Mega Thread Non-Freo AFL Discussion 2023

[Sweetback]

So it was a comment about ripped jeans (that is not racist) and one other senior player not named who actually made a racist comment.

Where was Fagan or Clarkson mentioned in all of that? It is them who are accused.

Sounds like you’ve got no idea of the micro aggressions that people who experience racism experience every day to remind them that they’re not as good as everyone else. This was obviously the final straw in what sounds like common occurrence

 

[Arkhitect]

If Logue wanted to come home at the end of the year, I'd take him back for a packet of chips and North agreeing to pay the bulk of his remaining contract.

Poor sod.

 

[Bigger]

So it was a comment about ripped jeans (that is not racist) and one other senior player not named who actually made a racist comment.

Where was Fagan or Clarkson mentioned in all of that? It is them who are accused.

FMD - it was not "a comment about ripped jeans (that is not racist)". It was the offer of some loose change to help the little woman mend her clothes. He's metaphorically flinging her some coins.

You have waded into a discussion you have repeatedly demonstrated you know little about. The Rioli situation was what inspired Hawthorn's initial review. The Jackson investigation, in tandem with the initial review, is what has brought on the undergoing investigation.

 

[Purple Suit]

This is concerning on so many levels.

North were insane to hire Clarkson knowing full well that this investigation was happening.

Clarkson was stupid to take the job for the same reason.

Locally, Griff and Tucker's managers were idiots for pushing the trades ahead, again for the same reason.

Now the North players and fans, and the whole competition, have been thrown under the bus.

A bus everyone saw coming.

Staggering.

It came out after he had already been hired, North are a basket case but not batshit crazy.

 

[anchor man]

You really struggle - he is the better player was what I said

Both indigenous greats. Shaun more so. I think that should be weighed just as strongly is my point. Then investigate.

I think that should be weighed just as strongly?

How was I saying we should weigh it more that Cyril.

Tel me.

I will leave your inerpretation to you, I have my own.

 

[beatnik]

As I mentioned Shaun has not had a problem.

Both indigenous greats. Shaun more so. I think that should be weighed just as strongly is my point. Then investigate.

Let me get this straight; you think that one indigenous player not being racially vilified at an organisation cancels out another who does?

 

[Wobbly Punt]

Let me get this straight; you think that one indigenous player not being racially vilified at an organisation cancels out another who does?

No I think the logic is that because 1 indigenous player wasn't subjected to it then it means none of it happened to anyone.

Equally bizarre and ridiculous but slightly different.

I actually worked very briefly with Wayne Carey many years ago. Now I know for a fact he didn't sleep with my wife or grab her chest so I guess the news of him doing those things to others must be bulldust too if we follow the posh logic.

Burgoyne did say he didn't ever see or hear anything about the incidents, he also said he didn't know a lot of things that went on at the club until after he'd gone. 1 person not knowing about it doesn't mean nothing happened.

 

[poshman]

The fact-free nature of some of your assertions aside, which has been amply dealt with above, I am still struggling with the underlined. You pegged me earlier as a person with comprehension issues so perhaps you can help me out specifically here. What the * are you going on about? Is it a zen thing?

Where is the fact free part? What proof do you have otherwise?

This conversation started here (which you haven't replied too):

I understand the sentiment but disagree when it is someones reputation and livelihood being trashed. It is easy to say when it is happening to others, would you want that applied to someone in your family if they were 100% certain they were innocent?

Innocent until PROVEN guilty is foundational to a democratic society. It is wrong when that is not applied to every individual not matter class, race, sex or situation. Abhorrent even.

Any time there is an accusation made - whether substantiated or not - reputations and livelihoods are imperilled. You can't avoid that.

There's a real "lily that festers" thing that goes on when white males in positions of power or fame are accused of something. Like their reputations and livelihoods are of more value.

___________________

My point being innocent until proven guilty should be the foundational principle.

What is it that you disagree with?

You didn't interact with my post or the main point which I put in capital letters to help you. Instead you make it sound like I said their livelihoods are more valuable than the accuser. Which I did not say. Therefore = you struggle with reading and comprehension.

_____________________

Do you think there should not be due process in every instance? Do you think people should lose jobs or future opportunities before something is proven?

I am dealing with a case at the moment where an accusation has been made of sexual misconduct. I don't believe the accuser. I believe the accused. Do you think they should be fired despite all evidence pointing to this being a false claim? Would the race of the accuser or sex make a difference?

 

[mattis117]

This is concerning on so many levels.

North were insane to hire Clarkson knowing full well that this investigation was happening.

Clarkson was stupid to take the job for the same reason.

Locally, Griff and Tucker's managers were idiots for pushing the trades ahead, again for the same reason.

Now the North players and fans, and the whole competition, have been thrown under the bus.

A bus everyone saw coming.

Staggering.

Everything looks crystal clear in hindsight

 

[Bigger]

Who you going to believe anyway, you beatnik? The good indigenous lad or the troublemaker?

 

[poshman]

Let me get this straight; you think that one indigenous player not being racially vilified at an organisation cancels out another who does?

Did I say that?

Why do people get so emotional they lose an ability to read.

If people say they are guilty based on one persons accusation but another says the opposite, all I am saying is both should be equally weighted. If that is all the original finding is baased on.

Person A says this = Guilty
Person B says the opposite =

Surely the answer is not to put more weight on either but to investigate and the rest of us not to have an opinion?

 

[Wobbly Punt]

And both Clarkson and Fagan should have the right to wait to be directly accused of something specific before being required to atone for a nebulous accusation.

Hardly nebulous given the detail that's been provided but yes, they haven't faced their accusers or the accusations and they have the right too before being punished.

As far as the accusers go, they've made their accusations clear in the initial report and beyond that there's no way I'd be involved with an AFL controlled investigation of these sorts of things if I were them. Especially given the AFL's record, and McLachlan's specifically, when it comes to Indigenous issues and racism.

 

[Bigger]

Where is the fact free part? What proof do you have otherwise?

"That is a convenient re-writing of history.

Lance left for the $$

Cyril = who knows."

Wilfully fact free.

As one of the only people alive acting like that was a mystery, I think even you know now why Cyril left. Even the ****en Hawthorn Football Club gave him an apology at the time. You were taking notes of what Burgoyne had to say, so you were paying some attention. How come then you missed the very thing that kicked all of this off?

You know, just as an aside, if I was continually having to bring into question the ability of others to read my writing, I would start to think maybe I was contributing to the problem.

 

[Demons09]

I reckon Clarko and Fagan are going to get a big payday and the Hawks are in a world of shit.

 

[Mags98]

Where is the fact free part? What proof do you have otherwise?

This conversation started here (which you haven't replied too):


Any time there is an accusation made - whether substantiated or not - reputations and livelihoods are imperilled. You can't avoid that.

There's a real "lily that festers" thing that goes on when white males in positions of power or fame are accused of something. Like their reputations and livelihoods are of more value.

___________________

My point being innocent until proven guilty should be the foundational principle.

What is it that you disagree with?

You didn't interact with my post or the main point which I put in capital letters to help you. Instead you make it sound like I said their livelihoods are more valuable than the accuser. Which I did not say. Therefore = you struggle with reading and comprehension.

_____________________

Do you think there should not be due process in every instance? Do you think people should lose jobs or future opportunities before something is proven?

I am dealing with a case at the moment where an accusation has been made of sexual misconduct. I don't believe the accuser. I believe the accused. Do you think they should be fired despite all evidence pointing to this being a false claim? Would the race of the accuser or sex make a difference?

no ones lost their job so what are you on about

 

[anchor man]

Did I say that?

Why do people get so emotional they lose an ability to read.

If people say they are guilty based on one persons accusation but another says the opposite, all I am saying is both should be equally weighted. If that is all the original finding is baased on.

Person A says this = Guilty
Person B says the opposite =

Surely the answer is not to put more weight on either but to investigate and the rest of us not to have an opinion?

In case you missed it, there has been an process going on that has stalled. Is it due to the AFL and Hawthorn not wanting the truth coming out? The investigation has been aunder way. Things from the investigation have been leaked. From which party , nobody knows, or do they.
The accusers have withdrawn from the AFL investigation.
Why should they continue to play along with an investigation that is leaking like a sieve.
The AFL and Hawthorn have been hoping that it would disappear.But they have only made the situation worse.
It needed to be done and dusted many many moons ago. Not just lifting the corner of the carpet.

 

[Arcassius]

I can't for the life of me figure out what FMD stands for. **** My Duck?

 

[King Tenz]

I can't for the life of me figure out what FMD stands for. * My Duck?

**** me dead

 

[Bigger]

Hardly nebulous given the detail that's been provided but yes, they haven't faced their accusers or the accusations and they have the right too before being punished.

As far as the accusers go, they've made their accusations clear in the initial report and beyond that there's no way I'd be involved with an AFL controlled investigation of these sorts of things if I were them. Especially given the AFL's record, and McLachlan's specifically, when it comes to Indigenous issues and racism.

If Poshman is paying attention, and not too busy consulting his Snappy Internet Rejoinders 101 Handbook, the bolded part is key. Fagan and Clarkson haven't actually been punished. Sure, it would seem that their reputations are being tarnished without recourse to due process or proper justice and the prospect of their livelihoods being affected would appear to be a huge punishment, but they haven't lost their livelihoods, have they?*

As I said, anyone accused of anything suffers a loss of reputation. In our hyper-accelerated world of rapid online judgment, the court of popular opinion, that's more of a problem than ever, but it has always been a problem. Being innocent goes a long way to solving that. The relentless charge on to the next controversy also helps.

But the potential impact to reputation shouldn't have anything to do with a victim's right to make accusations.

Fagan and Clarkson have access to the same mechanisms of redress available to anyone falsely accused of anything.

Running around denying that any form of racism is not that bad isn't helping your argument, Poshman.



*The young indigenous fella who reckons his life was deleteriously affected by his heirarchical superiors at Hawthorn has lost his preferred livelihood. But we don't hear too much about that.

 

[poshman]

In case you missed it, there has been an process going on that has stalled. Is it due to the AFL and Hawthorn not wanting the truth coming out? The investigation has been aunder way. Things from the investigation have been leaked. From which party , nobody knows, or do they.
The accusers have withdrawn from the AFL investigation.
Why should they continue to play along with an investigation that is leaking like a sieve.
The AFL and Hawthorn have been hoping that it would disappear.But they have only made the situation worse.
It needed to be done and dusted many many moons ago. Not just lifting the corner of the carpet.

So to be clear I never said what you are accusing me of saying?

And yes - I think the investigation seems to have been handled poorly.

Could it be that they don't want the truth coming out? Yes. Could it also be that there is little to no 'there' there?

 

[poshman]

no ones lost their job so what are you on about

I didn't say they had... although some are saying Fagan should. Therefore, the question as a point of principle stands. Do you think based on an accusation someone, anyone should lose their job?

 

[Purple Jesus]

Things going swimmingly down at Norf

feel sorry for Griff tbh

He made his choice.

 

[poshman]

"That is a convenient re-writing of history.

Lance left for the $$

Cyril = who knows."

Wilfully fact free.

As one of the only people alive acting like that was a mystery, I think even you know now why Cyril left. Even the *en Hawthorn Football Club gave him an apology at the time. You were taking notes of what Burgoyne had to say, so you were paying some attention. How come then you missed the very thing that kicked all of this off?

You know, just as an aside, if I was continually having to bring into question the ability of others to read my writing, I would start to think maybe I was contributing to the problem.

I followed it as far as an accusation from another player, not Cyril. And his accusation of one senior player and the president is not exactly damning.

I heard enough to know an accusation was made from a player (can't remember who) and that Burgoyne had said he never heard about it. That was all. Since then I have waited.

But can you get back to the point and to my questions which you refuse to answer.

 

[poshman]

If Poshman is paying attention, and not too busy consulting his Snappy Internet Rejoinders 101 Handbook, the bolded part is key. Fagan and Clarkson haven't actually been punished. Sure, it would seem that their reputations are being tarnished without recourse to due process or proper justice and the prospect of their livelihoods being affected would appear to be a huge punishment, but they haven't lost their livelihoods, have they?*

As I said, anyone accused of anything suffers a loss of reputation. In our hyper-accelerated world of rapid online judgment, the court of popular opinion, that's more of a problem than ever, but it has always been a problem. Being innocent goes a long way to solving that. The relentless charge on to the next controversy also helps.

But the potential impact to reputation shouldn't have anything to do with a victim's right to make accusations.

Fagan and Clarkson have access to the same mechanisms of redress available to anyone falsely accused of anything.

Running around denying that any form of racism is not that bad isn't helping your argument, Poshman.



*The young indigenous fella who reckons his life was deleteriously affected by his heirarchical superiors at Hawthorn has lost his preferred livelihood. But we don't hear too much about that.

When did I say it wasn't that bad?

I said that a joke being made about ripped jeans was not racist.

I said that one player saying something was not Clarkson or Fagan.

You seem unable to read what I am writing.

Do you think it is fine for someones reputation to be tarnished before any due course has been run? Do you have a problem with innocent until proven guilty?

 

[Mags98]

When did I say it wasn't that bad?

I said that a joke being made about ripped jeans was not racist.

I said that one player saying something was not Clarkson or Fagan.

You seem unable to read what I am writing.

Do you think it is fine for someones reputation to be tarnished before any due course has been run? Do you have a problem with innocent until proven guilty?

genuinely how would you want this handled differently? if complaints were only lodged with the club then i would not be surprised to see it be swept under the rug as many issues have been in the past.