior coaching in regional NSW years ago (00s) in a strong NRL area and it was bloody hard to get the AFL to take notice. Yet we ended up with four kids from a small NSW league town (Kyogle) in the NSW u15 side and one of them won the JL Williams medal.

Some good players have won that medal. LDU is probably the highest profile player right now.

It was impossible to get the AFL to take that area seriously or send good development options that way. Even now and its less than 120km SW inland from the Gold Coast where they have a team they pump heaps into.

With a bit of effort the AFL could have had two or three kids from that area in the last decade including some indigenous players who went on to play league. One even represented Australia in sevens rugby.

Its probably not just an indigenous thing either cos the private school system now dominates AFL recruiting. Three of North's better young players came from the Western Jets, outside that eastern suburbs set up and they went later in the draft (Xerri in the 70s, Ford at 56 and Paul Curtis at 35.) If those kids were in the Eastern suburbs I'd say they'd have had more access to development resources than they did in Western Melbourne.

Is it the AFL or is it the clubs going cheap? I think the AFL would be pissed off with most of the clubs approach to NGA zones. I work in the Northern suburbs of Adelaide with a lot of African kids - all of whom would qualify as NGA. Lots of incredible athletes - with a couple of socceroos and a few top level basketballers coming from the area - Adelaide United have a decent presence within the community, as do Adelaide 36ers, promoting their games, running clinics, giving out merch, networking. Nada from Port Adelaide, whose zone it is - they just sit back and rely on the local teams to tell them if they've got a talented kid that they should sign as NGA. It's not develpment - it's just taking advantage of what falls in your lap.

 

[sr36]

In an ideal world I agree and perhaps arrangements will be made which on the face of it look like this. However, I think its a pretty utopian view re how it'll work in practice, especially with the funding and expertise most welfare department's have. Welfare is also never a one shoe fits all approach.

True, but it's really just about reducing the potential for coercion or perceived coercion, by not having a performance manager with hiring and firing rights dealing with a players personal issues. And yes there will always be some cross over - it's just about reducing risk by having more appropriately demarcated roles - you can't eliminate risk.

In terms of the recruiting question - any club would be out of their mind if they look back at that Hawthorn era of dominance - that included Buddy, Cyril, Burgoyne and Hill - and decide the lesson we've learnt from that era and Hawthorn's experience is less Aboriginal players.

 

[kickazz]

I guess the intention of the whole "assigning everyone a nickname" thing is some sort of team building comradery thing, but I kinda don't get it. I see it more as an power thing on the part of the guy giving out the nicknames - if I were in the team and it happened to me it would really rub me the wrong way, it seems disrespectful.

 

[Elixuh]

True, but it's really just about reducing the potential for coercion or perceived coercion, by not having a performance manager with hiring and firing rights dealing with a players personal issues. And yes there will always be some cross over - it's just about reducing risk by having more appropriately demarcated roles - you can't eliminate risk.

In terms of the recruiting question - any club would be out of their mind if they look back at that Hawthorn era of dominance - that included Buddy, Cyril, Burgoyne and Hill - and decide the lesson we've learnt from that era and Hawthorn's experience is less Aboriginal players.

I don't think they can materially reduce the risk by putting in place a policy of virtual walls between departments. I think some people are a bit naïve to the role of welfare officers - who do they report to and ostensibly what is their mission? To ensure the performance of players in an AFL environment. They're not funded and do not have the expertise to do much else. It isn't a knock on welfare departments, they do great work, its just the way it is.

My post wasn't only talking about Aboriginal players, its really an issue which is relevant to all players. Aboriginal players aren't the only players in the AFL who come from problematic or disadvantaged backgrounds or who have personal issues etc. The point I was making won't be as relevant to guys like Buddy, Cyril and Burgoyne who were clear first round talent. It'll be more relevant to the guys in that 2nd round and beyond category who have a level of talent but its more speculative and other personal factors may more easily outweigh the talent appraisal.

 

[sr36]

I don't think they can materially reduce the risk by putting in place a policy of virtual walls between departments. I think some people are a bit naïve to the role of welfare officers - who do they report to and ostensibly what is their mission? To ensure the performance of players in an AFL environment. They're not funded and do not have the expertise to do much else. It isn't a knock on welfare departments, they do great work, its just the way it is.

My post wasn't only talking about Aboriginal players, its really an issue which is relevant to all players. Aboriginal players aren't the only players in the AFL who come from problematic or disadvantaged backgrounds or who have personal issues etc. The point I was making won't be as relevant to guys like Buddy, Cyril and Burgoyne who were clear first round talent. It'll be more relevant to the guys in that 2nd round and beyond category who have a level of talent but its more speculative and other personal factors may more easily outweigh the talent appraisal.

Footy clubs employee more than just the 42 on the list. Welfare shouldn't sit within the football department and should instead be a part of HR reporting to the CEO. Footy clubs are nothing without their employees, who are ****ing hard to replace when you find a good one. If they don't value their welfare and look for savings there, then they'll get what they deserve.

The bolded has already occured for most clubs. Partially due to list sizes dropping, but also for other reasons (including welfare costs), clubs are taking what they perceive to be less risks and are betting on personal factors as trumping talent with later picks. Draft numbers are dropping and will continue to drop - the rookie draft is nearly dead and it is already for the 18 year olds who miss the draft. It'll continue to shift to SSP who have trained for a block instead of speculative picks based on talent to fill lists.

 

[blackshadow]

I guess the intention of the whole "assigning everyone a nickname" thing is some sort of team building comradery thing, but I kinda don't get it. I see it more as an power thing on the part of the guy giving out the nicknames - if I were in the team and it happened to me it would really rub me the wrong way, it seems disrespectful.

That's definitely a valid view - there's also the flip side where having a nickname is part of making someone feel part of a group/team.

Not saying either is right or wrong, different people view things differently.

Thinking back to when I played country footy I am struggling to think of a single player in the club that didn't have a nickname, some of them still have that nickname decades on.

 

[Elixuh]

Footy clubs employee more than just the 42 on the list. Welfare shouldn't sit within the football department and should instead be a part of HR. HR would report to the CEO. Footy clubs are nothing without their employees, who are ****ing hard to replace when you find a good one. If they don't value their welfare and look for savings there, then they'll get what they deserve.

That's already occured for most clubs. Partially due to list sizes dropping, but also for other reasons, clubs are taking what they perceive to be less risks and are betting on personal factors as trumping talent with later picks. Draft numbers are dropping and will continue to drop - the rookie draft is nearly dead. It'll continue to shift to SSP who have trained for a block instead of speculative picks based on talent to fill list.

Yeah, I don't think the organisational structures in AFL environments are as clear cut as you're making out. They may be on paper, but in practice, no.

Its also not about clubs not valuing welfare or looking to save money, its about what they can do with the resources available to them, which isn't unlimited. And when you think about the playing list alone...they're never going to have enough funding at current levels to reduce risk in the way you're suggesting.

I think the solution is either the AFL provides a lot more funding to clubs which must be directed to welfare or clubs will have to reduce risk by making tough calls as to how they manage their players which may lead to undesirable outcomes for the players.

 

[yodellinhank]

By culture - I'm talking more about how people live, think and what they value rather than artefacts and outward expressions of culture. I'm of the view that Bachar Houli wouldn't have had much of a career if he was around a decade earlier - or even at a less open club. Simply because he wouldn't have been as accepted and embraced for being Bachar Houli with all of the cultural heritage he brought with him.

There were whispers that this was the case at Essendon with his coach.

 

[sr36]

Yeah, I don't think the organisational structures in AFL environments are as clear cut as you're making out. They may be on paper, but in practice, no.

Its also not about clubs not valuing welfare or looking to save money, its about what they can do with the resources available to them, which isn't unlimited. And when you think about the playing list alone...they're never going to have enough funding at current levels to reduce risk in the way you're suggesting.

I think the solution is either the AFL provides a lot more funding to clubs which must be directed to welfare or clubs will have to reduce risk by making tough calls as to how they manage their players which may lead to undesirable outcomes for the players.

I'm not suggesting they're clear cut. I'm suggesting they should be.

Hawthorn's system was clearly a recipe for trouble - Burt - the welfare manager, working for the coaches and even being put forward to be the player manager for a player they coaches want to make changes in his love life.

The industry doesn't need more funding to sustain demarcated welfare departments - massive broadcast deals are seeing players closing in on an average salary of half a million a year. Clubs, the AFL and the AFLPA just need to shift their priorities.

 

[Elixuh]

I'm not suggesting they're clear cut. I'm suggesting they should be.

Hawthorn's system was clearly a recipe for trouble - Burt - the welfare manager, working for the coaches and even being put forward to be the player manager for a player they coaches want to make changes in his love life.

The industry doesn't need more funding to sustain demarcated welfare departments - players are closing in on an average salary of half a million a year. Clubs, the AFL and the AFLPA just need to shift their priorities.

I agree with you I just don’t think it’ll happen.

Hawthorn, imo, had a system from the board and executive down, where because they were doing well under Clarkson, he was effectively the king of the castle and able to dictate terms. And there was limited to no governance.