Oppo Camp The Hawthorn Racism Report
- Thread starter kane249
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Sep 15, 2011
- 33,674
- 52,924
- AFL Club
- West Coast
The only possibility of sanctions is if it attracts the attention of someone outside their control, i.e. WADA and Essendon.
Victoria's work safety watchdog investigating Hawthorn allegations
Victoria's workplace safety watchdog launches an investigation into allegations of discrimination at the Hawthorn Football Club.
www.abc.net.au
It's already happening.
But I'm not sure that Workcover are actually all-that-good at investigating much outside of what they were initially set up for (which is things like huge safety breaches at manufacturing or building sites). Bullying, harassment, racism - they are all almost impossible to prove when it was verbal.
As we saw in perth, we still do lynch mobs with people screaming racial epithets, killing a child who was the same colour as the person they believe stole someones shit
And still have a police commissioner say it wasnt racially motivated.
The chances of the “good blokes club” coming up with something different are about as good as my chance of winning the 160 million dollar lottery last night, that i checked my ticket for today and i definitely didnt win.
Exactly.
This is where it all goes away.
They won’t want the public bashing and of course the high risk that the league could just decide this whole thing was an unfortunate misunderstanding and send all current coaches/administrators (which happens to include 2 men in particular) on some kind of non-specific cultural sensitivity training.
Throw in the heavy use of the term ‘historical claims’ (to help us all imagine this is some kind of ‘Rabbit Proof Fence’ style ‘olden days’ issue), and this is all pretty much sorted right?
Biggie
Eat better and exercise
- Moderator
- #656
AFL defends Hawks racism investigation as alleged victim brands safety ‘a lie’
AFL defends Hawks racism investigation as alleged victim brands safety ‘a lie’
www.foxsports.com.au
- Feb 4, 2021
- 510
- 1,260
- AFL Club
- West Coast
What's with the banner text? "A lie" is certainly implying, for those who won't read the article, that the original statements were a lie. It does not paint the picture that the accuser is not happy with how the AFL set this up and the 'indepent nature' of the investigation.
AFL defends Hawks racism investigation as alleged victim brands safety ‘a lie’
AFL defends Hawks racism investigation as alleged victim brands safety ‘a lie’
- Feb 5, 2009
- 9,452
- 15,143
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- West Coast (AFLW)
ABC Article does a better job with the headline:
Woman at centre of Hawthorn racism review will not participate in AFL investigation
The lawyer for a woman at the centre of the Hawthorn cultural safety review says his client will not participate in the AFL's investigation, saying she is "refusing to consent to the silencing tactics of the AFL".
www.abc.net.au
Strong rebuttal of the AFL's process and how it's designed to get the result the AFL want.
ABC Article does a better job with the headline:
Woman at centre of Hawthorn racism review will not participate in AFL investigation
The lawyer for a woman at the centre of the Hawthorn cultural safety review says his client will not participate in the AFL's investigation, saying she is "refusing to consent to the silencing tactics of the AFL".
Strong rebuttal of the AFL's process and how it's designed to get the result the AFL want.
I heard an interview with the lawyer for 'Amy' (not her real name obviously, but the name chosen to be used to refer to her) - and whilst they have a lot of issues with the review, to me the main one that is very relevant is that the AFL process is essentially to find guilt or innocence of the AFL personnel involved and then to determine sanctions if there is a level of guilt.
So there is no benefit for the accusers to tell their stories again. Because even if it is all found to be 100% true they would then likely have to tell their stories a 3rd time if they want any action (whether that is something financial, or systemic change, or an apology... etc etc).
I get why they would want no part in that. The AFL investigation needs to not only look at what sanctions, if any, are appropriate for the coaches/staff involved - but also what, if any, offers should be made to the players and families involved for assistance (financial or otherwise).
- Aug 14, 2019
- 1,262
- 2,312
- AFL Club
- West Coast
The points of view in this thread are bizarre. Strip the racial component out of it and ask the following questions.
Why should the accuser get to dictate the make up on the investigative panel, i.e. the judge and jury? Where else does that happen? The process has to be fair to both sides. Not bend over backwards catering to one side or the other. Proceedings where one side gets to pick the judge and jury are called Show Trials and they generally only happen in 3rd world communist countries.
What are their specific objections to the people who the AFL has chosen to be on this panel? Are they alleging pre - existing bias? If so which members of the panel are they alleging it against and what is their proof for alleging that?
Why is it an unreasonable burden for the accusers making very serious potentially career ending allegations against other people that they might have to tell their side of the story multiple times and be subject to questioning? If you are a victim of crimes such as rape, paedophilia, grievous bodily harm (which are all much more serious accusations than what has been alleged here) or anything else and you want the person who did it to you to be prosecuted then you will have to tell your side of the story. Multiple times. Maybe many multiple times. Maybe in court. And you will be subjected to adversarial questioning. And you won't be getting paid for the inconvenience of having to tell that story multiple times as some people are suggesting these complainants should. Why should the accusers here think they can just throw out their accusations here and not be subjected to the same process? If they were prepared to tell their story a second time to 4 Corners then why is it such a burden to tell it again to an AFL panel?
Clarkson and Fagan are back at their clubs because those clubs want their coach back and the AFL does not have the power to suspend them without completing a process that finds them guilty of something. Not because the fix is in.
Why should the accuser get to dictate the make up on the investigative panel, i.e. the judge and jury? Where else does that happen? The process has to be fair to both sides. Not bend over backwards catering to one side or the other. Proceedings where one side gets to pick the judge and jury are called Show Trials and they generally only happen in 3rd world communist countries.
What are their specific objections to the people who the AFL has chosen to be on this panel? Are they alleging pre - existing bias? If so which members of the panel are they alleging it against and what is their proof for alleging that?
Why is it an unreasonable burden for the accusers making very serious potentially career ending allegations against other people that they might have to tell their side of the story multiple times and be subject to questioning? If you are a victim of crimes such as rape, paedophilia, grievous bodily harm (which are all much more serious accusations than what has been alleged here) or anything else and you want the person who did it to you to be prosecuted then you will have to tell your side of the story. Multiple times. Maybe many multiple times. Maybe in court. And you will be subjected to adversarial questioning. And you won't be getting paid for the inconvenience of having to tell that story multiple times as some people are suggesting these complainants should. Why should the accusers here think they can just throw out their accusations here and not be subjected to the same process? If they were prepared to tell their story a second time to 4 Corners then why is it such a burden to tell it again to an AFL panel?
Clarkson and Fagan are back at their clubs because those clubs want their coach back and the AFL does not have the power to suspend them without completing a process that finds them guilty of something. Not because the fix is in.
- Sep 10, 2010
- 28,939
- 42,097
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Toronto Maple Leafs
The ABC article above seems to address this. But you should also note this isn't a trial; it's investigation conducted by a private business into the conduct of an employee of what is basically a sub-contractor. No-one has to do any of this, it's not a legal proceeding, and you're jumping the gun with the above questions.
Again, this is laid out pretty well in the statement which suggests this investigation exists for the AFL's ends rather than both the AFL and peoples mistreated by the policies of one of the AFL's clubs.
Thing is, there's no legal issue here unless the plaintiff can prove discrimination. The only way they're going to get there is to have someone research the incidents on their behalf. So any other investigation has one goal, to change the optics of the situation. The AFL would prefer this to go away quietly and never happen again, and the complainant (from my view) wants better treatment of first nations people in the AFL system.
I don't blame 'Amy' for not wanting to participate here, it's akin to the 'show trial' you're alluding to above. As for the initial story, again, it's an optics thing. The issue wouldn't come to light otherwise, but it's legally untested and should be treated similar to heresay that gets chucked around on a daily basis. Both Norf and Brisbane have done the right thing by satisfying themselves of their employees' conduct.
I agree ….
Whereas in a fascist society the folk with the money and influence dictate the terms and judges soo ok it achieves an outcome those folk want.
Sorta like whats happening here.
How about we behave instead like a democracy and have both sides agree to an independent arbiter managed at arms distance by an accounting firm with no links to the afl, coaches or accusers.
Independant being the main issue, look at the Sports Rorts issue that was politically buried by doing a PMO internal review and not releasing the details
- Feb 4, 2021
- 510
- 1,260
- AFL Club
- West Coast
You can't strip the racism out. You have people from a disadvantaged background who have allegedly been pressured into taking actions that are not in line with what they would have chosen for themselves.
Indigenous families pen open letter to AFL before Hawthorn racism investigation begins
In an open letter directed to league boss Gillon McLachlan, the families say they want to "tell our truths" in a "culturally safe environment".
www.abc.net.au
Biggie
Eat better and exercise
- Moderator
- #670
Hawks’ initial mediation bid rejected as president-elect admits review findings ‘horrific’
Hawks’ mediation bid rejected as club boss admits review findings ‘horrific’
www.foxsports.com.au
kane249
Wibble
- Oct 27, 2006
- 53,013
- 71,492
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Sth Freo, Liverpool, Chicago Bulls
- Thread starter
- #671
AFL demands uniform approach to culture reviews at all clubs
AFL clubs have been warned not to conduct their own independent cultural reviews until the inquiry into historical allegations against Hawthorn is complete.
thewest.com.au
"AFL clubs will then take a uniform approach back to players, staff and members"
‘Our stories will be told’: Four Hawks families commit to AFL inquiry in ‘good faith’
‘Our stories will be told’: Four Hawks families commit to AFL inquiry in ‘good faith’
www.foxsports.com.au
“Our stories will be told and they will be heard,” they said in a statement.
“Change for the better is coming.
“We are utterly determined to make the AFL a safer place for all First Nations players and their families.
“We trust that as a further demonstration of its good faith commitment the AFL will now detail how and when it intends to commence this work, the terms of reference, who will undertake it, and if it will be open and transparent to the world,” they said in their latest statement.
“To the media and clubs who want to eliminate racism in AFL football, please hold the AFL to its commitment.
“We want the AFL to be realigned to the right side of history.”
I don't know who their lawyer is but I love them. Straight on the front foot about open and honest transparency and getting the media involved to force the AFLs hand into doing so. Hopefully this builds so much ground swell the AFL can't run from it
Gives me great joy knowing that finally somebody is actively pressuring the AFL to not sweep a controversy under the carpet with a big 'Nothing to see here' sign in front.
‘Our stories will be told’: Four Hawks families commit to AFL inquiry in ‘good faith’
‘Our stories will be told’: Four Hawks families commit to AFL inquiry in ‘good faith’
“Our stories will be told and they will be heard,” they said in a statement.
“Change for the better is coming.
“We are utterly determined to make the AFL a safer place for all First Nations players and their families.
“We trust that as a further demonstration of its good faith commitment the AFL will now detail how and when it intends to commence this work, the terms of reference, who will undertake it, and if it will be open and transparent to the world,” they said in their latest statement.
“To the media and clubs who want to eliminate racism in AFL football, please hold the AFL to its commitment.
“We want the AFL to be realigned to the right side of history.”
I don't know who their lawyer is but I love them. Straight on the front foot about open and honest transparency and getting the media involved to force the AFLs hand into doing so. Hopefully this builds so much ground swell the AFL can't run from it
Gil and his cronies must be squirming
The accusers are human as are the accused.
The accusers are saying one thing and the accused are saying another.
Nothing recorded by either party, so someone's word against somebody else's word.
Already there is divided opinion on this forum, some for the accused and some against.
Some for the accusers and some against.
Good luck finding the truth in amongst this shit show. Most minds are already made up.
I feel the only winners out of all this will be the Lawyers............Again.
The accusers are saying one thing and the accused are saying another.
Nothing recorded by either party, so someone's word against somebody else's word.
Already there is divided opinion on this forum, some for the accused and some against.
Some for the accusers and some against.
Good luck finding the truth in amongst this shit show. Most minds are already made up.
I feel the only winners out of all this will be the Lawyers............Again.
