Opinion Non-Crows AFL 6: This Is Getting Cruel

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not sure it will. Cardinal Pell was acquitted on appeal but suffered immense reputational damage anyway
People have an innate distrust of the church after many years and cases of similar accusations. So there is still mistrust of Pell even after he was acquitted

People wanted to hear Depp was innocent. So they celebrated it when the court ruled that way

Remains to be seen how BRS will be viewed once that decision is made. Suspect be more like Pell than Depp. Similar with Clarko/Fagan unless there is a slam dunk result against these allegations
 
There was no termination. Whatever might be true, whatever was said/not said, there was no actual abortion.

which will be held up by the defence against charges of coercion. The other side will say they suffered the consequences from not having complied with the instruction
The request alone would be enough to ban them from coaching imo
 
No, the Hawthorn board is far more accepting of the accusers than elsewhere, particularly now it's been noted an assistant coach corroborated at least some of the complaints. There's no persecution complex over there. It's refreshing.
When the club president carried around a golliwog in a Hawks jumper that he nicknamed "Buddy" I don't think that you would be as surprised with the shocking revelations
 

Log in to remove this ad.

FiveAA going back to taking 3AW coverage for non-Crows and Port games. SEN's coverage will now be exclusively on the narrowcast band.

 
He was originally a member of the GWS Academy before getting drafted by WCE though, surely you remember the controversy that ensued over his eligibility to be drafted by GWS that was finally ruled ineligible by the AFL? It came down to was his family based in the Mildura (Vic) area or the Wentworth (NSW) area...His family had farms in both areas from memory?
Had forgotten that .....so heading to GWS wasn't that bad 👍
 
A full 24 hours is nothing, particularly when none of the details have been shared

I'm pretty sure you've had investigative journalists pursue you for a quote before, and I can't imagine they gave you an unlimited deadline before getting back to them ...

24 hours to respond to a journalist's question is very reasonable.
 
Yes, and?

The questions aren’t the issue now is it?

The journalist wants an answer to some questions. That's the entirety of his relationship with the person he's questioning. They can (and did) choose to offer no response.

The journalist has zero responsibilities beyond that - he's not their lawyer.
 
24 hours to respond to a journalist's question is very reasonable.
I think it would be common / standard practice, especially when a publication deadline is in place, but is it "reasonable"?

  • Is it reasonable to expect someone to respond within 24 hours to a series of very serious and quite detailed allegations, some of which may turn on matter of perception / interpretation?
  • Is it reasonable to wait until 24 hours before publication (assuming you had the material in hand earlier) before notifying the "accused"?

But most importantly - is it reasonable for a reader of the story to draw any conclusions about guilt or innocence, based on the fact that the "accused" may quite reasonably not wish to comment that soon / that quickly?
 
Also, to cover your arse when receiving a request from a journalist like this you write to them saying that 24 hours is unreasonable, you've instructed solicitors and will respond to them in full within 48/72 hours to a week.

Let's you assert that the timeframe wasn't reasonable, and leaves the publisher in the awkward position of saying they'll get back to us tomorrow.

Failing to say anything means that you'll need more than a week to huddle with your PR people and lawyers to find a compelling basis to find any level of plausible deniability.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

In hindsight, given everything that's happened this week.

I'm prepared to retract my statements on the club acting to swiftly with the Rendell situation when it happened. That was the right call.
 
In hindsight, given everything that's happened this week.

I'm prepared to retract my statements on the club acting to swiftly with the Rendell situation when it happened. That was the right call.
Disagree. It's a long time ago and I'd have to go digging for a link, but my recollection is clear that what he actually said - not the way Jason Mifsud interpreted it - was not racist. It was blunt, and perhaps clumsy, but it was not racist.

Edit: Here's a link:

"I said to 'Jase' [Mifsud] that the attrition rate was too high at the moment. He agreed that there were too many indigenous players dropping out of the system. I said, 'I've got my theories, tell me if you reckon I'm right'," Rendell said. When he then declared indigenous players generally came from more laidback families and were "not prepared for AFL life as others . . . he [Mifsud] said, 'That's a fair assumption of Aboriginal life' ".

"I was using that as a basis for an idea I had to help more indigenous players stay in the system. I want every kid to play 10 years no matter where they are from," he said. "I said to Jason there is a serious issue that needs to be addressed right now. It was a throwaway line — a ridiculous line — but I said you might find we only recruit players with only one white parent."
Maybe it wasn't a very, shall be say, diplomatic way to express himself, but it was not, as was alleged / implied at the time, a statement that he / the club would only recruit players with at least one white parent, it was a statement about what might happen if better mechanisms weren't put in place to support indigenous recruits.

Mifsud should have said "hang on a minute Matt, that's taking it a bit far" but instead he decided to go the "reporting for racism" route.
 
Last edited:
I just read somewhere that if Geelong win tomorrow Joel Selwood would have then played in 22 winning finals which equals the amount of finals that St Kilda have won in their existence.

I know the Aints are a joke, but 22 finals wins in 150 years??? That's a disgrace

They've won more spoons than they have finals.
 
Disagree. It's a long time ago and I'd have to go digging for a link, but my recollection is clear that what he actually said - not the way Jason Mifsud interpreted it - was not racist. It was blunt, and perhaps clumsy, but it was not racist.

Edit: Here's a link:


Maybe it wasn't a very, shall be say, diplomatic way to express himself, but it was not, as was alleged / implied at the time, a statement that he / the club would only recruit players with at least one white parent, it was a statement about what might happen if better mechanisms weren't put in place to support indigenous recruits.

Mifsud should have said "hang on a minute Matt, that's taking it a bit far" but instead he decided to go the "reporting for racism" route.
I'm not a fan of Rendell circa 2022 but he was absolutely ridiculously harshly dealt with by both the AFL and the club over a well intentioned opinion, you're right he could have used more nuanced wording but I saw no racism in what he said....and he's been proven correct in that as history shows.
 
I just read somewhere that if Geelong win tomorrow Joel Selwood would have then played in 22 winning finals which equals the amount of finals that St Kilda have won in their existence.

I know the Aints are a joke, but 22 finals wins in 150 years??? That's a disgrace

They've won more spoons than they have finals.

It’s more than Adelaide’s won in its existence too, so don’t get too chirpy
 
I'm not a fan of Rendell circa 2022 but he was absolutely ridiculously harshly dealt with by both the AFL and the club over a well intentioned opinion, you're right he could have used more nuanced wording but I saw no racism in what he said....and he's been proven correct in that as history shows.
That is certainly the truth in my eyes and knowledge
 
That’s not going to be an easy sell, the distance between cause and effect is quite long

Particularly if they suffered no detriment (I.e. delisting for example) from disobeying the first instruction
You might be a self appointed expert subject matter here but seem to be getting slightly confused with material facts, considering the documented abortion within a year of the previous birth.

“Six months after the birth of their child, Ian and Amy were shocked to find they were expecting again.”
 
It’s more than Adelaide’s won in its existence too, so don’t get too chirpy

We've been in existence for a quarter of the time of St Kilda, and already have twice as many flags as them. We'll overrun them in Finals wins - probably in the next decade.
 
We've been in existence for a quarter of the time of St Kilda, and already have twice as many flags as them. We'll overrun them in Finals wins - probably in the next decade.
Someone's an optimist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top