News Mitch Cleary stood down indefinitely - AFL have really stepped in it this time

[Slartibartfast]

What? Did he really? Bloody Hamish!

And then drove off without stopping

 

[WillHayward]

So, he went against the guidelines that were clearly spelt out just last week (sounds familiar) , has apologised and has been reinstated.

Storm in a teacup really.

Except he didnt breach anything

BC outed herself. You cant breach somebody's confidentiality after they have already done it themselves.

 

[Registered User]

Did Gil make the call on suspending him, or someone else? Also, as Gerard Healy just asked on 3aw, who at the afl said that afl.com journos are employees first and journos 2nd?

 

[HairyO]

So indefinitely stood down means "for good if there is no backlash, for the morning if there is a backlash."

****ing joke of an organisation.

 

[Diamond Jim]

I remember a thread ages ago, in the thread it was brought up that cotchin used to bully people at school and the richmond supporters jumped down peoples throats. Not sure if I believed it then but if he did get mitch sacked, then perhaps I do believe it.

Yes I recall that.

Remember also - Cotchin and ‘The Influencer’ are barely 30....theyve barely lived a life of adult decisions. ( Breeding is no indication of maturity, sensible decision making or intelligence btw. - it CAN (not always) be just as much about conforming and not questioning,)

Regardless - as a ‘couple’ they may have ‘ticked the boxes’ on a superficial basis - and impressed the hell out of the ‘nuffies’........but kids, money, footy club captain & ‘influencer’ are hardly qualifications for the ‘good person’ test. Are they?

In fact...that combination of ‘money and power’ usually hides some pretty serious defects....(A recent AFL Capt and Coach comes to mind) - the main one being an inability to stand in another’s shoes.......until told to do it.....and then the tears and bleating starts....

I’d like to see Brooke do something ‘real’...not use a chequebook to excuse her actions. Maybe work a soup kitchen for two weeks....

 

[D-N-R]

Except he didnt breach anything

BC outed herself. You cant breach somebody's confidentiality after they have already done it themselves.

The directive was not to name the families involved. He named one of them. It's pretty cut and dried.

 

[living_in_syd]

https://www.afl.com.au/news/480320
Listen to first 4 mins, Mitch is speaking today.
Absolute storm in a tea cup, he’s back at work. Might as well change the thread title

 

[STFU Donnie]

And then drove off without stopping

What a prick.

 

[Rod Stroker]

https://www.afl.com.au/news/480320
Listen to first 4 mins, Mitch is speaking today.
Absolute storm in a tea cup, he’s back at work. Might as well change the thread title

The "storm" was that he was even stood down in the first place. Ridiculous decision by such an amateur organization

 

[calman]

The storm is journalist who is supposed to be independent, was stood down indefinitely ( AFL said this, not me) because he did something the AFL did not like.
If an action is serious enough to be stood down indefinitely, then you should be able to defend your decision in a public domain

He did not release confidential information, as it was already in PUBLIC DOMAIN, once something goes up on the internet, it is there forever
Claiming you are protecting privacy in this scenario is an excuse for you are making me look bad
Will next journalist hesitate to release information in the public interest because they are concerned at AFL or club reaction. either independent media or a PR department. You don't get to be called independent if you only write approved pieces signed off by an AFL commissar

 

[ShadeyP]

Whoever made this decision initially needs to f..k right off , this world is upside down and then some .

 

[HirdsTheWord]

View attachment 926417
My mate straight up asked cotchin.

Apparently the AFL’ doing.

Lol what’s Cotchin gonna Say?

We all know She beats him. She runs him and the Richmond footy club.

 

[D-N-R]

Standing an employee down is likely just the protocol the organisation goes through with everyone. Once there is an investigation, the employee can either be sacked or reinstated.

To pre-empt the findings or not go through a set procedure would be ameteurish.

The investigation and reinstating of the journalist in short time shows it wasn't a big deal. Storm in a teacup.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Did Gil make the call on suspending him, or someone else? Also, as Gerard Healy just asked on 3aw, who at the afl said that afl.com journos are employees first and journos 2nd?

Healy actually asked that?

How stupid is he?

They work for the AFL!

How are people pretending otherwise? It’s totally bizarre.

Let’s be totally clear: Cleary and the AFL.com team are NOT journalists. No matter what they might be called. Or how good they might be at their job.

All day today people - including some actual “journalists” - have been saying this.

“Oh no, they’re indepedent”... they’re being paid by the AFL. It’s literally impossible for them to be independent.

Its just bizarre. Is people’s idea of journalism so twisted that they actually think this?

 

[KM00]

Standing an employee down is likely just the protocol the organisation goes through with everyone. Once there is an investigation, the employee can either be sacked or reinstated.

To pre-empt the findings or not go through a set procedure would be ameteurish.

The investigation and reinstating of the journalist in short time shows it wasn't a big deal. Storm in a teacup.

But if it was just a standard protocol - why make a public statement of it? If it really was not a big deal ... they should have done an internal investigation, given him a slap on the wrist if he did the wrong thing, and moved on.

The AFL announced it, and it appears to me that they only backed down and decided he could come back because of the massive amount of negative publicity and poor outlook for the AFL.

The whole thing smells !!! (That isnt to say that Cotchin did or didnt have anything to do with it - not making any judgement on that, but incredibly poor decisions made by the AFL Media here)

 

[Eric Blair]

We have always been at war with Eurasia

I don’t think I have ever posted in a more appropriate thread given my username.

I for one look forward to the puff piece on new recruit comrade ogilvy

 

[wagstaff]

Healy actually asked that?

How stupid is he?

They work for the AFL!

How are people pretending otherwise? It’s totally bizarre.

Let’s be totally clear: Cleary and the AFL.com team are NOT journalists. No matter what they might be called. Or how good they might be at their job.

All day today people - including some actual “journalists” - have been saying this.

“Oh no, they’re indepedent”... they’re being paid by the AFL. It’s literally impossible for them to be independent.

Its just bizarre. Is people’s idea of journalism so twisted that they actually think this?

Caroline Wilson made the same observation on Footy Classified tonight: if Cleary is the serious journo people say he is, why is he working for the AFL?

Sure, the AFL could've handled this better but if you think you can be a viable independent journo working for the AFL, you're incredibly naive.

 

[D-N-R]

But if it was just a standard protocol - why make a public statement of it? If it really was not a big deal ... they should have done an internal investigation, given him a slap on the wrist if he did the wrong thing, and moved on.

The AFL announced it, and it appears to me that they only backed down and decided he could come back because of the massive amount of negative publicity and poor outlook for the AFL.

The whole thing smells !!! (That isnt to say that Cotchin did or didnt have anything to do with it - not making any judgement on that, but incredibly poor decisions made by the AFL Media here)

Because they had sent out a media release on Friday afternoon saying their policy was to not release the names of the individuals, then that evening he posted the message doing the opposite.

So they couldn't then ignore it and doing an investigation behind closed doors would have opened them up to criticism for not doing anything. Then they would have had to reveal they had investigated it secretly and this thread would have been about how the AFL tried to cover up an internal investigation.

Damned if they do etc.

 

[Slartibartfast]

What a prick.

The following week Hamish and Cotchin were on a Sunday footy show.
Was going along smoothly until Jack Riewoldt started to do some trolling.
He asked if there was an incident at his property.
A stern Cotchin brushed it off. Panel went back to chatting footy.
Riewoldt bobbed up again and asked if all of his pets are OK.
Cotchin is seething at which point Hamish tried to gloss over the facts and say there was a problem but all is OK.
RieWorld was like a dog on a bone, with a cheeky grin he enquired if a cast membear had run over his family pet.
Hamish again trying to do the , nothing to see here . Cotchin was fuming, Riewoldt is pissing himself.


Riewoldt finished Hamish off by asking straight out if he had run over Cotchin’s dog then just kept on driving .
Cotchin was not a happy camper, he was not angry at Riewoldt either it was directed at Hamish.
Hamish ever the denier went it to full Romping wins mode and said he knew it was ok so did not see a need to stop.

It was quality TV viewing. Please someone post it to you tube!!!

 

[Falconista]

I'm just amazed that so many believed that the AFL website had any proper independence from the AFL authority. Shows the AFL have done pretty well on the PR front to convince so many.

Reminds me of this Media Watch from 2012. Stuck in my head and is playing out publicly now.
https://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/episodes/paying-for-news/9974074

PS: 4:57 of the video- the 2012 AFL website craps all over whatever this years monstrosity is..

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Caroline Wilson made the same observation on Footy Classified tonight: if Cleary is the serious journo people say he is, why is he working for the AFL?

Sure, the AFL could've handled this better but if you think you can be a viable independent journo working for the AFL, you're incredibly naive.

I don’t really blame him for anything, I don’t know what his view is. He’s in a legitimate job - it’s not journalism, but he’s doing a job nonetheless. And in that job, it’d seem a pretty petty “offence”.

It’s all these other clowns today. I even
saw Jon Ralph invoke the term “without fear or favour”!

For Christ’s sake...

The guy‘s not a journalist. He works for the AFL. The end.

 

[Turnover]

The following week Hamish and Cotchin were on a Sunday footy show.
Was going along smoothly until Jack Riewoldt started to do some trolling.
He asked if there was an incident at his property.
A stern Cotchin brushed it off. Panel went back to chatting footy.
Riewoldt bobbed up again and asked if all of his pets are OK.
Cotchin is seething at which point Hamish tried to gloss over the facts and say there was a problem but all is OK.
RieWorld was like a dog on a bone, with a cheeky grin he enquired if a cast membear had run over his family pet.
Hamish again trying to do the , nothing to see here . Cotchin was fuming, Riewoldt is pissing himself.


Riewoldt finished Hamish off by asking straight out if he had run over Cotchin’s dog then just kept on driving .
Cotchin was not a happy camper, he was not angry at Riewoldt either it was directed at Hamish.
Hamish ever the denier went it to full Romping wins mode and said he knew it was ok so did not see a need to stop.

It was quality TV viewing. Please someone post it to you tube!!!

Fascinating drama.

 

[wagstaff]

I don’t really blame him for anything, I don’t know what his view is. He’s in a legitimate job - it’s not journalism, but he’s doing a job nonetheless. And in that job, it’d seem a pretty petty “offence”.

It’s all these other clowns today. I even
saw Jon Ralph invoke the term “without fear or favour”!

For Christ’s sake...

The guy‘s not a journalist. He works for the AFL. The end.

It's a common theme in the media in general (not just in Oz or in footy) of how pretentiously they act on these issues. They believe like they're the sole defence to society becoming overrun by authoritarianism when in truth journalists have never been less respected by the public.

 

[My Tilly]

Caroline Wilson made the same observation on Footy Classified tonight: if Cleary is the serious journo people say he is, why is he working for the AFL?

Perhaps he is making upwards of 30-50k more employed by the AFL as opposed to an independent firm?

 

[AFLOnline]

The following week Hamish and Cotchin were on a Sunday footy show.
Was going along smoothly until Jack Riewoldt started to do some trolling.
He asked if there was an incident at his property.
A stern Cotchin brushed it off. Panel went back to chatting footy.
Riewoldt bobbed up again and asked if all of his pets are OK.
Cotchin is seething at which point Hamish tried to gloss over the facts and say there was a problem but all is OK.
RieWorld was like a dog on a bone, with a cheeky grin he enquired if a cast membear had run over his family pet.
Hamish again trying to do the , nothing to see here . Cotchin was fuming, Riewoldt is pissing himself.


Riewoldt finished Hamish off by asking straight out if he had run over Cotchin’s dog then just kept on driving .
Cotchin was not a happy camper, he was not angry at Riewoldt either it was directed at Hamish.
Hamish ever the denier went it to full Romping wins mode and said he knew it was ok so did not see a need to stop.

It was quality TV viewing. Please someone post it to you tube!!!

In cotchins defense, if someone had done what Hamish done to my dog, I’d have run that bloke over