Hawks racism allegations (merged thread)

[Demonland 71,237]

 

[Graeme Yeats' Mullet 6,772]

21 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

As if the AFL will cede power to an independent body...

It's against the fibre of their being

[Graeme Yeats' Mullet 6,772]

Hawthorn have truly lacked foresight here. They have essentially set up an anonymous public accusation forum, without any view on how any serious accusations may be resolved

There is no clear path forward for those aggrieved and/or those accused to have the situations resolved one way or the another

What a complete mess

[rjay 24,849]

54 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

I think they are right to not want the AFL involved in any way. Basically telling them to stick their so called independent inquiry.

Their (AFL) record on this is poor.

...but not sure how it happens.

Maybe the human rights commission? although other authorities in the past also don't have a great record.

Any ideas?

Edited September 29, 2022 by rjay

[daisycutter 29,600]

3 minutes ago, rjay said:

I think they are right to not want the AFL involved in any way. Basically telling them to stick their so called independent inquiry.

Their (AFL) record on this is poor.

...but not sure how it happens.

Maybe the human rights commission? although other authorities in the past also don't have a great record.

Any ideas?

i thought the afl was setting up an independent panel

the afl integrity unit are not conducting the investigation

[rjay 24,849]

7 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i thought the afl was setting up an independent panel

the afl integrity unit are not conducting the investigation

...but the AFL are still selecting the panel and who creates the terms of reference?

It can't be independent if the AFL are setting it up.

The players don't want them involved in anyway apart from being called to give evidence.

I agree with the players.

Edited September 29, 2022 by rjay

[Stiff Arm 4,419]

15 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i thought the afl was setting up an independent panel

the afl integrity unit are not conducting the investigation

Would be good if the panel was independent and not set up or funded by the AFL. The best way to get the right outcome (whatever that may be) is not to have the AFL run it or have influence over it 

Edited September 29, 2022 by Stiff Arm

[DeeSpencer 25,424]

25 minutes ago, rjay said:

I think they are right to not want the AFL involved in any way. Basically telling them to stick their so called independent inquiry.

Their (AFL) record on this is poor.

...but not sure how it happens.

Maybe the human rights commission? although other authorities in the past also don't have a great record.

Any ideas?

The article mentions human rights commission or a state inquiry, but I would’ve thought the AFL could pick 1 or 2 members, the AFLPA 2 members and the AFLCA 1 member and they hold it under afl rules. Maybe give veto power to each body to rule out anyone deemed untrustworthy or biased. The hearing is to determine if afl rules were breached, it has to be at least held in relation to the afl even if they stay away from it. 

At the end of the day legal actions and settlements are likely to come no matter which way it breaks, but as tricky as it is the players have to step forward I think.

 

Edited September 29, 2022 by DeeSpencer

[rjay 24,849]

2 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

The article mentions human rights commission or a state inquiry, but I would’ve thought the AFL could pick 1 or 2 members, the AFLPA 2 members and the AFLCA 1 member and they hold it under afl rules. Maybe give veto power to each body to rule out anyone deemed untrustworthy or biased. The hearing is to determine if afl rules were breached, it has to be at least held in relation to the afl even if they stay away from it. 

At the end of the day legal actions and settlements are likely to come no matter which way it breaks, but as tricky as it is the players have to step forward I think.

 

The AFLPA are funded by the AFL, let's just leave that there.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,129]

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

The article mentions human rights commission or a state inquiry, but I would’ve thought the AFL could pick 1 or 2 members, the AFLPA 2 members and the AFLCA 1 member and they hold it under afl rules.

Yeah, nah.

[layzie 33,732]

If anyone thinks there isn't going to be more and more news each day on this they are kidding themselves.

[old dee 23,744]

12 hours ago, Graeme Yeats' Mullet said:

As if the AFL will cede power to an independent body...

It's against the fibre of their being

And you lose total control. 

[Demonland 71,237]

 

[layzie 33,732]

Good work Jeff, model president..

[Sir Why You Little 36,954]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/hawthorn-hawks/afl-news-2022-hawthorn-racism-report-abc-statement-russell-jackson-alastair-clarkson-and-chris-fagan-contacted-eddie-mcguire/news-story/bcdc58e4848b7ee94535b139e2ceee35

[sue 9,096]

19 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/hawthorn-hawks/afl-news-2022-hawthorn-racism-report-abc-statement-russell-jackson-alastair-clarkson-and-chris-fagan-contacted-eddie-mcguire/news-story/bcdc58e4848b7ee94535b139e2ceee35

Interesting that the ABC says they were offered more time to respond to the allegations but didn’t really. 

[Sir Why You Little 36,954]

8 minutes ago, sue said:

Interesting that the ABC says they were offered more time to respond to the allegations but didn’t really. 

The ABC Legal Department would have covered all bases with this story. It’s too volatile to be careless

[layzie 33,732]

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/hawthorn-hawks/afl-news-2022-hawthorn-racism-report-abc-statement-russell-jackson-alastair-clarkson-and-chris-fagan-contacted-eddie-mcguire/news-story/bcdc58e4848b7ee94535b139e2ceee35

Eddie was barking up the wrong tree

[sue 9,096]

1 hour ago, sue said:

Interesting that the ABC says they were offered more time to respond to the allegations but didn’t really. 

Whoops. Typo made that post obscure.   Last word was meant to be “reply”. 

[BoBo 2,941]

3 hours ago, sue said:

Interesting that the ABC says they were offered more time to respond to the allegations but didn’t really. 

Yeah, they were all on the phone to lawyers as soon as they got wind that the abc were asking questions. 

[layzie 33,732]

2 hours ago, sue said:

Whoops. Typo made that post obscure.   Last word was meant to be “reply”. 

That makes more sense 😀

[Demonland 71,237]

 

[Demonland 71,237]

 

[Lord Nev 13,512]

 

[Graeme Yeats' Mullet 6,772]

9 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

 

Ordinary article by Caro in TheAge

Citing Sam Mitchell's book published in 2018, and conversations with non-indigenous player who all said "that their own experiences should not be compared to those published in the cultural safety review"

And the majority "stressed that Clarkson saw himself as a father figure at the club who, while at times overstepping the mark in interfering in their personal lives, firmly believed he was prioritising the best interests of his footballers"

The most shocking "fresh" allegation is that Mitchell had to hand his phone in with all temates while away and his Mrs was often needing to take on of the babies to hospital  -  and a few paragraphs later actually note the fact that the phone was given back and an exception made for him...

So a non-story with no relevant new information insinuating there is more shocking accusations, just so Caro can get some column inches out the door...