News Hawthorn Racism Scandal

[MrPower]

Fair call.

A bit like my wife saying she has always observed me observing traffic laws when in the car with me. She would be confident I would never do any different when she wasn't in the car.

And she wasn't with me when I went through that red traffic light at the Gepps Cross corner one early week night.

The red light camera at that intersection was the 'fair, impartial, and independent investigative process' that proved her wrong

Whatever the words, the businesses are going to support their investment until they can't any longer. At this stage, they have no choice

 

[Festerz]

Whatever the words, the businesses are going to support their investment until they can't any longer. At this stage, they have no choice

Your words are better.

 

[Saltiga]

If clarkson come to port instead, the tone would be very different on here. It would be a tone of there's two sides to every story, many indigenous players rate him highly and he deserves to put his version across.

 

[MrPower]

Your words are better.

Tell 'em your missus was driving!

 

[HinkleysHeroes]

I dont give a stuff about Hawthorn in respect to which players we consider..

Sydney have a no dickheads policy. Rioli looks like a dickhead. I want an elite athletes only policy. Rioli isnt an elite athlete.

Let WCE baby sit him.

I see how well that no dickhead policy worked yesterday.

I don't care if a player is a dickhead, there is room for all personalities in a footy club. How far you push that is the line you need to find.

Eg. Dane Swan was a dick head but I'd always have him in my team at that time.

 

[Festerz]

Tell 'em your missus was driving!

Meh. The thing about speed/red light cameras. They aren't using ARC technology,

They capture the pic of the person behind the wheel pretty clearly.

 

[Mikey13G]

If clarkson come to port instead, the tone would be very different on here. It would be a tone of there's two sides to every story, many indigenous players rate him highly and he deserves to put his version across.

There's three sides to every story. The players version, Clarko's version and the truth. Ken cops a lot of flak for saying there's more to life than football, but this story has highlighted why that's the case.

 

[Troopsy]

If clarkson come to port instead, the tone would be very different on here. It would be a tone of there's two sides to every story, many indigenous players rate him highly and he deserves to put his version across.

Nah. There were quite a few people (including myself) that were relieved that didn’t happen.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

If clarkson come to port instead, the tone would be very different on here. It would be a tone of there's two sides to every story, many indigenous players rate him highly and he deserves to put his version across.

Yeah some peoples perceptions would be biased if he had come here. Just like those of sone North and Brisbane fans are now.

Doesn't make them right.

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Powerade 08]

The Lions and North standing by Clarkson's/Fagan's version of events suggests to me that they must think they have a leg to stand on. I don't understand why else they would both publicly come out and support them before the investigation has concluded given the severity of the allegations.

"James Hird is a person of great respect at this club and in the broader football community and the board will not be taking decisions about the next steps until the process of the review and the investigation have taken their course."

and the article is titled 'I (Hird) can't wait to clear my name'.

 

[PowerBaz]

It will all come out in the wash at some point. I’m thinking by Christmas?

 

[Steve Dore]

Meh. The thing about speed/red light cameras. They aren't using ARC technology,

They capture the pic of the person behind the wheel pretty clearly.

Off topic but they don't and it doesn't matter. If the registered owner, or the person first on the registration if registered in joint names, wasn't driving they need to provide a stat dec specifying the person driving at the time. A lot of red light cameras take a pic of the rear of the vehicle from an angle such that not even the back of the driver's head is visible.

 

[Sinnthesis]

Is this the only thread that hasn't got an anti Hinkley sentiment?
In that case: Sack Hinkley!

 

[edgie]

Yes, we dodged a bullet with Clarkson but we still have the noose around our neck that is Hinkley.


Sack them both

Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk

 

[TeeKray]

The AFL will do everything it can to control it and the AFL no doubt was sitting on this until first Brisbane were knocked out and then the GF was over.

The Essendon drugs scandal showed the AFL tried and successfully controlled a big chunk of what happened but in the end it couldnt control everything, especially when it got to CAS. Reckon same will happen here.

CAS is a body that sits outside the AFL's sphere of influence (ie it's not based in Australia).

The AFL will manufacture an outcome here to absolve Clarkson and Fagan of significant wrongdoing whilst simultaneously pretending they've heard the concerns of the players making the complaints.

Even if it ends up in court, the AFL will likely be able to negotiate the least damaging outcome possible for them. Australians in general have way too much naive faith in the legal system. It's open to soft corruption and big companies are still able to bully smaller companies or individuals into submission. The AFL will win out in the end.

 

[VineValerian]

Off topic but they don't and it doesn't matter. If the registered owner, or the person first on the registration if registered in joint names, wasn't driving they need to provide a stat dec specifying the person driving at the time. A lot of red light cameras take a pic of the rear of the vehicle from an angle such that not even the back of the driver's head is visible.

Yep. Happened to us several years ago.
Missus was speeding home one night after work and got clocked. Joint names on the rego, so I got the infaction notice.

Went to the local Council offices and got a JP to sign an SD, or something similar, to present to the police.

Got the demerit points allocated to her.

Mind you I still paid her bloody fine 'cos we only have a joint account

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Sonja Hood is 'really confident in his (Clarkson's) side of the story'. That sounds like standing by his version of the events to me.



The Fagan statement is less certain but has the same flavour in my opinion

Not questioning you here, just that you posted the link, but in what capacity is Sonja Hood confident in Clarkson's version? Has she spoken to the people who have made the claims, reviewed the evidence and determined they are lying? Because that is effectively what she is saying.

This is the exact flip side to the 'two sides to every story' argument put forward by those who don't believe the accusations.

What's happening here is these clubs are trying to control the narrative to protect their investments. It goes beyond standing by them and is creating a public environment that undermines the individuals making the claims.

 

[Steve Dore]

... Australians in general have way too much naive faith in the legal system. It's open to soft corruption and big companies are still able to bully smaller companies or individuals into submission. The AFL will win out in the end.

Many people assume that the legal system in terms of civil law is actually a justice system. Organisations like the AFL with money, influence and influential associates tend to win in civil cases contrary to what would be a just outcome.

 

[Jonts]

CAS is a body that sits outside the AFL's sphere of influence (ie it's not based in Australia).

The AFL will manufacture an outcome here to absolve Clarkson and Fagan of significant wrongdoing whilst simultaneously pretending they've heard the concerns of the players making the complaints.

Even if it ends up in court, the AFL will likely be able to negotiate the least damaging outcome possible for them. Australians in general have way too much naive faith in the legal system. It's open to soft corruption and big companies are still able to bully smaller companies or individuals into submission. The AFL will win out in the end.

They'll have one trigger man, unsure who but someone will (at least to the public) get hit hard

 

[jakey]

Not questioning you here, just that you posted the link, but in what capacity is Sonja Hood confident in Clarkson's version? Has she spoken to the people who have made the claims, reviewed the evidence and determined they are lying? Because that is effectively what she is saying.

This is the exact flip side to the two sides to every story argument put forward by those who don't believe the accusations.

What's happening here is these clubs are trying to control the narrative to protect their investments. It goes beyond standing by them and is creating a public environment that undermines the individuals making the claims.

You can see the impact of this on the North Melbourne board. When the scandal first hit, reactions were similar to here. Dropped in yesterday after Sonja's statement and there's a poll with 2/3rds of posters responding that Clarko will 100% coach next year, nothing to see here etc. The machine is working hard.

 

[FishingRick04]

Just o be Devils advocate. Whose to say the conversation didn’t go down, player “I’m struggling. My missus is volatile, unstable, now she’s pregnant and I don’t know if I want a kid to her!”.

Coach replies “maybe it’s in you’re interest not to have the kid with her. Maybe you need to separate?”

I’m not saying if it played out like that or not. However it potentially could have. At the time the coach may have being giving guidance they thought was correct for the player.

Player has a change of heart, wants the kid and stay with misses. Who knows. It just shows in these type of meetings best opinions kept to themselves, have a 3rd party witness, or send player to the club psychologist who would be the expert.

All I know is at times we all hear what we want to hear rather than what was actually said. Especially if it suits an agenda we are trying to build.

I hope it played out like the above because the other version is bloody awful.

 

[Chachi]

Just o be Devils advocate. Whose to say the conversation didn’t go down, player “I’m struggling. My missus is volatile, unstable, now she’s pregnant and I don’t know if I want a kid to her!”.

Coach replies “maybe it’s in you’re interest not to have the kid with her. Maybe you need to separate?”

I’m not saying if it played out like that or not. However it potentially could have. At the time the coach may have being giving guidance they thought was correct for the player.

Player has a change of heart, wants the kid and stay with misses. Who knows. It just shows in these type of meetings best opinions kept to themselves, have a 3rd party witness, or send player to the club psychologist who would be the expert.

All I know is at times we all hear what we want to hear rather than what was actually said. Especially if it suits an agenda we are trying to build.

I hope it played out like the above because the other version is bloody awful.

Without all the information it's impossible to say. These types of sensitive conversations 'could' be misunderstood or taken out of context.

My big BUT is it's not just one player, and why are they all Indigenous?

Usually there are two sides to a story and the truth is somewhere in between.

I feel this should be investigated by the Victorian IBAC. Whether we like it not they are made up of actual Detectives who have training and experience on how to investigate a matter to the level of 'beyond a reasonable doubt' and they are led by a former Supreme Court Judge.

If the AFL want to make a real impact now and for the future into preventing this type of behaviour they need to do more because thus far it's only been a PR exercise until the heat or interest dies down. The Crows camp, among others, is an excellent example of this.

Lives are going to be changed forever here so I really hope they do this properly.

 

[PortWTF]

Without all the information it's impossible to say. These types of sensitive conversations 'could' be misunderstood or taken out of context.

My big BUT is it's not just one player, and why are they all Indigenous?

Usually there are two sides to a story and the truth is somewhere in between.

They are all indigenous because the review only interviewed past indigenous players. This is one reason why I think it might be premature to say that this is a "racism" scandal. For all we know, this is how they treated everyone.

 

[Schulzenfest]

They are all indigenous because the review only interviewed past indigenous players. This is one reason why I think it might be premature to say that this is a "racism" scandal. For all we know, this is how they treated everyone.

And as I've posted in this thread before, if what Clarkson has been alleged to have said is true, it should be a sackable offence whether it was racially motivated or not.

 

[Festerz]

Just o be Devils advocate. Whose to say the conversation didn’t go down, player “I’m struggling. My missus is volatile, unstable, now she’s pregnant and I don’t know if I want a kid to her!”.

Coach replies “maybe it’s in you’re interest not to have the kid with her. Maybe you need to separate?”

I’m not saying if it played out like that or not. However it potentially could have. At the time the coach may have being giving guidance they thought was correct for the player.

Player has a change of heart, wants the kid and stay with misses. Who knows. It just shows in these type of meetings best opinions kept to themselves, have a 3rd party witness, or send player to the club psychologist who would be the expert.

All I know is at times we all hear what we want to hear rather than what was actually said. Especially if it suits an agenda we are trying to build.

I hope it played out like the above because the other version is bloody awful.

Don't think that it's helpful to make stuff up to play devils advocate on this one, mate.

An alternative possible narrative to take the sting out of what we do know to make us feel a bit better about ourselves and the game we love.

WHAT WE DO KNOW is was told to the ABC journalist and published on Monday last week by 6 individuals, including:

Ian (not his real name), made the allegation he was requested to have his partner terminate their unborn child.

“Clarkson just leaned over me and demanded that I needed to get rid of my unborn child and my partner. I was then manipulated and convinced to remove my SIM card from my phone, so there was no further contact between my family and me. They told me I’d be living with one of the other coaches from that night onwards,” the player alleged. “He told me to kill my unborn kid.”

WHAT WE DO KNOW is that Phil Egan, the author of a damaging review into Hawthorn Football Club that contained allegations of serious mistreatment of First Nations former players, has described the findings as “To hear and see the trauma as it was personally conveyed to me was like a nightmare” .

WHAT WE DO KNOW is that these allegations are not shocking just because of what they contain, but because they ring true given the decades of abuse not just of Indigenous AFL players by clubs, officials and supporters but of the history of white people in power telling black people how to live their lives and what is best for them and their kids.

THAT is what is bloody awful.