Not really Melbourne related, but it's interesting seeing this unfold.

Ex-Crows footy boss ‘vindicated’ by infamous camp verdict

Sam McClure and Caro have had to issue an apology to the Collective Minds group over the whole camp fiasco.

What raised my eyebrows was this was mentioned in the full statement.

"In 2018 former Port Adelaide head coach Mark Williams publicly stated a number of outlandish claims he asserted were facts. These were a key trigger in the AFL Integrity Unit investigation and have since been proven to be wrong by the AFL Integrity Unit and Safework SA."

The apology says in part,

"If the publications were taken to suggest otherwise, Nine withdraws that suggestion. Nine apologises and expresses regret if the publications caused hurt and offence to Mr Woulfe, Mr Leddie and Collective Mind."

There is also similar wording replacing "Nine" with "The Age" (which Nine, the company) owns.

I'm surprised the injured parties accepted that wording. It's not really an apology at all. Why have Nine and The Age been allowed to get away with including the phrase "if the publications caused hurt"? Of course they did - that's why the apology was sought in the first place. 

If a footballer had said that after breaking someone else's jaw behind play, journos would be the first to criticise the player for qualifying it with that mealy-mouthed expression.

Without being able to read the whole story, it does seem like Choco has either gone off half cocked or is unable to prove what he said was true.

With that said, the onus is on the journalists to get two sources for every allegation/story. They haven't done this.

From a PR perspective, I mentioned last year that Pert placed a media ban on Choco. Maybe this is the reason.

1 minute ago, dee-tox said:

Without being able to read the whole story, it does seem like Choco has either gone off half cocked or is unable to prove what he said was true.

With that said, the onus is on the journalists to get two sources for every allegation/story. They haven't done this.

From a PR perspective, I mentioned last year that Pert placed a media ban on Choco. Maybe this is the reason.

Is this actually legit?

1 minute ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Is this actually legit?

Absolutely. 

11 minutes ago, dee-tox said:

Absolutely. 

Yeah okay. 

I remember Mark Williams did the SEN interview last year which was actually great to listen too.

I know Choco can say stuff that can divide opinions, but personally I wish we could hear more from a football perspective. 

36 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

The apology says in part,

"If the publications were taken to suggest otherwise, Nine withdraws that suggestion. Nine apologises and expresses regret if the publications caused hurt and offence to Mr Woulfe, Mr Leddie and Collective Mind."

There is also similar wording replacing "Nine" with "The Age" (which Nine, the company) owns.

I'm surprised the injured parties accepted that wording. It's not really an apology at all. Why have Nine and The Age been allowed to get away with including the phrase "if the publications caused hurt"? Of course they did - that's why the apology was sought in the first place. 

If a footballer had said that after breaking someone else's jaw behind play, journos would be the first to criticise the player for qualifying it with that mealy-mouthed expression.

They could ask for a better apology.

Or someone at the Age could ring up Eddie Betts or Charlie Cameron and ask them about the camp again.

 

53 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

The apology says in part,

"If the publications were taken to suggest otherwise, Nine withdraws that suggestion. Nine apologises and expresses regret if the publications caused hurt and offence to Mr Woulfe, Mr Leddie and Collective Mind."

There is also similar wording replacing "Nine" with "The Age" (which Nine, the company) owns.

I'm surprised the injured parties accepted that wording. It's not really an apology at all. Why have Nine and The Age been allowed to get away with including the phrase "if the publications caused hurt"? Of course they did - that's why the apology was sought in the first place. 

If a footballer had said that after breaking someone else's jaw behind play, journos would be the first to criticise the player for qualifying it with that mealy-mouthed expression.

This is the current standard political apology coming from governments.  If you say "I apologise if you are offended" with the implication that no reasonable person would be offended, you can appear to be apologising and can't be proved to be not apoogising.  I'd reject any apology with this qualification was insincere.

The apology one make when one doesn’t want any legal ramifications for apologizing….

Is the AFL Integrity Unit an oxymoron?

the comments were made in 2018 and the apology given in 2022 .it is reasonable to postulate that the apology formed part of settlement terms of a defamation action brought by members of the  Crows hierarchy  and/or Collective Minds .

This is the picture of Sam McClure in "The Australian" story (online version). I think he owes us all an apology for that haircut.

4 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

They could ask for a better apology.

Or someone at the Age could ring up Eddie Betts or Charlie Cameron and ask them about the camp again.

 

Exactly - the apology is issued only because Safework SA found no evidence of breaches of OH&S laws - this doesn't mean that there wasn't significant fallout from the camp among the players.

4 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

The apology says in part,

"If the publications were taken to suggest otherwise, Nine withdraws that suggestion. Nine apologises and expresses regret if the publications caused hurt and offence to Mr Woulfe, Mr Leddie and Collective Mind."

There is also similar wording replacing "Nine" with "The Age" (which Nine, the company) owns.

I'm surprised the injured parties accepted that wording. It's not really an apology at all. Why have Nine and The Age been allowed to get away with including the phrase "if the publications caused hurt"? Of course they did - that's why the apology was sought in the first place. 

If a footballer had said that after breaking someone else's jaw behind play, journos would be the first to criticise the player for qualifying it with that mealy-mouthed expression.

From what I understand, the wording of these apologies is determined as part of the legal proceedings or negotiated through legal parties afterwards, and when you see these kind of 'I'm sorry if it was taken a particular way...' apologies; I think that gives you an insight into how strong (or otherwise) the case against the journos was.

It's very different to breaking someone's jaw, so perhaps not the best analogy there.

 

8 hours ago, dee-tox said:

From a PR perspective, I mentioned last year that Pert placed a media ban on Choco. Maybe this is the reason.

BS

18 minutes ago, drysdale demon said:

BS

Pfft!

21 hours ago, dee-tox said:

 

From a PR perspective, I mentioned last year that Pert placed a media ban on Choco. Maybe this is the reason.

Hang on! What?! Really?

That's a bit disappointing. I was looking forward to hearing more interviews by Mark "Choco" Williams regarding his contribution as Head of Development for the MFC. How he was going with developing our young recruits.

I also had my hopes up that @Demonlandmight be fortunate enough to try and get Mark "Choco" Williams on the Demonland podcast this year.

On 2/4/2022 at 4:01 PM, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

This is the picture of Sam McClure in "The Australian" story (online version). I think he owes us all an apology for that haircut.

He'll look back in 30 years and wonder . . . what was I thinking?

8 hours ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

He'll look back in 30 years and wonder . . . what was I thinking?

You think it would take that long?

22 hours ago, Supreme_Demon said:

Hang on! What?! Really?

That's a bit disappointing. I was looking forward to hearing more interviews by Mark "Choco" Williams regarding his contribution as Head of Development for the MFC. How he was going with developing our young recruits.

I also had my hopes up that @Demonlandmight be fortunate enough to try and get Mark "Choco" Williams on the Demonland podcast this year.

He was on the BUrgo podcast after the GF and pretty sure I heard him on another one too (Deebrief?)