Oppo Camp Non Geelong football (AFL) discussion 2022, part II

[Lana]

Club Statement - Chris Fagan

The official AFL website of the Brisbane Lions Football Club

www.lions.com.au

Literally the only well run club in this situation, nothing from North yet.

 

[Lana]

It's tough for all concerned.

The on-going saga will cause more trauma to the victims.

Clarko and Fagan are entitled to the presumption of innocence, and the right to a thorough investigation.

North and the Lions need the benefit of a thorough investigation.

A thorough investigation needs all the time necessary to preserve its integrity.

North and the Lions need a fast resolution......which flies in the face of all the above.

This isn't a court of law, no presumption of innocence is required.

 

[Sky]

How in the world those accused came to the conclusion that to separate families and ask one couple to have an abortion was a "good" thing to do to "win"???

Anyway, if I was North or Brisbane I would be talking to possible coaches now. Ross Lyon is the obvious one....just ring him up and ask what his terms are.

Chris Fagan is a failure who can’t win a prelim and Ross Lyon has 3 (4) grand finals to his name. No brainer really

 

[Cataholic]

This isn't a court of law, no presumption of innocence is required.

A basic presumption whenever an allegation is made, law court or not.

Once proven, or the evidence is undeniable, then it's no longer an allegation and the claim to innocence is lost.

Fwiw, I think this case is almost at the undeniable stage.

That said, Fagan is said to have been blindsided by the allegations and refutes them.

 

[Shadow89]

How in the world those accused came to the conclusion that to separate families and ask one couple to have an abortion was a "good" thing to do to "win"???

Anyway, if I was North or Brisbane I would be talking to possible coaches now. Ross Lyon is the obvious one....just ring him up and ask what his terms are.

Bring Brad Scott back, lol. In this case, absolutely is 'better the devil you know'

 

[Baudolino]

This isn't a court of law, no presumption of innocence is required.

The presumption of innocence is a worthwhile principle to abide by regardless of whether the matter is a legal one or not.

 

[Lana]

A basic presumption whenever an allegation is made, law court or not.

Once proven, or the evidence is undeniable, then it's no longer an allegation and the claim to innocence is lost.

Fwiw, I think this case is almost at the undeniable stage.

That said, Fagan is said to have been blindsided by the allegations and refutes them.

It is a shitty golden mean fallacy bullshit that protects offenders over victims, especially in cases like this by having the default stay on the side of those protected by institutions that can create as an opaque system of "justice" as they require to bury it.

I'm happy to give a presumption of innocence when it is a they said they said on an near equal level, this is clearly not the case.

If it was a nothing burger Hawthorn would have released the report in full this morning. It must be damming well beyond the names listed so far. It clearly was leaked by someone unsatisfied with outcome given the current revelations

 

[Baudolino]

"The presumption of innocence is only applicable in a court of law" reminds me of free speech debates when people defending Twitter or other US companies say "the US First Amendment does not apply to private companies" as if that's some instant gotcha. Yes, we understand that private companies are technically allowed to restrict free speech. Obviously. But that's not the point. The point is about the principle and whether it should be upheld regardless of whether violations of that principle are legal or not.

Same dynamic at play with presumption of innocence wherein people seemingly don't understand that we're talking about the principle, not just the legalities.

 

[Cataholic]

It is a shitty golden mean fallacy bullshit that protects offenders over victims, especially in cases like this by having the default stay on the side of those protected by institutions that can create as an opaque system of "justice" as they require to bury it.

I'm happy to give a presumption of innocence when it is a they said they said on an near equal level, this is clearly not the case.

If it was a nothing burger Hawthorn would have released the report in full this morning. It must be damming well beyond the names listed so far. It clearly was leaked by someone unsatisfied with outcome given the current revelations

They approached Hawthorn, Clarkson and Fagan but all chose not to respond, hence the ABC ran with the story.

And I agree. The victims here must be protected and cared for at all costs.

 

[Kitcat]

A basic presumption whenever an allegation is made, law court or not.

Once proven, or the evidence is undeniable, then it's no longer an allegation and the claim to innocence is lost.

Fwiw, I think this case is almost at the undeniable stage.

That said, Fagan is said to have been blindsided by the allegations and refutes them.

And the Brisbane club statement says Fagan was not consulted during the review.

 

[Cataholic]

And the Brisbane club statement says Fagan was not consulted during the review.

But I can't see how he lays claim to being 'blindsided' when the ABC approached him for comment prior to the story being run?

 

[Hamingja]

Just on the allegations stated, this comes across as some type of pseudo-Stolen Generation microcosm.

Taking away and isolating people from friends and families.

Only complete sociopaths would do this.

It is like something from 100 years ago, how it could happen in a modern football club is staggering.

I didn't really follow the fallout from the Kennett/Rioli stuff beyond the headlines. Kennett's comments about her jeans or whatever were poor but this gives a whole new level of context to it.

You'd bet anything there would be AFL accredited journos who knew a lot more about this stuff at the time, but like the doping saga, it has to be someone with their nose not in the trough to break it.

 

[Cataholic]

Tried listening to Hawthorn's press conference, but sadly we don't have the technology in 2022 to broadcast and hear the questions put forward.

 

[Lana]

"The presumption of innocence is only applicable in a court of law" reminds me of free speech debates when people defending Twitter or other US companies say "the US First Amendment does not apply to private companies" as if that's some instant gotcha. Yes, we understand that private companies are technically allowed to restrict free speech. Obviously. But that's not the point. The point is about the principle and whether it should be upheld regardless of whether violations of that principle are legal or not.

When we think of the point of concepts of free speech or presumption of innocence it is to protect the weak from the strong, the reason they're codified in term of government v people is that the government is assumed to be powerful to such an extent that without it the weaker party would have no recourse. The concept of private power away from that was relatively speaking non-existent away from areas of religion or nobility.

There is nothing restricting the AFL, or any of the clubs by denying them any presumption they have the power and the resources and relationships to frame this in any way they'd like. They'd have the lawyers, the media training, ability to pay for crisis Public Relations team what ever they need.

Clarkson, Fagan etc could call a press conference, they'd be 50 cameras in front of them within the hour for them to tell their side. Legally they're well in the right to say silent, it'd still be damming.

 

[James1970]

Hawks presser...statement read out was barely a paragraph...they're going down the 'whole country has issues...' route in answer to questions.

Blimey...they've had weeks to prepare this.

 

[Stokey]

And the Brisbane club statement says Fagan was not consulted during the review.

From the presser just completed by Hawthorn, the review wasn't commissioned due to anything alleged. It was just a fact finding mission to see how First Nations players experiences were at Hawthorn and if the could supply additional support post playing.

In this instance I don't see why he would have been consulted.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

People seemed to enjoy ripping into Adelaide Crows over their camp.

Sorry but no comparison between the two is fair.

 

[Cataholic]

Hawks presser...statement read out was barely a paragraph...they're going down the 'whole country has issues...' route in answer to questions.

Blimey...they've had weeks to prepare this.

So their behaviour is somehow mitigated by the country's as a whole?

Right.

 

[Stokey]

Hawks presser...statement read out was barely a paragraph...they're going down the 'whole country has issues...' route in answer to questions.

Blimey...they've had weeks to prepare this.

Didn't even want anything identifying Hawthorn in the background. That's how massive this is.

I did believe what they were saying but saying the country has cultural issues wasn't a great move.

 

[James1970]

Question I wish would get asked...was the AFL going to announce an independent investigation today, or were they pushed early by the ABC report?

Obvious answer, but if not, when? Next Monday? Christmas Eve? After Clarkson's retirement?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Chris Fagan is a failure who can’t win a prelim and Ross Lyon has 3 (4) grand finals to his name. No brainer really

Nonsense. both have 0 flags and Fagan's lions have 2-3 losses in finals by less than a kick. Things could easily be different.

 

[Stokey]

Question I wish would get asked...was the AFL going to announce an independent investigation today, or were they pushed early by the ABC report?

Obvious answer, but if not, when? Next Monday? Christmas Eve? After Clarkson's retirement?

Didn't like the 'we will be setting up..' Should have been 'We have set up...'

 

[Cataholic]

Question I wish would get asked...was the AFL going to announce an independent investigation today, or were they pushed early by the ABC report?

Obvious answer, but if not, when? Next Monday? Christmas Eve? After Clarkson's retirement?

There was an allegation - on SEN I believe - that the ABC forced the hand of both the AFL and Hawthorn because they weren't going to release the report.

Can't verify if that's true or not though.

 

[Cataholic]

Didn't like the 'we will be setting up..' Should have been 'We have set up...'

They've had this report for two whole weeks.

The investigation should be active, not in the process of being established.

 

[Stokey]

There was an allegation - on SEN I believe - that the ABC forced the hand of both the AFL and Hawthorn because they weren't going to release the report.

Can't verify if that's true or not though.

This could have still been investigated confidentially. It does look like the AFL was sitting on this for whatever reason.