tigs2010
Pick 1...
McDonough?
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Round 21
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round 20 Winner: All Aust
Supporters - Request an External Review
- Thread starter RJK Tiger
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Thread starter
- #77
Difference ours would be called without there being a fire to put out. All the others were only reacting to complaints, we would be the only one being proactive.
Reading through this, someone mentioned Rhys McKenzie. Couldn't even remember this kid being on our list. Googled his story & was a bit surprised to read it
Connolly: Reaction to McKenzie post must be considered
A facebook post from former Richmond player Reece McKenzie is terribly sad reading and the reaction to his accusations against the Tigers should be carefully articulated, says Rohan Connolly.
www.sen.com.au
Read his full post below:
"When you have intolerable levels of anxiety and depression and have developed an eating disorder causing you to lose all of your friends all because of an incompetent, dysfunctional, joke and embarrassment of a club," McKenzie wrote.
"I didn't retire from football because of mental health reasons, I quit Richmond, I f***ing quit because if I had continued to receive the treatment that they were giving me I would have killed myself no doubt.
"No person at any profession deserves the treatment I received, they are a disgrace to professional sporting clubs around the world and it's no wonder they got someone else in to do Dan Richardson's job because he knows f*** all about football and f*** all about basic human care.
"When I was 16 I tried to commit suicide, but I failed, I failed because in those moment of agony I told myself that I would one day play AFL and that was the only thing that was going to keep me going and then one day I got there only to have my dream taken away by a joke of a club that doesn't know how to take care of its players.
"I am now a broken man because of this. Football was my life and now I don't even know if I will ever be able to return to the football field because of my anxiety.
"They even tried to silence me by signing a deed of release that was going to have a silence clause for life but instead I signed one that was for a 'reasonable period of time'.
"Well you know what, I find it a pretty damn reasonable period of time...f*** you Richmond, thanks for ruining my life, just hope you don't f*** someone else's up too."
------
Shows you how much times have changed in less than a decade.I cant even remember this happening - if it were to happen now, it would be a big story.
Dare say people who think we have no reason to do a review on ALL PLAYER treatment may need to take a moment of pause. If we did indeed request him to sign a deed of release, then we are not much better. Asking that of a 20 year old kid is very poor form
- Thread starter
- #79
I have to admit its very odd that Egan was given such strict rules around who he could & couldn't speak to. From my understanding the was only allowed to speak to players of aboriginal descent during a specific time period. You would have to assume these restrictions were put up for a reason or more likely, via request of someone. So when Burt, Fagan & Clarkson react dismayed they were not interviewed as part of the process, it was because the Hawks demanded it that way. Basically, these people themselves requested to not participate in the process, or Hawthorn wanted to keep them in the dark about it.
Why would Hawthorn do that is interesting, but i must assume it was likely 1 of - they asked these people (among others) if they wanted to be included and they said no - OR - They knew exactly what the review would find and wanted to leave the guilty in the dark about it to make the issue seem more individual based, than club driven.
The other telling part of this with Fagan & Clarkson reacting dismayed at not being included & suggesting they have been jilted/slighted by the announcement, the ABC clearly state in their article that "ABC Sport put detailed questions about the allegations in this story to Clarkson, Fagan and Burt but at time of publication none had responded.".
So,all these men knew prior to the ABC report being released that an investigation into aboriginal players welfare had been conducted & they both were featured heavily & negatively - but still chose to not answer the ABC's questions, hide behind a generic press release stating innocence and shock, while lawyering up at the same time.
To be honest they really appear to be acting like people guilty of something.
Essendon with their injection crap, Adelaide with their boot camp, Hawthorn with the Cyril Rioli shit and now Hawthorn again with this.
Sorry Essendon, Crows & Hawks fans but when shit like this happens your Club President & management groups should be removed and placed under the control of the AFL for 5 years. We're in a never ending shit wheel of shit****ery and I'm over it. It's time for real punishments for this shit. Where's the REAL accountability?
It's probably too much to blame Gillon for this, but AFL standards have slipped in almost every area while him and Hocking chased bullshit pipe dreams such as "international expansion" with AFL-X. The fish rots from the head etc etc.
Sorry Essendon, Crows & Hawks fans but when shit like this happens your Club President & management groups should be removed and placed under the control of the AFL for 5 years. We're in a never ending shit wheel of shit****ery and I'm over it. It's time for real punishments for this shit. Where's the REAL accountability?
It's probably too much to blame Gillon for this, but AFL standards have slipped in almost every area while him and Hocking chased bullshit pipe dreams such as "international expansion" with AFL-X. The fish rots from the head etc etc.
Tiger_Of_Old
🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆
How far do ya want to go back?
The great Jack Dyer has skeletons in his closet.
Last edited:
Eddie is an indigenous guy in an extremely racist country which had genocidal govt policy aimed at eradicating a race of people I apportion no wrong to what he's written. I wouldn't last a minute in his shoes. In the HFC case proof/evidence will be very interesting. Lots of serious accusations being levelled at ex coaches at HFC. What if the accused want to challenge/defend the heavy accusations. Got to be careful about sacking people summarilay.
The young indig kids being told to abort their children deserve payback compensation. Not dissimilar to Zantuck suing for loss of income. HFC should have a look at KGI. RFC is going well in this field. Kudos to the club. I hope Edwards hangs around in some capacity.
Last edited:
LET’S MAKE IT A TIME TO SHUT UP AND LISTEN
Gideon Haigh
A cardinal principle of government is never to commission a report whose recommendations you do not already know. It looks like the same may apply in sport.
This is the first of several things worth saying about the content of Phil Egan’s report to the Hawthorn board, divulged this week by the ABC’s Russell Jackson, encompassing the stories of “Ian’’, ‘‘Zac’’ and “Liam” – Indigenous players who have reported being submitted to what in a domestic environment would be deemed “coercive control”.
The individuals concerned did not seek to share their stories. They were asked for them. In this sense, these are less ‘‘allegations’’ than testimony – offered, one imagines, considering their harrowing components, with something less than glee.
This is why it makes no sense for defenders of Alastair Clarkson, Chris Fagan and Jason Burt to complain of a lack of “due process’’. Egan was not asked to solicit the perspectives of coaches, officials or players generally; he was charged, in light of Cyril Rioli’s public estrangement from the club, with surveying the experiences of the Hawks’ Indigenous players. It was up to the board how they then decided to proceed.
What should disturb football, too, is not so much that the stories are outlandish or incredible, but the opposite – that they fall comfortably within the bounds of the conceivable. Viz Eddie Betts’ response of being appalled but ‘‘not surprised’’.
Consider what we have discovered about football clubs in the 21st century. We have learned, from West Coast Eagles, that success covers a multitude of sins; we have learned, from Essendon, how difficult it can be to step out of line of a culture of obedience; we have learned, from Collingwood, how they struggle to listen to truths they’re reluctant to hear.
While Hawthorn styles itself as ‘‘the family club’’, it’s also a club that builds statues of its premiership coaches, that defines itself by a code of gruff, stoic, almost martial self-sacrifice. Its club history is entitled The Hard Way. That way, not least under Clarkson, has been a hugely successful.
The reality is, furthermore, that modern football clubs now manage players to their last atom – indeed, that some players, naive, callow and living for footy, welcome and benefit from the imposition of structures and rules on their lives.
As Luke Hodge intimated this week, this management readily takes in the personal: “When you have 18, 19, 20-year-old kids getting drafted, you always hear about breakups and whether it’s the right thing … Personally, I’ve had a lot of private conversations with those guys (club staff).’’
But what’s important to remember is that clubs are not, ultimately, doing this out of consideration of a players’ welfare. They do not wish to make their players “better people’’ except insofar as it improves their football; their interest is limited to extracting from said player an expression of the talent that cumulatively goes to winning.
Such is their inherent asymmetry of power, football clubs are inclined to think that, at all events, they know best.
They are not, after all, known for their grievance mechanisms or their whistle blower protections; there are no external ombudsmen or ethics commis-sioners. They are fundamentally autocratic institutions.
It can be argued, of course, that they must be – they have, in a way, a weekly deadline to meet for optimum competitiveness. But it is also the case that people in autocracies tend to fall in with what’s expected, and to look the other way when bad stuff happens.
Let’s add the necessary caveats. The testimony Egan elicited has not been tested. Details will almost certainly be disputed. Further facts, additional context or mitigating factors may come to light. But their substance will be hard to shift, and one response that will certainly not suffice is that of Hawthorn’s CEO Justin Reeves. To the question of whether his club had a “culture problem’’, he offered lamely: “I think Australia has a culture problem historically.’’
Football giving itself a free pass because, y’know, Australia – it simply won’t cut it any longer.
The AFL regularly preens itself as being more enlightened than thou, but times like these leave an uncomfortable feeling that many of its social initiatives have been mainly performative if not outright cosmetic. It will be a sour note for AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan to finish on, but let’s face it, his success has been largely measured in dollars anyway.
On that note, one last suggestion: please can we not make this about ourselves. Can we stop talking about our “shock’’ and our “sadness’’ as though these are what matters? Can we not have another inquiry into Indigenous experience in football that isn’t about white people’s expectations and disappointments, about whether the already rich and powerful have been shown appropriate “courtesy” and “respect”? Let’s maybe instead take the advice Paul Keating once offered: “Shut up and listen and you might learn something.’’
Gideon Haigh
A cardinal principle of government is never to commission a report whose recommendations you do not already know. It looks like the same may apply in sport.
This is the first of several things worth saying about the content of Phil Egan’s report to the Hawthorn board, divulged this week by the ABC’s Russell Jackson, encompassing the stories of “Ian’’, ‘‘Zac’’ and “Liam” – Indigenous players who have reported being submitted to what in a domestic environment would be deemed “coercive control”.
The individuals concerned did not seek to share their stories. They were asked for them. In this sense, these are less ‘‘allegations’’ than testimony – offered, one imagines, considering their harrowing components, with something less than glee.
This is why it makes no sense for defenders of Alastair Clarkson, Chris Fagan and Jason Burt to complain of a lack of “due process’’. Egan was not asked to solicit the perspectives of coaches, officials or players generally; he was charged, in light of Cyril Rioli’s public estrangement from the club, with surveying the experiences of the Hawks’ Indigenous players. It was up to the board how they then decided to proceed.
What should disturb football, too, is not so much that the stories are outlandish or incredible, but the opposite – that they fall comfortably within the bounds of the conceivable. Viz Eddie Betts’ response of being appalled but ‘‘not surprised’’.
Consider what we have discovered about football clubs in the 21st century. We have learned, from West Coast Eagles, that success covers a multitude of sins; we have learned, from Essendon, how difficult it can be to step out of line of a culture of obedience; we have learned, from Collingwood, how they struggle to listen to truths they’re reluctant to hear.
While Hawthorn styles itself as ‘‘the family club’’, it’s also a club that builds statues of its premiership coaches, that defines itself by a code of gruff, stoic, almost martial self-sacrifice. Its club history is entitled The Hard Way. That way, not least under Clarkson, has been a hugely successful.
The reality is, furthermore, that modern football clubs now manage players to their last atom – indeed, that some players, naive, callow and living for footy, welcome and benefit from the imposition of structures and rules on their lives.
As Luke Hodge intimated this week, this management readily takes in the personal: “When you have 18, 19, 20-year-old kids getting drafted, you always hear about breakups and whether it’s the right thing … Personally, I’ve had a lot of private conversations with those guys (club staff).’’
But what’s important to remember is that clubs are not, ultimately, doing this out of consideration of a players’ welfare. They do not wish to make their players “better people’’ except insofar as it improves their football; their interest is limited to extracting from said player an expression of the talent that cumulatively goes to winning.
Such is their inherent asymmetry of power, football clubs are inclined to think that, at all events, they know best.
They are not, after all, known for their grievance mechanisms or their whistle blower protections; there are no external ombudsmen or ethics commis-sioners. They are fundamentally autocratic institutions.
It can be argued, of course, that they must be – they have, in a way, a weekly deadline to meet for optimum competitiveness. But it is also the case that people in autocracies tend to fall in with what’s expected, and to look the other way when bad stuff happens.
Let’s add the necessary caveats. The testimony Egan elicited has not been tested. Details will almost certainly be disputed. Further facts, additional context or mitigating factors may come to light. But their substance will be hard to shift, and one response that will certainly not suffice is that of Hawthorn’s CEO Justin Reeves. To the question of whether his club had a “culture problem’’, he offered lamely: “I think Australia has a culture problem historically.’’
Football giving itself a free pass because, y’know, Australia – it simply won’t cut it any longer.
The AFL regularly preens itself as being more enlightened than thou, but times like these leave an uncomfortable feeling that many of its social initiatives have been mainly performative if not outright cosmetic. It will be a sour note for AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan to finish on, but let’s face it, his success has been largely measured in dollars anyway.
On that note, one last suggestion: please can we not make this about ourselves. Can we stop talking about our “shock’’ and our “sadness’’ as though these are what matters? Can we not have another inquiry into Indigenous experience in football that isn’t about white people’s expectations and disappointments, about whether the already rich and powerful have been shown appropriate “courtesy” and “respect”? Let’s maybe instead take the advice Paul Keating once offered: “Shut up and listen and you might learn something.’’
When they said "family" club did Clarko think they were taking about this "family"?
Phar Ace
Brownlow Medallist
He simply has a different view to you and me - probably wouldn't accuse him of copping out or passing the buck - it's not in his brief. Whether it is ignorance or just outdated views, we are all on a journey.
Muddiemoose
Moderator
- Aug 24, 2017
- 27,653
- 99,956
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Moderator
- #86
I think some need to understand that the review isn’t just to find the negative it can also be a tool to highlight positive change to use a case study to underpin future decisions, not just for Richmond or even the afl but clubs of all kinds that have dealings with indigenous people
This is a complete hypothetical but I’m just using it to highlight my point
Say they interview an indigenous player who was drafted in early 2010s and they ask about his experience at the club
Quite possible he could say some negative things related to locker room talk and inclusion in our programs but than they can also highlight how that has very much changed and evolved due to the introduction of things like the KGI, wellness programs, full time indigenous assistant coach, ect ect.
(Once again totally made up by me and not actually based on anyones actual experience but just to highlight the point)
That would be a positive finding overall from the report and something that is just as important to highlight as the negative
Not all findings would be negative, not all would be positive but it would be an improvement tool to help guide positive change
Phar Ace
Brownlow Medallist
Well said, and that is what I have threaded through my responses so far, here and in the main thread on Big Footy about it. We simply have to listen first. Not while all the big boys, while all the Alpha's are about, but actively listen, hear the pace, pause and pitch that tell us so much more that words alone - ask open questions that elicit whole sentences, paragraphs in return. We don't want to know what our cherished indigenous players think from our perspective, we need to hear it from their perspective. The good, the expected and the unexpected.
Just like everything I say is not relevant to everyone, so too our indigenous guys, and the AFLW and VFLW teams for that matter. It's the powerless that need the most listening too, because that is where the best information will probably be.
If power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely - then think of the opposite of this for the powerless.
This is an opportunity, not a threat or a waste! This sort of thinking is what has built the Richmond we are mostly so very proud of.
Last edited:
Phar Ace
Brownlow Medallist
Muddiemoose
Moderator
- Aug 24, 2017
- 27,653
- 99,956
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Moderator
- #89
It’s also interesting (reading caros article this morning)
That it’s the family’s and the wives retelling of events that are giving the most damning evidence, it’s easy to forget it’s not just about the player other peoples lives are dramatically impacted by decisions we make as a club
The player is in the system to it’s easy to forget the forest for the trees when you are in that grind but the family’s have that small degree of separation from the process so can give a different but still very relevant perspective
Phar Ace
Brownlow Medallist
It’s also interesting (reading caros article this morning)
That it’s the family’s and the wives retelling of events that are giving the most damning evidence, it’s easy to forget it’s not just about the player other peoples lives are dramatically impacted by decisions we make as a club
The player is in the system to it’s easy to forget the forest for the trees when you are in that grind but the family’s have that small degree of separation from the process so can give a different but still very relevant perspective
Bang on - stoic, almost mute like males (WE ALL KNOW A COUPLE
) caught between team and Club rules with little consideration of a culture more diverse than we can probably ever really know.
PFunk
Debutant
- Jun 24, 2022
- 90
- 267
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Isn't that what a review is for? We shouldn't be waiting for someone like Cyril Rioli to come out publicly and share their story - being proactive now, finding out if wrongs or harms have happened in the recent or distant past and making sure that if RFC has engaged in harmful behaviour it doesn't happen again.
If it turns out that Richmond has been squeaky clean - great - then the rest of the AFL has a template they can implement.
I want to be able to follow the sport and team I love without having a sick feeling on Grand Final day that some pretty f*ed up s* has happened to the players and their families.
Tiger_Of_Old
🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆
It's funny. We have the deserved reputation built on the back of very hard work by our current administration to be the leaders of reconciliation through various programs through the kgi institution.
Yet some seem to think a review is necessary.
PFunk
Debutant
- Jun 24, 2022
- 90
- 267
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Up until this week Alistair Clarkson had the reputation of having a good relationship with the Aboriginal community and with the Aboriginal players at Hawthorn. Shannyn Rioli had even said that he had been a good support for her and Cyril. It does not mean that it reflects everyones experience.
If a review comes up with nothing, no harm done. Not doing a review and pointing to the KGI and saying how great are we, then something coming out later does a lot of harm.
I think that it should be mandated that all clubs have a review - Richmond included.
Phar Ace
Brownlow Medallist
Standing still is not an option, that is why you review
Tiger_Of_Old
🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆
Who's standing still with reconciliation?
Anyway i'm in a bad mood.The cats are gonna fuken win the flag
Sydney are shit.
i'll leave it there.
Phar Ace
Brownlow Medallist
Fair call - lots of bath water will be drunk in Geelong
Last edited:
sregit
Premiership Player
Possibly the AFL itself should be investigated first to ensure no discrimination has taken place in relation to their previous practices. I would suggest with all the issues that are now surfacing in relation to indigenous players, that one or two of these issues would have been put before the AFL and it’s possible they have turned a blind eye to it.
Bullshite. This an AFL wide issue and clubs should not be investigating themselves, even if they engage independent reviewers. The AFL needs to apply a standardised review and if necessary a standardised disciplinary method for any wrong doing.
Last edited:
Many people hide meth addictions in the early stages, Im fine with a reveiw but it's a football club not a baby sitting centre.
What could we have done better with Yaran, make him live with a coach or move from the people that may have influenced his behaviour, wouldn't we then be doing what Hawthorn did?
Any reveiw has to be across the board for players of all races imo.
You're right but it's hard to punish people for doing thing that at the time were considered the norm, I'm 59 and the World was a very different place when those men played.
Fortunately we are gradually changing, long way to go but I feel our club has a good infrastructure in place for all our young players to develop in.
More trouble than it's worth an external review as you will get a number of disgruntled ex players with a demented view of the world or just plain bullshitters coming out saying whatever they please. Clarko who I know personally has been crucified with this type of process .
Similar threads
- Locked
