Tweet
The Roar sports website is mainly a rugby site but would normally have one afl news story to read, and it is not the grand final they are running. It this Hawthorn story. It seems so revolting as to be enough to be preposterous., "kill your unborn child"??? FFS.
-
-
From Eddie Betts to Chad Wingard, the incidents of abuse of indigenous players has continued on even years after the Adam Goodes affair. And the AFL has done effectively nothing.
Would it be too cynical to think that the AFL will do nothing about this latest allegation? Surely there will be a commission, but what will really happen to change things? Pardon me if I'm skeptical.Comment
-
Watching AFL360 tonight, two big points got raised.
Eddie Betts made the point it was no surprise. He told the story of being at a pool this year (yes, this year) and being asked to leave because two older, whiter people complained about his presence. Devastating, but it was a lead to the issue of racism being so prevalent it was ingrained in ways large and small and other clubs are unlikely to be immune and should consider their own version of the Hawks’ report. It’s hard to argue against.
And Whateley made the point about bigger issues, which is the issue clubs make of protecting and cultivating young players as people first, footballers second being a pretence at times. Look at Essendon during the drugs saga, or this. I’d be confident with someone who places so much emphasis on mental health and player wellbeing as Horse, we’d be very well placed. But you can never get lax about it.'Delicious' is a fun word to sayComment
-
As shocking and disgusting as these allegations are, it is only fair that we hear from those allegedly responsible in the quest to discover the truth. Hopefully the investigation will be truly independent, and then everything will be made fully public. At that point the AFL should bar those responsible for life, if these allegations are proven.Comment
-
I make no comment on the truth of what the allegations. But the emotional and aspirational manipulation, isolation from family, interfearance in private lives, dividing the world into initiates and outsiders - this is all straight out of the playbook of The Exclusive Brethren and every other cult you might care to name.Comment
-
The Eddie Betts story was he was told his kids presence was upsetting the white people's grandchildComment
-
It will no doubt be a terribly unfashionable comment to make, but I do this stuff for a living. I am extremely uncomfortable with the fact that this report has been published without, according to the reports, Clarkson, Fagan or Burt being even spoken to. Maybe the allegations are 100% true, maybe they're not. But to publish a report like this - and potentially destroy careers - without even speaking with those directly implicated, is frankly horrendous. If any of us were thinking of ourselves or anyone we cared about we would want something fairer than that.
As it happens, I detest Clarkson. I detest Newbold. I think both were beyond abysmal during the Goodes saga (and I was there, and positively nauseous, that awful day at the MCG). The Hawthorn Football Club was pathetic and its key figures were pathetic. In a way I rejoice in their suffering. But two wrongs do not make a right and the way this is unfolding is simply not right.My opinion is objective truth in its purest formComment
-
According to the ABC they were contacted for comment before the article was published and given 24 hours (stretched to 30 hours) to respond. The ABC received no response from anyone.
I agree with you in principle, but I suppose the publishing industry has standard practices about contacting parties for comment and then making decisions on whether to publish.
According to Tracey Holmes (who I saw talking about it on The Drum this evening), it's been known within AFL circles for a few days that the ABC was about to publish something, and that it was at this point that the AFLPA started to get involved.Comment
-
You are entirely missing my fundamental point. What you have just said is about the media seeking a response to a media query - about a report which was damning but written without even giving those damned the opportunity to tell their side of the story. My point is that the report itself (ie the report the media were seeking comment on) should not have been completed without at least giving those directly implicated an opportunity to comment on the allegations against them. What the media did or didn't do is not my point - that's after the event.My opinion is objective truth in its purest formComment
-
I think your comments misrepresent what has happened here. The "report" hasn't been published. It was received by Hawthorn and passed on to the AFL a couple of weeks ago, and presumably both parties were considering what the next steps were.
Somehow the ABC has become aware of the report and has done its own investigation. There must have been a leak somewhere, though it's not clear where that leak came from. From what I've read, the level of anecdotal evidence in the ABC story far exceeds that included in the report received by Hawthorn (and passed to the AFL).
It's also relevant to understand what the scope of the "report" was. Hawthorn didn't set out to investigate any allegations. They set out to contact the First Nations players and staff who had been at the club over the period in question to find out about their experiences at the club and to see whether they needed any support. This was a response to experiences shared by Cyril Rioli (at least some of which are in the public domain).
They weren't anticipating receiving a report that highlighted issues of this nature (and that the ABC article has further elaborated upon). It thus wasn't within the scope of the work that led to this report to get others to tell their side of the story. Having received a report that highlighted unexpected issues, presumably the next step would have been to launch an investigation, which would have involved speaking to others to get their perspectives.
What is slightly curious (but maybe not the most important aspect of this story) is how the ABC came to be aware of the report and to do their own work. I find it hard to believe that either Hawthorn or the AFL wanted this to become public before they'd had a chance to do follow up work.Comment
-
This abc investigation didn’t just happen this week, it would’ve been weeks, or maybe even months in the making
Why give Clarkson and co just 24 hours to respond? Why didn’t they request a formal interview with them? Particularly when they were not part of the process for the initial report
Given the extreme nature of the allegations, it strikes me as ACA gotcha journalism
The allegations seem outrageous by any normal persons standards and completely out of character for the two main protagonists named, regardless of your personal opinion of them.
The idea that coaches would ask to take your SIM card as a means from removing a person from their family seems preposterous and nonsensical
Their careers and lives are in tatters from unsubstantiated accusations provided by anonymous sources and haven’t been provided any real opportunity to defend themselves. They’ve already been deemed guilty by the moral majority
If the allegations turn out to be true, then those involved deserve punishment, but this is trial by social media and it’s pretty unsavouryLast edited by caj23; 22 September 2022, 07:24 AM.Comment
-
Good post. Not surprised Clarko and Fagan didn't comment, they would have needed to lawyer up before any statements. Whatever the AFL puts in place to investigate, it needs to be truly independent of the AFL which runs a massive PR department to protect its brand, and sensitive to those wronged who now have to re-live the experience.
There's been plenty of smoke around Hawthorn on this with First Nations players suddenly leaving and retiring, if it's true then I'm as gobsmacked as everyone and the consequences need match.Comment
Comment