Jump to content

Caroline Wilson, Sam McClure issue apologies over Crows camp saga

dazzledavey36
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

Posted

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."

  • Quote
    • Shocked 1
    • Demonland changed the title to Caroline Wilson, Sam McClure issue apologies over Crows camp saga
     

    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.

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    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.

  • Quote
    •  
    • Author
    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?

  • Quote
    • Shocked 1

    • Author
    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. 

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    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.

     

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    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.

  • Quote
    • Like 5
     

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

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    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 .

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    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.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    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.

     

  • Quote

    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.

  • Quote
    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.

    bdfc70efff88e1ec1be1631d79d50d4c

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

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    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?)

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • PREGAME: St. Kilda

      The Demons come face to face with St. Kilda for the second time this season for their return clash at Marvel Stadium on Sunday. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • 15 replies
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: Carlton

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Tuesday, 22nd July @ 8:00pm. Join Binman & I as we dissect the Dees disappointing loss to Carlton at the MCG.
      Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
      Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • 0 replies
      Demonland

    • VOTES: Carlton

      Captain Max Gawn still has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year Award from Christian Petracca, Jake Bowey, Kozzy Pickett & Clayton Oliver. Your votes please; 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

      • 13 replies
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: Carlton

      A near full strength Demons were outplayed all night against a Blues outfit that was under the pump and missing at least 9 or 10 of the best players. Time for some hard decisions to be made across the board.

        • Clap
        • Love
        • Like
      • 196 replies
      Demonland

    • GAMEDAY: Carlton

      It's Game Day and Clarry's 200th game and for anyone who hates Carlton as much as I do this is our Grand Final. Go Dees.

        • Haha
      • 669 replies
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Carlton

      Good evening, Demon fans and welcome back to the Demonland Podcast ... it’s time to discuss this week’s game against the Blues. Will the Demons celebrate Clayton Oliver’s 200th game with a victory? We have a number of callers waiting on line … Leopold Bloom: Carlton and Melbourne are both out of finals contention with six wins and eleven losses, and are undoubtedly the two most underwhelming and disappointing teams of 2025. Both had high expectations at the start of participating and advancing deep into the finals, but instead, they have consistently underperformed and disappointed themselves and their supporters throughout the year. However, I am inclined to give the Demons the benefit of the doubt, as they have made some progress in addressing their issues after a disastrous start. In contrast, the Blues are struggling across the board and do not appear to be making any notable improvements. They are regressing, and a significant loss is looming on Saturday night. Max Gawn in the ruck will be huge and the Demon midfield have a point to prove after lowering their colours in so many close calls.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
    View All