Graeme Yeats' Mullet

2018... Where was all the outrage from Caro then? https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/mitch-in-the-works-20180803-p4zve4.html

Noticed that too... "Seized" is an interesting choice of words. I wonder if the "seizing" involved a routine request for relevant information and the helpful compliance of those providing the information?

I've found it interesting the backlash at the allegations that HFC intervened in the home living arrangements for one (or more?) of those laying accusations. I understand that football clubs routinely advise (or require) certain living arrangements and have role dedicated to developing players off-field, even today... I'm waiting to understand the context, and if there was a lack of cultural sensitivity that meant indigenous players as a group weren't treated appropriately. Or whether it was one individual circumstances not treated appropriately. Or another explanation... Time may tell? (Or may not)

I think these two takes are a strong potential to be the competing narratives coming out of any further investigation My guess is that any allegations are based in (at least some level of) fact. But context and different individual perspectives aren't yet clear and will be important But I can’t see a situation where context or varied perspectives can explain the accusations of pressuring family planning decisions... If that's in any way true, then those responsible are likely irreparably damaged

Garbage, and you know it I have no idea what happened here, and have stated that above. Neither do most people btw Simply calling out this story doesn’t add fresh allegations, and the story also admits the experiences spoken of should not be compared to those published in the cultural safety review... But written in a way to give the impression she's added to the case against Clarkson You are right, tho, that I don't rate Caro, because of articles like this

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...

Yep, have a crack at MG

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

As if the AFL will cede power to an independent body... It's against the fibre of their being

I remember when we all complained about Freo not giving us value for Hogan (pick 6 and 23 less pick 65) We got May Without May, we don't get a 🏆 Jackson is gone, maximise the outcome and turn it into some gold

He's pretty good on a lead, and one out... But can take a mark, outnumbered, deep in the pocket, with the ball kicked on his head? 🤷‍♂️

HtB every day of the week to Papley, that useless [.] Meredith says no prior... 🤦‍♂️

HtB? Didn't he kick it 20m

Sydney can't kick

Literally

Exactly The report is of allegations made by third parties, which the reporter can establish were made So the "facts" are those people made those allegations Much of the opinion on here is based on the substance of the allegations - which have now been categorically denied by the accused parties The legal avenue I think more time for responses may have resulted in was injunction to prevent the story going to press, not the reporter being sued

Were any "facts" presented? I'm not sure There were quotes presented, from unnamed sources, who alleged events happened, without much context Don't for a minute think that I doubt the allegations, I simply don't know anything. Just calling out the word "facts"

Probably, but did he want a response? Or just want to be able to say he tried to get one...? He couldn't go to press without an attempt... If there was more time, I think the pre-emptive legal route may have been pursued

The request for comment from the journo to Fagan was on Monday right? Wasn't that Brisbane's mad-Monday day? Just another dimension to the timing... My view is the late timing is much more convenient for the Journo, as the only response would be a denial and any more time may result in an injunction to stop going to press, particularly if the accuser is remaining nameless.

It seems it could be heading for a really poor outcome... But hopefully a well constructed enquiry can establish truth and context with input from all parties

Replace OMac again... 🤷‍♂️

This was obvious We looked weather beaten

Be intersting to see the correlations between: ABC Report (3 parties) Hawthorn Report - if released (whatever the scope) Independent AFL Investigation (presumably scope includes any/all or most parties)

Sorry, I'm coming to this late as had a busy day at work... A lot of catching up to do... Allegations aside, can someone confirm... Is the basis of the story by ABC based on the reporters discussion with contributors to the Hawthorn investigation? Or based on the report itself (being released or leaked)? The reporting of the responses of those apparently accused doesn't make clear what they are responding to either...

Meredith... 🤦‍♂️ Get ready for some howlers...! Could be worse, he could still be sporting that horrible undercut! 🤔