Oppo Camp Non-Essendon Football Thread XVI

[boncer34]

I can't even
MRO should stop wasting everyone's time

MRO has been consistent.

 

[boncer34]

there are maybe 1 or 2 decent afl journo's who cover the sport without an obsession for the soap opera

Caro isn't one, but she's not alone with the likes of Morris, Browne, McClure, Ralph, Hutchy, etc. that haven't moved on from the Cousins ambulance chasing coverage of AFL

Im glad Cripps had a go. And they're fired up and beat the Dees this week......then they can lull into a false sense of security the following week
but also, just glad he called it out
it's become schoolyard whispers in the last decade and really doesn't add anything to the sport

Caro's work in the early 2000's was top notch, she had great knowledge and insights to the game on field.

Then she got a taste for the clicks the off field rubbish brings and we lost a good analyst.

 

[citizen-erased]

MRO has been consistent.

To be fair so has the tribunal
Carlton challenge and their player gets off

 

[citizen-erased]

Caro's work in the early 2000's was top notch, she had great knowledge and insights to the game on field.

Then she got a taste for the clicks the off field rubbish brings and we lost a good analyst.

A lot of them
Used to love sen and reading the HS AFL coverage

Ever since the Cousins debacle it's not been the same
Remember one morning stuck on the Monash all i heard was 120m of cousins this and cousins that.
Don't think I ever switched it on again after that day

 

[Yoda_]

A lot of them
Used to love sen and reading the HS AFL coverage

Ever since the Cousins debacle it's not been the same
Remember one morning stuck on the Monash all i heard was 120m of cousins this and cousins that.
Don't think I ever switched it on again after that day

what shits me with AFL media is the amount of coverage outside the game has compared to what it is all about., 120 minutes per team on the weekend

 

[Call Me Cake]

 

[fishardansin]

Watching Gil's press conference ... oof.

This is a lot like the AFL/ASADA thing. AFL tries to keep the process in-house and wrap people on the knuckles with a suitable punishment for a fall guy with a big enough profile ... Hird/Clarkson.

The ASADA situation was complicated because some of Essendon wanted to play along, and then many of us didn't. This situation must be cut and dry. The accused are completely belligerent and the AFL has said ... oh well, good luck at Human Rights Commission.

It is probably a better outcome for the AFL. No crimes have been committed, by a strict following of Australian law, they don't have to punish any individuals and they will get dragged through the mud publicly.

 

[citizen-erased]

Hawks about to lose picks?
Might be why they've stopped tanking for Reid

 

[84859300]

Watching Gil's press conference ... oof.

This is a lot like the AFL/ASADA thing. AFL tries to keep the process in-house and wrap people on the knuckles with a suitable punishment for a fall guy with a big enough profile ... Hird/Clarkson.

The ASADA situation was complicated because some of Essendon wanted to play along, and then many of us didn't. This situation must be cut and dry. The accused are completely belligerent and the AFL has said ... oh well, good luck at Human Rights Commission.

It is probably a better outcome for the AFL. No crimes have been committed, by a strict following of Australian law, they don't have to punish any individuals and they will get dragged through the mud publicly.

The thing they learnt from our saga and how they handled the Hawthorn accusations, IMO this was a plus one to the AFL. They established an independent review board rather than trying to stage manage the whole process. Yeah, the result pretty much ended up the same... but at least this time they put a layer in between themselves and the case. This has given them the ability to come out and say what they said today. "They're sorry, they mindfull fo everyone involved and they've listened".

It's just that they really haven't. They didn't hear from the Hawthorn three and they admit that they didn't hear from all accusers. Pretty suspect to deliver a verdict on 56% of the evidence. But the time is right to give the not guilty result and to proclaim that the AFL has not paid any funds to the accusers.

This removes any association with the AFL holding up proceedings, so the accusers can now go to the Human Rights Council. This is where the real legal aspect will take place. The Kangaroo Court/Mediation opportunity is now passed. Now the adults get to be involved in the conversation.

 

[MiguelM]

Watching Gil's press conference ... oof.

This is a lot like the AFL/ASADA thing. AFL tries to keep the process in-house and wrap people on the knuckles with a suitable punishment for a fall guy with a big enough profile ... Hird/Clarkson.

The ASADA situation was complicated because some of Essendon wanted to play along, and then many of us didn't. This situation must be cut and dry. The accused are completely belligerent and the AFL has said ... oh well, good luck at Human Rights Commission.

It is probably a better outcome for the AFL. No crimes have been committed, by a strict following of Australian law, they don't have to punish any individuals and they will get dragged through the mud publicly.

AFL were controlling the narrative until WADA got involved. They then washed their hands of it, sound familiar!

 

[BrunoV]

It says more about the allegations that the accused can be cleared without needing to put a defence forward.

It sounds to me like there is no case to answer.

As Whatley observed on 360 it may be tied in with the documents the complainants won't produce.

But what is the purpose of that? Probably so they can go the human rights commission to avoid discovery, and manage the PR of this thing in a favourable (bullshit) forum.

I listened to Andy Collins (current Hawthorn president?) on Crunch Time on Saturday. He said all 3 of Clarkson, Burt and Fagan would be welcome back at Hawthorn.

Why would Hawrhorn welcome back despicable racists?

Why is the AFL setting this up to penalise Hawthorn only?

Why did Reeves resign citing stress?

It's all part of the cover up, yeah?

 

[faible]

It sounds to me like there is no case to answer.

 

[fairbump_playon]

She's just a person, with values, faults and biases like any other. As a journalist I don't think she's half bad. I don't think she's exactly a feminist. Or at least, she'd probably be second wave if anything. She's more of a one-eyed Tigers fan than anything, bias wise. And she could do with a little self-awareness, but so could they all.

It's true that all people have values, faults and biases.

But it's not true that the values, faults and biases of all people are the same.

She is a talent and a force, there's no doubt. Imagine the crap she has had to wade through over 40 years to do what she has done. I admire that about her greatly.

However - she's mostly (to me) insufferable. Her schtick is so unnecessarily bleak, dramatic, personal, certain and judgemental. The brand is sensationalism. She could be just factual.. table what she knows and then simply speculate as to the possible impact or consequences.

It really explodes when the facts are wrong, as they were in this instance with Cripps.

FWIW I hate Barrett the most. His IQ is too low for his job. His logic gets so badly exposed in conversation.. yet on he bounds, missing the point, but somehow wearing a correctly buttoned shirt. He makes Matthew Lloyd look like Stephen Hawking.

 

[andleanback]

Wonder how much the afl gave them and then made them sign NDA’s. Laughable Gil could sit there with a straight face and say they hadn’t been given any money

 

[Eleven 38]

It's honestly hard to prove people guilty when there's no evidence. Ie the hawthorn racism case where one party says someone says something and the other says they didn't.

That's why we have these things get leaked to the press now, it's the only way victims can feel justice. It's the same reason the Brittany Higgins case was in the media so much, they know they can't get proper justice by going through the legal process so they jeopardise their legal case to put everything into the public forum, it's the only way they can feel some sort of justice has been done.

 

[citizen-erased]

It's honestly hard to prove people guilty when there's no evidence. Ie the hawthorn racism case where one party says someone says something and the other says they didn't.

That's why we have these things get leaked to the press now, it's the only way victims can feel justice. It's the same reason the Brittany Higgins case was in the media so much, they know they can't get proper justice by going through the legal process so they jeopardise their legal case to put everything into the public forum, it's the only way they can feel some sort of justice has been done.

no different to our drugs thing.
AFL should have stayed well out of it. the conflict of interest to protect the brand is too much to have them involved in any shape or form.

Im not sure why the govt allows them to keep these things internally managed with the pretence of an "independent" party being involved.

Racism and cultural implications aside, the individual accusations of harassment were enough to refer this outside the AFL for investigation.
Lo and behold, we're in the same place. A mess of a stage managed saga with a lot of trial by media

 

[BrunoV]

During the drugs saga, the AFL had no qualms trying to pin the whole thing on Hird. It was trying to shift the whole thing to a few bad actors. Just as it had no problem blaming Melbourne's tanking on Dean Bailey (to protect Melbourne's ability to maintain pokies licences among other wonderful reasons).

If it had a case it could tie around the neck of Clarkson, Fagan and/or Burt do people really think that wouldn't be the outcome?

That's brand protection and was always the cleanest outcome once the allegations were made public. Public sentiment would almost never accept exoneration because it was manipulated into assuming guilt.

Brand protection is not stepping to terminate a botched process, while being seen as failing to protect the position of a downtrodden minority, who hold a special place in the code, without reaching a resolution that protects the AFL, Hawthorn and the accused 3 from further claims.

 

[andleanback]

During the drugs saga, the AFL had no qualms trying to pin the whole thing on Hird. It was trying to shift the whole thing to a few bad actors. Just as it had no problem blaming Melbourne's taking on Dean Bailey (to protect Melbourne's ability to maintain pokies licences among other wonderful reasons).

If it had a case it could tie around the neck of Clarkson, Fagan and/or Burt do people really think that wouldn't be the outcome?

That's brand protection and was always the cleanest outcome once the allegations were made public. Public sentiment would almost never accept exoneration because it was manipulated into assuming guilt.

Brand protection is not stepping to terminate a botched process, while being seen as failing to protect the position of a downtrodden minority, who hold a special place in the code, without reaching a resolution that protects the AFL, Hawthorn and the accused 3 from further claims.

No because in this case it’s better for the brand to protect any potential behavior clarko/ fagan/ Burt we’re involved in (I still think whatever happened has been massively misconstrued). It’s better for the ‘brand’ to attack hawthorn of the process and leaking of information and bringing the game into disrepute, than to say one of the best coaches of all time is a racist.

 

[BrunoV]

No because in this case it’s better for the brand to protect any potential behavior clarko/ fagan/ Burt we’re involved in (I still think whatever happened has been massively misconstrued). It’s better for the ‘brand’ to attack hawthorn of the process and leaking of information and bringing the game into disrepute, than to say one of the best coaches of all time is a racist.

Only if it doesn't all come out in court or the human rights commission anyway.

 

[andleanback]

Only if it doesn't all come out in court or the human rights commission anyway.

I doubt it will.

 

[citizen-erased]

During the drugs saga, the AFL had no qualms trying to pin the whole thing on Hird. It was trying to shift the whole thing to a few bad actors. Just as it had no problem blaming Melbourne's taking on Dean Bailey (to protect Melbourne's ability to maintain pokies licences among other wonderful reasons).

If it had a case it could tie around the neck of Clarkson, Fagan and/or Burt do people really think that wouldn't be the outcome?

That's brand protection and was always the cleanest outcome once the allegations were made public. Public sentiment would almost never accept exoneration because it was manipulated into assuming guilt.

Brand protection is not stepping to terminate a botched process, while being seen as failing to protect the position of a downtrodden minority, who hold a special place in the code, without reaching a resolution that protects the AFL, Hawthorn and the accused 3 from further claims.

i think the difference is Hird was an easier scapegoat given he was a relatively new coach and Essendon had Bomber in the box as the alternative.

In this case, this involves a flag contenders coach (a contender which has come out of years of underperformance in a non-vic market) and a saviour coach who has joined a team in a similar doldrum....and with it's own issues of existence within the vic market.

Anyways, it's hard to know b/c it's been blurred by the process.
Maybe they've seen enough to know they can bear any brunt of the outcomes. Maybe they can see there won't be any. Or maybe they've seen it's gonna blow up in their faces anyway and they should extricate themselves from it as quick as possible to minimise damage. Who knows what happens next.
It should never have involved the AFL. Hawks should have referred to VicPol or AFP or anyone other than the AFL, and just let the AFL know

Im not entirely sure how the hawks don't get done for disrepute now.
Botched process, leaked info, code and it's employees dragged through the media, etc.

it feels eerily similar though.
Is the HRC the WADA in this scenario?

 

[jmoo wan]

I’d like to know what Bruce Francis makes of it all.

 

[Blind Turn]

I’d like to know what Bruce Francis makes of it all.

It literally still amazes me how much energy and fine detailed analysis Bruce went into. I say ‘literally amazed’ because it was indeed a maze of detail that required Ariadne and a thread of string to get out of. Unfortunately there was no Minotaur to slay and it instead felt like we’d entered Hades, died, and were unable to get out due to Cerberus guarding the friggin gates.

 

[Old Campaigner]

It’s easier to pin stuff on a rookie coach than to attach the turboracist label to a guy who would otherwise be one of the all time greats of coaching

 

[doug85]

I’d like to know what Bruce Francis makes of it all.

I’ve never seen Bruce Francis and Bruno in the same room together