Mega Thread Non-Freo AFL Discussion 2023

[beatnik]

Are you calling me a racist? How weak and pathetic of you. On another teams board.

There are claims of systemic racism at Hawthorn. Burgoyne said he didn't see or experience it. At the very least that means from his point of view it was not the case.

You are playing foolish word games while making accusations against someone based primarily on me wanting people to be innocent until proven guilty.

Not specifically but it’s funny how people tell on themselves…

Yeah, I’m from another board and was just wandering past…in fact, I just lobbed here after asking chatGPT: “find me the lamest argument ever used when denying a football club is racist”

So yes, we agree on one thing: I am playing games with your foolish words…

 

[Purple Jesus]

Not specifically but it’s funny how people tell on themselves…

Yeah, I’m from another board and was just wandering past…in fact, I just lobbed here after asking chatGPT: “find me the lamest argument ever used when denying a football club is racist”

So yes, we agree on one thing: I am playing games with your foolish words…

Regardless of who said what, you ****ing lost?

 

[Hamann188]

Doesn't need to be a long argument, can be wrapped up pretty quickly actually.

Innocent until proven guilty. End of discussion.

 

[SupermanCapes]

Doesn't need to be a long argument, can be wrapped up pretty quickly actually.

Innocent until proven guilty. End of discussion.

From a legal standpoint, absolutely - and that's how our legal system works so everyone can chill out on that front.

From a social perspective that is not, and never has been, how these things work. Very few accusations ever get the opportunity to be categorically proven or decided upon by an independent body - does that mean that as long as someone denies having done something everyone has to pretend the accusation never occurred?

It's incredibly arrogant to assume that anyone is entitled to tell people how they are to respond to information. That goes for both sides.

In this case everyone has been presented with the same facts, being: individuals have made allegations of certain behaviour against other individuals.

Everyone is entitled to take that information and come to a view on it. Some will say the haven't heard enough and so it doesn't move the dial for them - totally fair enough. Others will say they choose to accept that, statistically, people rarely make accusations without basis and so there could be something to the claims - also fair enough.

Anyone trying to say that Clarkson and Fagan categorically did or didn't do anything is dumb - that's an impossibility from our position. It's also incredibly unlikely that this gets resolved in any satisfactory way. I can't see it ending any other way than accusation and denial with no way to prove either right or wrong.

 

[Wobbly Punt]

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.

So to paraphrase your position...I don't know anything about it, am not interested enough to inform myself but don't mind casting aspersions that nothing happened despite the fact people who seem to have informed themselves are telling me there is more to it than I know in the 0 seconds I've researched it.

Seems reasonable.

There's much more than 1 accusation, including a very graphic, detailed and highly disturbing email chain which has been confirmed as being genuine by the Hawks. The details within that email have yet to be confirmed but the email itself was received by the club.

I'm not going to summarise nor describe what was accused because it is way too sensitive for that and I don't want to get anything wrong and then mislead anyone. Nor do I want to be seen as knowing more than I do. But the email and other allegations aren't hard to find if you want too.

If you don't want too, then maybe arguing with people who have taken enough of an interest to inform themselves about it isn't the wisest move. Grabbing more knowledge of what happened and then having a position may prevent you from being argued with. It's baffing to me that you'd openly admit you don't know any details and then argue with people that do all while asking them to inform you as well.

I feel for all parties to differing degrees but I admit I am biased towards the accusers for my own personal reasons. For that reason I'm not slagging off either Fagan or Clarkson nor do I want to push the accusers side as I don't know enough. I will slag off the AFL because the damage this has done and their obsession with controlling it rather than properly dealing with it is the only thing I am sure of and it is truly disgusting.

Wilful ignorance is always weird, wilful ignorance combined with a need to push an agenda or an argument within that topic is silly at best and could be categorised as much worse than that. Maybe inform yourself a bit.

 

[Wobbly Punt]

Doesn't need to be a long argument, can be wrapped up pretty quickly actually.

Innocent until proven guilty. End of discussion.

I'd agree with this too. I'd add that the innocence of everyone involved should be protected and that attacking accusers is part of that. You haven't done that so please don't mistake what I'm saying for an attack because that's not my intent as we completely agree. But in other areas I have seen it and in some of the commentary since Clarkson stepped down things have got very close to it which is really concerning to me.

The 2 coaches and the Exec deserve to sit in front of someone independent and make their arguments. This doesn't need to include facing the accusers but it definitely should include facing their accusations and making their own case about what happened or didn't.

The accusers deserve to have their arguments heard by the same independent party.

All parties deserve to be treated with respect and understanding until then.

Presumption of innocence doesn't mean presumption of malicious intent or lack of character from those making the accusations.

The worst thing about how McLachlan and his grubby team have handled this is that is the AFL controlled investigation is the only one who hears it, it won't matter what the findings are, they'll be muddied. If they come out with a finding that the accused were at fault then people will point to the fact that the accusers weren't involved, it was a sham and the "woke progressives" have won their day and crucified 2 innocent men. If it comes out there was nothing untoward then then people will point to the fact that the accusers weren't involved, it was a sham and the AFL has covered it all up and the accused were clearly guilty and the reputational damage will be even more.

Gil's need to control has damaged everyone much more than a fully independent and sound investigation would have done and he's as much at fault here as anyone at Hawthorn who started a review and then fumbled the results of it.

 

[Tbonefreo]

Interesting that walker was rested for this weekend

 

[Mogumber]

Tex?
Not really wanting to get in to this, as my Bigfooty name is named after an aboriginal mission forced upon indigenous back in the day, but I must say that if the AFL look at you as some sort of scape goat, you are literally f'd.
Look at James Hird, Dean Bailey (RIP) and now these guys.
Typical of a large corporation, with too many tentacles. Too many virtue signallers, not enough doers.
They are complicit in this as anyone imo

 

[poshman]

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

No - you struggle with reasoning it seems.

I am saying both should be given the same weight.

That is it. For those saying that Clarkson is 100% a racist. I am saying that everyone should wait on the findings.

If we don't trust the findings that is on the afl not Clarkson.

Why is that argument so offensive?

 

[Mags98]

Tex?
Not really wanting to get in to this, as my Bigfooty name is named after an aboriginal mission forced upon indigenous back in the day, but I must say that if the AFL look at you as some sort of scape goat, you are literally f'd.
Look at James Hird, Dean Bailey (RIP) and now these guys.
Typical of a large corporation, with too many tentacles. Too many virtue signallers, not enough doers.
They are complicit in this as anyone imo

scape goats?

clarko and fagan were senior figures at the club, theyre not just scape goats mate

 

[Hamann188]

From a legal standpoint, absolutely - and that's how our legal system works so everyone can chill out on that front.

From a social perspective that is not, and never has been, how these things work. Very few accusations ever get the opportunity to be categorically proven or decided upon by an independent body - does that mean that as long as someone denies having done something everyone has to pretend the accusation never occurred?

It's incredibly arrogant to assume that anyone is entitled to tell people how they are to respond to information. That goes for both sides.

In this case everyone has been presented with the same facts, being: individuals have made allegations of certain behaviour against other individuals.

Everyone is entitled to take that information and come to a view on it. Some will say the haven't heard enough and so it doesn't move the dial for them - totally fair enough. Others will say they choose to accept that, statistically, people rarely make accusations without basis and so there could be something to the claims - also fair enough.

Anyone trying to say that Clarkson and Fagan categorically did or didn't do anything is dumb - that's an impossibility from our position. It's also incredibly unlikely that this gets resolved in any satisfactory way. I can't see it ending any other way than accusation and denial with no way to prove either right or wrong.

I understand and that's all a fair and reasonable argument.

I have no dogs in this fight, I'm neither here nor there on Clarkson or Fagan and I don't know these kids who have made these accusations so I can't categorically support or refute their claims.

My biggest concern is that none of this EVER gets resolved and one or both the party's lives and reputations are permanently tarnished.

I have, and this is only my personal opinion, have a really hard time fathoming anybody could do or say the things Clarkson is accused of doing or saying in this day and age. Maybe that's just my narrow and naive point of view but if the accusations are true then he deserves every ounce of treatment, and more, that he is receiving.

This is the hard part, imagining that these kids have lied about the whole thing out of some sort of spite about something as trivial as being delisted or the like. In fact it's even harder to fathom that scenario than it is imagining Clarkson and Fagan actually committing these acts. But if it is the case then they have knowingly destroyed a successful man's life and legacy for a pretty petty reason.

Neither of these scenarios really sits well with me.

If I had to offer my extremely amateur opinion, both parties are in the wrong or right depending on your point of view. The fact that Clarkson and Fagan have vehemently denied the claims suggest to to me that they don't realise they've said something insensitive. Perhaps they have actually tried to offer support or advise these kids at the time and it has somehow been lost in translation between cultures and taken completely wrong.

At the end of the day, it isn't for any of us to pass judgement on any of the involved parties. But just assuming Fagan and Clarkson performed these heinous acts they're accused of just because you don't like them personally and then laugh and cheer as you watch their downfall without any concrete proof that they are guilty is just plain wrong. If they are innocent and this is what they are experiencing, I wouldn't wish that on my own worst enemy, that is just cruel.

Hope I've got my point across about innocent until proven guilty, and how it's really more a figure of speech in reflection to how it appears a lot of us are just piling it on without really knowing the whole truth. I hope I haven't triggered anybody, I know it's a sensitive subject and I'm honestly not trying to offend. I'm just glad none of it's happening at our club with it's rich history of indigenous representation.

#Foreverfreo

 

[MadMundy]

I guess it's time to stay away from AFL media until this Clarkson saga finishes again, it's going to be unbearable.

 

[Hamann188]

I'd agree with this too. I'd add that the innocence of everyone involved should be protected and that attacking accusers is part of that. You haven't done that so please don't mistake what I'm saying for an attack because that's not my intent as we completely agree. But in other areas I have seen it and in some of the commentary since Clarkson stepped down things have got very close to it which is really concerning to me.

The 2 coaches and the Exec deserve to sit in front of someone independent and make their arguments. This doesn't need to include facing the accusers but it definitely should include facing their accusations and making their own case about what happened or didn't.

The accusers deserve to have their arguments heard by the same independent party.

All parties deserve to be treated with respect and understanding until then.

Presumption of innocence doesn't mean presumption of malicious intent or lack of character from those making the accusations.

The worst thing about how McLachlan and his grubby team have handled this is that is the AFL controlled investigation is the only one who hears it, it won't matter what the findings are, they'll be muddied. If they come out with a finding that the accused were at fault then people will point to the fact that the accusers weren't involved, it was a sham and the "woke progressives" have won their day and crucified 2 innocent men. If it comes out there was nothing untoward then then people will point to the fact that the accusers weren't involved, it was a sham and the AFL has covered it all up and the accused were clearly guilty and the reputational damage will be even more.

Gil's need to control has damaged everyone much more than a fully independent and sound investigation would have done and he's as much at fault here as anyone at Hawthorn who started a review and then fumbled the results of it.

Absolutely mate, I certainly don't take it as an attack. I realise that mine was a very over simplification of the circumstances. You're absolutely right, all parties innocence should be protected.

 

[sumavich]

scape goats?

clarko and fagan were senior figures at the club, theyre not just scape goats mate

8 months is a long time in the AFL media world.
More journos covering AFL than Canberra politics

 

[Taylor]

scape goats?

clarko and fagan were senior figures at the club, theyre not just scape goats mate

If the AFL had better reputation for protecting whistle blowers, let's say the investigation was conducted by The Voice with total anonymity - I would expect a long, long list of events and interactions from almost every club.

The AFL culture was massaged into better public relations facing images but it's the same team running the show. Remember the AFL only commented at all on this topic because it went to the media a week after they received it.

The AFL will happily create an event where they can sacrifice a couple of old white guys publicly to show what a good community member they are. They'll make a big show of it and use that metaphorical blood to wipe the rest under the carpet and cover it all up.

It's actually my biggest fear for The Voice, that people will think the job is now done and when the gain from that is mostly immaterial regular disconnected people will rubber band their feelings on it, tending towards negative. It's why public, mostly token gestures are good for awareness and bad long term. You can have hours of memories of "doing something" and nothing has changed or improved.

I'll be voting yes, I'll get a job working there, I'll use it to look into culture at AFL football clubs.

 

[Mags98]

If the AFL had better reputation for protecting whistle blowers, let's say the investigation was conducted by The Voice with total anonymity - I would expect a long, long list of events and interactions from almost every club.

The AFL culture was massaged into better public relations facing images but it's the same team running the show. Remember the AFL only commented at all on this topic because it went to the media a week after they received it.

The AFL will happily create an event where they can sacrifice a couple of old white guys publicly to show what a good community member they are. They'll make a big show of it and use that metaphorical blood to wipe the rest under the carpet and cover it all up.

It's actually my biggest fear for The Voice, that people will think the job is now done and when the gain from that is mostly immaterial regular disconnected people will rubber band their feelings on it, tending towards negative. It's why public, mostly token gestures are good for awareness and bad long term. You can have hours of memories of "doing something" and nothing has changed or improved.

I'll be voting yes, I'll get a job working there, I'll use it to look into culture at AFL football clubs.

not saying the AFL itself hasnt had issues here but clubs are pretty independent, especially when it comes to the relationships between coaching staff and players no? so to brush clarko and fagan and co off as merely just 'scapegoats' is imo pretty disingenuous.

 

[anchor man]

8 months is a long time in the AFL media world.
More journos covering AFL than Canberra politics

PLease... "alledged" journos.

 

[Tony_Clifton]

We have this concept of innocent until proven guilty but when a person gets acquitted they are found not guilty. Now not guilty is not the same as innocent. Nobody is found innocent. Can someone please eli5?

 

[Joao]

We have this concept of innocent until proven guilty but when a person gets acquitted they are found not guilty. Now not guilty is not the same as innocent. Nobody is found innocent. Can someone please eli5?

Quite correct, we really should use the terms guilty and not guilty when discussing the legal system.

 

[Taylor]

not saying the AFL itself hasnt had issues here but clubs are pretty independent, especially when it comes to the relationships between coaching staff and players no? so to brush clarko and fagan and co off as merely just 'scapegoats' is imo pretty disingenuous.

The clubs aren't that independent, you need only look at what happens if a coach questions an umpiring decision publicly.

 

[gaskin]

I find it funny how Jordan Lewis

Jordan Lewis

Age

38

Ht

186cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

D/M

Career

Season

Last 5

D

23.5

5star

K

12.1

4star

HB

11.5

5star

M

5.5

5star

T

2.7

4star

MG

310.5

4star

No current season stats available

D

15.0

4star

K

6.8

3star

HB

8.2

5star

M

4.8

5star

T

2.8

5star

is trying to make out that Clarko is the victim in all this and Hawthorn are at fault.

 

[SupermanCapes]

I understand and that's all a fair and reasonable argument.

I have no dogs in this fight, I'm neither here nor there on Clarkson or Fagan and I don't know these kids who have made these accusations so I can't categorically support or refute their claims.

My biggest concern is that none of this EVER gets resolved and one or both the party's lives and reputations are permanently tarnished.

I have, and this is only my personal opinion, have a really hard time fathoming anybody could do or say the things Clarkson is accused of doing or saying in this day and age. Maybe that's just my narrow and naive point of view but if the accusations are true then he deserves every ounce of treatment, and more, that he is receiving.

This is the hard part, imagining that these kids have lied about the whole thing out of some sort of spite about something as trivial as being delisted or the like. In fact it's even harder to fathom that scenario than it is imagining Clarkson and Fagan actually committing these acts. But if it is the case then they have knowingly destroyed a successful man's life and legacy for a pretty petty reason.

Neither of these scenarios really sits well with me.

If I had to offer my extremely amateur opinion, both parties are in the wrong or right depending on your point of view. The fact that Clarkson and Fagan have vehemently denied the claims suggest to to me that they don't realise they've said something insensitive. Perhaps they have actually tried to offer support or advise these kids at the time and it has somehow been lost in translation between cultures and taken completely wrong.

At the end of the day, it isn't for any of us to pass judgement on any of the involved parties. But just assuming Fagan and Clarkson performed these heinous acts they're accused of just because you don't like them personally and then laugh and cheer as you watch their downfall without any concrete proof that they are guilty is just plain wrong. If they are innocent and this is what they are experiencing, I wouldn't wish that on my own worst enemy, that is just cruel.

Hope I've got my point across about innocent until proven guilty, and how it's really more a figure of speech in reflection to how it appears a lot of us are just piling it on without really knowing the whole truth. I hope I haven't triggered anybody, I know it's a sensitive subject and I'm honestly not trying to offend. I'm just glad none of it's happening at our club with it's rich history of indigenous representation.

#Foreverfreo

Thanks for taking the time to talk that out, all really well put.

My own view is that whoever leaked the report to the media has some answering to do. There is nothing wrong with a truth-telling report until the results are published publicly before the accused parties have been involved. At that point it's a half-finished investigation that has done all of the damage without any of the healing.

 

[ignoramus]

We have this concept of innocent until proven guilty but when a person gets acquitted they are found not guilty. Now not guilty is not the same as innocent. Nobody is found innocent. Can someone please eli5?

"Presumption of innocence" is a procedural principle; "not guilty" is a verdict (result).

Within the system of (Australian) legal discourse, "not guilty" does not mean "innocent", because the finding of "innocence" is not available to the court. Not guilty simply means that the prosecutor was not able to prove that the defendant did it. (Here, we could also have a supplementary discussion about the different standards for burden of proof.)

Moreover, the principle of the "presumption of innocence" isn't "innocent until proven guilty", but rather derives from the Latin "Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negate", which translates roughly as "the burden of proof lies with the one who asserts, not with the one who denies".

Presumption of innocence - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

As a procedural principle, the presumption of innocence does not ascribe the character of innocence to anyone, nor even presumes it of anyone. Rather, it is a means of legitimating particular judicial processes and techniques — e.g. those concerning the acquisition of evidence, witness testimony and examination, etc. — and disqualifying others. To risk an analogy, we could say that the "presumption of innocence" is built into judicial procedures in the sense that the presumption that people generally are not psychopaths is built into the procedures of polite social interaction. When I want to buy something from a shop, for instance, I take it up to the counter and conduct my behaviour and speech as though the sales clerk were not a violent psychopath. The fact that I make it out of the store alive doesn't in itself mean that the sales clerk isn't a psychopath, that he/she wasn't about to stab me in the eye with a hunting knife.

It's a bit silly, or at least contentious, to appeal to "presumption of innocence" outside the context of the judiciary, as SupermanCapes explained.

 

[Ge3ks]

Oh... sorry where's the football thread?

 

[ignoramus]

Oh... sorry where's the football thread?

You're after bigfooty.com. This is bigjurisprudence.com.