Opinion Heretier Lumumba

[cityslick1]

Timed for release before the prelim? Sadly we didn’t make it H.

Interesting to see part of his claim is loss of enjoyment! I didn’t know you could take that to the Supreme Court? I might claim against the pies this year as well!

My first thought was that he actually waited until our season was over, to not distract the players.

And its probably not fair to presume, without full knowledge, but in answer to the following... mo is

Does Heritier have mental health issues - yes, not the club's fault..
Did the behaviour of the club enhance his issues - most likely yes, like it or not Ed, that is the club's fault
Was he racially vilified - likely yes, Club's fault. No dancing around this...
Will he be entitled to a payout - likely yes, but should settle out of court
Could he reject a settlement - also possible, as he may wish to expose the club & make a statement, as number 1 priority
Will he settle for out of court, provided club issue public apology admitting racist culture and harm to H as a result of this - yes, most likely scenario imo

Thankfully we're in a time when this stuff is treated as it should be, and the club needs to purge itself of its skeletons, admit wrong-doing and actually give H some peace. Again, like it or not...

 

[ride56]

H is saying indigenous footballers are the greatest in history. Quite obviously that is bullshit. "Some of the greatest" would be a better response. The Prince H LMAO goose

Well, given he somehow claims "indigenous" status as he has some African / Brazillian ancestry, so could someone of Irish or Scottish ancestry as they are also indigenous to those lands. The guy is just trying to be part of the cool gang anyway he can, the shallow thinking goose

 

[manicpie]

And while

My first thought was that he actually waited until our season was over, to not distract the players.

And its probably not fair to presume, without full knowledge, but in answer to the following... mo is

Does Heritier have mental health issues - yes, not the club's fault..
Did the behaviour of the club enhance his issues - most likely yes, like it or not Ed, that is the club's fault
Was he racially vilified - likely yes, Club's fault. No dancing around this...
Will he be entitled to a payout - likely yes, but should settle out of court
Could he reject a settlement - also possible, as he may wish to expose the club & make a statement, as number 1 priority
Will he settle for out of court, provided club issue public apology admitting racist culture and harm to H as a result of this - yes, most likely scenario imo

Thankfully we're in a time when this stuff is treated as it should be, and the club needs to purge itself of its skeletons, admit wrong-doing and actually give H some peace. Again, like it or not...

Give it a rest, he's a desperate attention seeking opportunist, if you can't see it as a scam then don't assume that the club has a racist culture. Why has it taken 12 years for him to sue us, with the BLM movement up and going it is a perfect time to sue

 

[partypie]

Why?

Because companies that endorse sporting teams or players are more vulnerable to and nowadays have almost an instinctive desire to appease the woke generation?

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

My first thought was that he actually waited until our season was over, to not distract the players.

And its probably not fair to presume, without full knowledge, but in answer to the following... mo is

Does Heritier have mental health issues - yes, not the club's fault..
Did the behaviour of the club enhance his issues - most likely yes, like it or not Ed, that is the club's fault
Was he racially vilified - likely yes, Club's fault. No dancing around this...
Will he be entitled to a payout - likely yes, but should settle out of court
Could he reject a settlement - also possible, as he may wish to expose the club & make a statement, as number 1 priority
Will he settle for out of court, provided club issue public apology admitting racist culture and harm to H as a result of this - yes, most likely scenario imo

Thankfully we're in a time when this stuff is treated as it should be, and the club needs to purge itself of its skeletons, admit wrong-doing and actually give H some peace. Again, like it or not...

I reckon you are making all sorts of assumptions for which no open evidence exists and do more than justice to Harry. If the club assumes a financial responsibility for his mental state and racist claims, I will be very surprised. If it's settled out of court, I will be angry, because the truth of this needs to be revealed. You seem very certain he was vilified and that the club caused his mental anguish. Again, I see no evidence for either assumption. The only outcome that will satisfy me is that Heritier loses the case and is never heard from again. You obviously hold him in much higher esteem than me. I am yet to see anything emerge which suggests that the club is quilty of racism or his current state of mind. To me, he is just a very strange and quirky opportunist seeking to create money out of thin air. Each to our own.

 

[noideaatall]

Hi noideaatall! How ironic I should read your greeting as I am sitting down to eat my stir fry which contained one of the kaffir lime and lemongrass shots you recommended in the covid thread! I got fresh supplies today because Coles had them on special for $3, meaning each shot costs only 75c.

My favourite. Something that good and cheap has to toxic for human consumption or involves some obscure, endangered creature.

I would like to think the only side I am on is my own... I'd like this cloud to disappear, no more almac, Winmar, pointing the bone days. The internal review was never going to silence H nor our critics out there, whatever their motive, hence I am glad of the court case.

H's character won't impact on any assessment of racist behaviour. Nor will the argument he accepted the name. The counter that he was a young, un-impowered "victim" of a racist culture seeking acceptance and the AFL/Pies should have protected him based on the professional standards at that time will prevail. As I have posted, Collingwood's reaction this year leads me to speculate they weren't all over this when it happened.

I wish the Pies had made a statement earlier this year that on becoming aware of H.'s inappropriate nickname they took the x, y & z actions to support H., other players and to prevent this occurring in the future. I wish H. had agreed to sit down and chat with the Pies with a media representative in tow to keep them all honest. Collingwood's silence, subtle undermining of H only give them impression their approach is club first. In H.'s case sueing makes it look all about money rather than education.

I do think it is worth noting this is not solely about Collingwood, it is about the AFL and, in that sense, the football culture in general. I view this stuff as a journey and the biggest crime that we (Pies, AFl, general football community) are a few steps behind some of the more progressive elements of our community.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Well, given he somehow claims "indigenous" status as he has some African / Brazillian ancestry, so could someone of Irish or Scottish ancestry as they are also indigenous to those lands. The guy is just trying to be part of the cool gang anyway he can, the shallow thinking goose

Well, you know, if you believe the scientists, only those in Africa can have any claim to being indigenous. Everyone else emigrated at some point.

 

[DinoSoar]

I reckon you are making all sorts of assumptions for which no open evidence exists and do more than justice to Harry. If the club assumes a financial responsibility for his mental state and racist claims, I will be very surprised. If it's settled out of court, I will be angry, because the truth of this needs to be revealed. You seem very certain he was vilified and that the club caused his mental anguish. Again, I see no evidence for either assumption. The only outcome that will satisfy me is that Heritier loses the case and is never heard from again. You obviously hold him in much higher esteem than me. I am yet to see anything emerge which suggests that the club is quilty of racism or his current state of mind. To me, he is just a very strange and quirky opportunist seeking to create money out of thin air. Each to our own.

I think it will get settled out of court as this seems to be the way of things these days on matters such as this. Unfortunately, the allegations are not clear cut (one way or another) and this is further muddied by mental health conditions that could well have been exacerbated by his self-confessed illicit drug taking. Also in the mix are the concussions, as it is now beginning to become apparent the long term damage and changes concussion can have on personality and cognition. The whole situation is just one hot mess, no matter from which angle you look at it - there are no winners here.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

My favourite. Something that good and cheap has to toxic for human consumption or involves some obscure, endangered creature.

I would like to think the only side I am on is my own... I'd like this cloud to disappear, no more almac, Winmar, pointing the bone days. The internal review was never going to silence H nor our critics out there, whatever their motive, hence I am glad of the court case.

H's character won't impact on any assessment of racist behaviour. Nor will the argument he accepted the name. The counter that he was a young, un-impowered "victim" of a racist culture seeking acceptance and the AFL/Pies should have protected him based on the professional standards at that time will prevail. As I have posted, Collingwood's reaction this year leads me to speculate they weren't all over this when it happened.

I wish the Pies had made a statement earlier this year that on becoming aware of H.'s inappropriate nickname they took the x, y & z actions to support H., other players and to prevent this occurring in the future. I wish H. had agreed to sit down and chat with the Pies with a media representative in tow to keep them all honest. Collingwood's silence, subtle undermining of H only give them impression their approach is club first. In H.'s case sueing makes it look all about money rather than education.

I do think it is worth noting this is not solely about Collingwood, it is about the AFL and, in that sense, the football culture in general. I view this stuff as a journey and the biggest crime that we (Pies, AFl, general football community) are a few steps behind some of the more progressive elements of our community.

I think the Pies were very wise in saying nothing (though they didn't as Buckley mentioned it at an early press conference saying it was a shame that the club had failed to meet the needs of all individuals or words to that affect). Lumumba wanted only an apology not a discussion which might have led to something to apologise about) and given the current court case, the Pies were very wise to say nothing. His inappropriate nickname is still a matter for some conjecture and I am glad the club also refused to acknowledge they knew about it given the mystery surrounding who use it, why and who knew about it. If it's a journey then I would not have been going on it given the lack of clarity regarding the destination, its contents or its participants. Lumumba can't expect a club to apologise for vague nickname references and a culture of racist behaviour which he seems unable to actually describe.

PS If it contained an endangered creature, it would cost a lot more!

 

[jathanas]

My favourite. Something that good and cheap has to toxic for human consumption or involves some obscure, endangered creature.

I would like to think the only side I am on is my own... I'd like this cloud to disappear, no more almac, Winmar, pointing the bone days. The internal review was never going to silence H nor our critics out there, whatever their motive, hence I am glad of the court case.

H's character won't impact on any assessment of racist behaviour. Nor will the argument he accepted the name. The counter that he was a young, un-impowered "victim" of a racist culture seeking acceptance and the AFL/Pies should have protected him based on the professional standards at that time will prevail. As I have posted, Collingwood's reaction this year leads me to speculate they weren't all over this when it happened.

I wish the Pies had made a statement earlier this year that on becoming aware of H.'s inappropriate nickname they took the x, y & z actions to support H., other players and to prevent this occurring in the future. I wish H. had agreed to sit down and chat with the Pies with a media representative in tow to keep them all honest. Collingwood's silence, subtle undermining of H only give them impression their approach is club first. In H.'s case sueing makes it look all about money rather than education.

I do think it is worth noting this is not solely about Collingwood, it is about the AFL and, in that sense, the football culture in general. I view this stuff as a journey and the biggest crime that we (Pies, AFl, general football community) are a few steps behind some of the more progressive elements of our community.

I have not sensed that the club is subtly undermining H in this instance. I suspect that the club would have been more proactive to initiate dialog if H's recent statements weren't so legally charged. Any lawyer advising the club would have identified that and advised the club not to respond publicly.

I hope the court case will bring out the truth and ensure that any wrongs are righted.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

I have not sensed that the club is subtly undermining H in this instance. I suspect that the club would have been more proactive to initiate dialog if H's recent statements weren't so legally charged. Any lawyer advising the club would have identified that and advised the club not to respond publicly.

I hope the court case will bring out the truth and ensure that any wrongs are righted.

Or even better still, show there are no wrongs to be righted.

 

[Quicky]

To all the snowflakes here that “demanded” OUR CLUB apologise to him..............I told you so.

Heritier never was after an apology..........I joined Instagram so I could confront him on this and he ran away because he didn’t like what I asked him or he just can’t handle mature confrontation. Most likely he was after $.

Mods should send this thread to the nest........it doesn’t deserve anymore oxygen here.

I have a pretty good idea who is funding his legal process.

We really had some sh*t blokes in that 2010 Premiership Team.........starts from the Coach I guess..

On a human level I still think the right thing to do was to apologise. What was said to H is wrong.

From a legal perspective it would have been dumb. The clubs covered their arse.

It's pretty clear now H is after either 1) money 2) to drag the clubs name through the mud 3) both.

If it's just about money his motivations are wrong.

If its to drag the clubs name through the mud, I can understand why he'd want to if he's feeling aggrieved. I don't think its good for a person to hold on to that kind of resentment though and if it were me i'd be approaching it different.

I don't think we're ever really gonna know.

 

[Quicky]

Sorry mate but our Club apologising would have been the worst thing for us to do. If you still can’t realise that now then I can’t help you there.

Heritier needs to understand that he will never be a modern day Martin Luther King Jr.

Did you read my second sentence? I understand why the club hasn't commented.

 

[GoDaics]

Hopefully it gets to court we are found to have no case to answer to and the flog is up for big costs re our legal fees.

 

[Quicky]

I did read it but you still believe we should apologise........is that not true now?

I think H was called a chimp and that calling a black person a chimp is wrong. Even if it was casual, even if H was a party to it, and even if no malice was meant. When you've done something wrong the human thing to do is apologise. I understand why the club can't do that because of the legal implications. Do you believe that calling H a chimp is wrong? Can you see how that might affect a person?

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

I think H was called a chimp and that calling a black person a chimp is wrong. Even if it was casual, even if H was a party to it, and even if no malice was meant. When you've done something wrong the human thing to do is apologise. I understand why the club can't do that because of the legal implications. Do you believe that calling H a chimp is wrong? Can you see how that might affect a person?

You make a valid point but there really is too much uncertainty around the claim to comment as decisively as you have done. I disagree with you saying that it is wrong 'if H was a party to it', and I doubt that a court would consider the club and AFL liable for a financial payment if H had encouraged players to use that nickname. If he later decided he disliked it, he could have asked players to stop, as he eventually did with a decisive outcome.To suggest that an agreed to nickname should be worthy of suing the club and AFL is ridiculous. Or as Jason Mifsud said yesterday, H could have appealed to him as the AFL's head of diversity but he didn't. It's a bit rich to now be suing the AFL for failing to protect him against racist taunts when he never once approached the AFL with a complaint during his playing days.

 

[Quicky]

You make a valid point but there really is too much uncertainty around the claim to comment as decisively as you have done. I disagree with you saying that it is wrong 'if H was a party to it', and I doubt that a court would consider the club and AFL liable for a financial payment if H had encouraged players to use that nickname. If he later decided he disliked it, he could have asked players to stop, as he eventually did with a decisive outcome.To suggest that an agreed to nickname should be worthy of suing the club and AFL is ridiculous. Or as Jason Mifsud said yesterday, H could have appealed to him as the AFL's head of diversity but he didn't. It's a bit rich to now be suing the AFL for failing to protect him against racist taunts when he never once approached the AFL with a complaint during his playing days.

I think it's been established that H was called a chimp by past players who have commented. They've given some context around it but you're right we don't have the full context of it.

My comments about it being wrong, even if H was a party to it, wasn't with consideration of how that would be considered legally, that's probably one for Kirby. I just think, just because H was party to it (assuming thats true), doesn't mean it wasn't wrong.

I think about some of the stupid shit I have done over the years. Sometimes it takes years, reflection, maturity to comprehend it. I imagine the trauma of some events may manifest in a similar way. It's only after time and reflection that you understand it.

I suspect it may be so with H so i'm willing to be empathetic about it and how it has affected him. It could also just be a resentful person reaching for a cash grab and to dole out some reputational damage. Or a bit for both.

I just tend to go back to what we know. A young black footballer was nicknamed chimp. To me its very wrong.

 

[Pistol Night]

Timed for release before the prelim? Sadly we didn’t make it H.

Interesting to see part of his claim is loss of enjoyment! I didn’t know you could take that to the Supreme Court? I might claim against the pies this year as well!

If those are the grounds i anticipate a massive class action from all Pies supporters!

 

[Nuffsaid]

I find a few things strange about this whole situation:
1. There seems to be no point where H says ‘ I asked for it to stop and it didn’t’ . Along with some implied suggestions that he embraced the nickname or at least appeared to - it’s odd that he never raised it at the time. I find it hard to think that if this were the case, that the club wouldn’t have taken strong action. All employers have a grievance process.
2. To suggest that the only possible reaction was to take hallucinogenic mushrooms seems to gloss over a myriad of alternative options H had available to him .
3. If his genuine motivation is for the cause of racial equality and awareness, why would he reject any offer or opportunity to work with the club for systemic improvement?

There are 1000s of examples in a club environment of people being given ‘ironic nicknames’ and it’s pretty much the rule of the land that if they hate it you stop, but if they embrace it, it sticks.

I don’t begrudge H the feelings he had about the name but he alone has to take responsibility for how he dealt with that feeling - and the actions he could reasonably taken - other than drugs, rants, and bizarre behavior.

 

[noideaatall]

I have not sensed that the club is subtly undermining H in this instance. I suspect that the club would have been more proactive to initiate dialog if H's recent statements weren't so legally charged. Any lawyer advising the club would have identified that and advised the club not to respond publicly.

I hope the court case will bring out the truth and ensure that any wrongs are righted.

My impression was some of the comments were undermining. Wouldn't be the first time I had the wrong impression. I note Leon Davis

Leon Davis

Age

43

Ht

177cm

Wt

80kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.5

3star

K

10.2

4star

HB

3.3

3star

M

3.1

3star

T

2.8

4star

G

1.2

4star

No current season stats available

D

5.0

1star

K

3.6

2star

HB

1.4

2star

M

1.2

2star

T

0.4

3star

G

0.4

3star

shared that impression.
When Davis and Krakouer come out in support of Lumumba, surely that is a warning bell not to dismiss the issue lightly. The links in post 161 are worth following: both of these guys have a thoughtful and insightful perspective.

I'm sure the lawyer would advise to minimise potential litigation but that doesn't make it the right thing to do. If the club didn't believe there was a need to apologise at least they could have confirmed the situation and detailed their response. Of course if their silence is to protect other past/present players at the club then fair enough.

 

[jackcass]

Because companies that endorse sporting teams or players are more vulnerable to and nowadays have almost an instinctive desire to appease the woke generation?

It’s a delicate balance which I can appreciate, but sponsors equally love seeing their brand splashed across the tv. I doubt this case will be sufficiently detrimental so as cause any angst among sponsors. The club have launched an independent investigation. Not sure what else they can do.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

When Davis and Krakouer come out in support of Lumumba, surely that is a warning bell not to dismiss the issue lightly.

Interestingly to me; while Davis came out in support of Lumumba, it was support of a general nature and stating that his own experiences mirrored those described by Lumumba... not actually verifying that anything Lumumba said was true.

Also, Davis mentioned that the behaviour was dealt with strongly by the club at the time, per the buzzfeed article.

Davis still doesn't feel comfortable going public with the details of what he experienced, but says it was dealt with strongly at the time by the club. He says he still has a good relationship with Collingwood, and its management.

Moreover, Lumumba states that immediately after the meeting with Bucks and the leadership group, the “chimp” nickname stopped.

So while the culture at the club may have been pretty bad, it seems management dealt with each case effectively at the time?

 

[noideaatall]

Interestingly to me; while Davis came out in support of Lumumba, it was support of a general nature and stating that his own experiences mirrored those described by Lumumba... not actually verifying that anything Lumumba said was true.

Also, Davis mentioned that the behaviour was dealt with strongly by the club at the time, per the buzzfeed article.

I thought Davis was referring to his own experience of racism at the club in regards to it being dealt with strongly.

Moreover, Lumumba states that immediately after the meeting with Bucks and the leadership group, the “chimp” nickname stopped.
So while the culture at the club may have been pretty bad, it seems management dealt with each case effectively at the time?

That depends if it stopped solely because of what Lumumba said. At this stage nothing has been revealed (that I am aware of) as to how management acted after Lumumba's meeting.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I thought Davis was referring to his own experience of racism at the club in regards to it being dealt with strongly.

Yes, that is what I said.

That depends if it stopped solely because of what Lumumba said. At this stage nothing has been revealed (that I am aware of) as to how management acted after Lumumba's meeting.

I don’t think we have that information, but if it stopped immediately, that would at least suggest that the “guilty” parties (assuming use of the “chimp” nickname hadn’t been sanctioned by Lumumba) were accepting that behaviour needed to change...?

 

[Kappa]

It’s a delicate balance which I can appreciate, but sponsors equally love seeing their brand splashed across the tv. I doubt this case will be sufficiently detrimental so as cause any angst among sponsors. The club have launched an independent investigation. Not sure what else they can do.

You're joking right... in the modern age of #BLM and you don't think companies will freak out about sponsoring a club embroiled in a racism lawsuit... Right...