sue

Doubtless true, and those posters may have been wrong. But being wrong about the sincerity of his message is not even a possibilty if he didn't make the appropriate farewell message in the first place.

Sadly the amount has overwhelmed the number, particularly in the last year or so. (Good luck critiquing that sentence.)

I don't recall selling my soul old dee. More like my having had it extracted by Voldemort.

It is totally inappropriate for anyone to reveal private matters affecting a player's choice, though reasonable speculation should be acceptable on a site like this. A number of posters have complained that if he knew he was going it would have been better for the club if he left last year and have stuck into him for not doing that. That is why I asked if those who imply they know the personal reasons could state that those reasons didn't arise till this year. If they only arose this year, that should shut those complainers up totally. Not that they have much of a leg to stand on anyway.

Do you know when did this legitimate reason arise ? During the last 12 months?

It's OK if there are private reasons to account for some of this. Some people have hinted that they know what they are. To mollify those who are annoyed Jackon didn't go earlier, could those people in the know say if these private reasons only arose this year?

If he can't get to WA and doesn't go to North I'd prefer him to sit out rather than play a year at Melbourne. That would be disruptive in all sorts of ways. (But a deal will be done is much more likely.)

Surely if it comes down to Jackson not being able to get to WA he won't go to North. He'd re-sign with Melbourne (except in a fit of pique). Not that I think he will end up in that siutation.

Wrong meaning of confidential. When you are asked to tell your story and told that the review is confidential, it doesn't mean your are gagged forever telling your story anywhere else. It means the reviewer won't release you details. Who would ever agree to make a complaint on the condition they can't tell anyone else - especially if they had no confidence it wouldn't be swept under the carpet.

In other ways it doesn't. It adds credibility to the indigenous families' claims since it is independent evidence of his controlling behaviour. The degree, extent and nature of the controlling behaviour in the case of indigenous players can still raise the question of racism.

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

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

I'm taking out futures on pop-corn.

Listen to the other coaches post-season reviews and your head will probably feel just as bad.

Appropriate.

Of course an investigation has to consider all sides and try to establish the truth as far as possible. But repeatedly saying that in order to refute assumptions by other posters that there is likely to be a serious case to answer, smells slightly to me. If 3 or 5 people said that they saw me breaking into your house, I think most people would think there is likely to be something in the charge and await proceedings.

True. What I meant by 'may not end well for anyone' was that the complainants may refuse to enter into such a process and so there may be no resolution.

The difficulty is greater than that I fear. My first thought when the AFL said it would investigate was "Will these people really want to go through this all again in a more public way, especially if some smooth-talking lawyer gets to cross-examine them". Now maybe the AFL review won't go that way, but if it does I suspect this will not end well for anyone.

That makes sense

It would be interesting following the court cases of those crying foul, arguing they felt sick (COVID??) and had to leave.

True, but surely it can add to a case if a witness (who might be disbelieved for some reason) is able to say, " I told X about it at the time' and X is called as a witness to confirm that happened. It's evidence that the accusation wasn't concoted yesterday. (Leaving long planned conspiracies or lying aside).

Yep, unfortunately that's what anyone accused of a crime effectively suffers. I can't see how it can be any different here unless everything is kept secret which would mean that many would never trust the result (or non-result). I've detailed my position in a post at 7:49am yesterday, page 21 so won't repeat it all again.

Some say the coaches are getting no natural justice because they havent been given a chance to respond to the allegations. Does the same not apply to someone accused of a crime? They are named in public. They get a chance to tell their side of things during a trial. The coaches will get their chance in the investigation the AFL is organizing. It is sad but true that in both examples, if the allegations prove unsubstantiated, the person's reputation may take a hit but that's just the way things are. Better than having everything done in secret and the public losing all confidence in the process.

And with a few minutes to go, BT says Gil must be happy with the half time entertainment without a hint of irony.

Geelong seem to be able to get handballs away when tackled. Have they done something new and special or is Sydney hopeless at tacking all of a sudden?