Hawthorn racism review

[bulldogtragic]

You don't know that. Could be a number of assistants.

Over that time, over a dozen assistants at a guess. I’m not prepared to guess. The media or AFEL can name names.

[bornadog]

Over that time, over a dozen assistants at a guess. I’m not prepared to guess. The media or AFEL can name names.

I have listed some on previous post

[Grantysghost]

You don't know that. Could be a number of assistants.

2013

Assistant coaches

• Leon Cameron (Forward)
• Adam Yze (Forward)
• Brendon Bolton (Midfield)
• Adam Simpson (Midfield)
• Luke Beveridge (Defence)
• Damian Monkhorst (Ruck)

2014

Assistant coaches

• Luke Beveridge.
• Brendon Bolton.
• Cameron Bruce.
• Brett Ratten.
• Damian Monkhorst (Ruck)
• Damian Carroll (Football Academy Development Coordinator)
• Adem Yze (Development)
• Brent Guerra (Part-time Development coach)

I don't it was speculation. But it was Bevo.

[bornadog]

I don't it was speculation. But it was Bevo.

I don't understand your allegation, and you do have to be careful writing that.

[GVGjr]

Over that time, over a dozen assistants at a guess. I’m not prepared to guess. The media or AFEL can name names.

Yes, it's on the AFL to release the names of people that need to make themselves available.
Such a tragic position the competition finds itself in.

[Grantysghost]

I don't understand your allegation, and you do have to be careful writing that.

OK, it may have been Bevo.

[jeemak]

So the next phase begins.

Fagan & Clarkson push back vigorously. Media gets given more evidence to push back in kind…

The language from the coaches is interesting. Deny wrong doing, claimed they were denied due process.

What process are they talking about, in lieu of the investigation only commencing with the integrity unit now?

They've gone super-defencive straight off the bat which tells me they're *!*!*!*!ed.

[jeemak]

I don't it was speculation. But it was Bevo.

I don't understand your allegation, and you do have to be careful writing that.

Yes, it's on the AFL to release the names of people that need to make themselves available.
Such a tragic position the competition finds itself in.

OK, it may have been Bevo.

If anyone sided with the players to do the right thing then it would have been Sam Power, not Bevo.

[Grantysghost]

The language from the coaches is interesting. Deny wrong doing, claimed they were denied due process.

What process are they talking about, in lieu of the investigation only commencing with the integrity unit now?

They've gone super-defencive straight off the bat which tells me they're *!*!*!*!ed.

Agree that's the classic play.

But the level of allegation probably means there's no other play?

[Grantysghost]

If anyone sided with the players to do the right thing and see justice done then it would have been Sam Power, not Bevo.

So wise.

[Grantysghost]

I don't understand your allegation, and you do have to be careful writing that.

Bad to clarify I was saying if anyone would be honest and stick up for the players I'd expect it to be Luke.

[jeemak]

Agree that's the classic play.

But the level of allegation probably means there's no other play?

I would have thought the denial/ defend the position rigourously would have been sufficient, but to talk about due process etc. puts too much mayo on it for mine.

But I'm not a PR agent, and perhaps these guys can actually just deny and deny it until it goes away with the AFL's help.

[Grantysghost]

I would have thought the denial/ defend the position rigourously would have been sufficient, but to talk about due process etc. puts too much mayo on it for mine.

But I'm not a PR agent, and perhaps these guys can actually just deny and deny it until it goes away with the AFL's help.

Sadly I believe that to be the case.

[1eyedog]

I’m not sure there’s a defamation case here. Especially if Fagan & Clarkson keep their jobs and there’s no financial damage on top of alleged reputations damage.

I’ve been following the Ben Roberts-Smith case closely, and there’s more of a case there, and it’s a close run thing, and it’s about war crimes and being a murderer (which is another sphere altogether). The ABC will use ‘truth’ as a defence to the publication. Factually they’ve reported an investigation was done. True. They’ve interviewed multiple sources and presumably vetted the evidence in deciding to report it with a reasonable belief what they’ve been told is ‘true’. Importantly, I read they offered both men (plus the development fella) the opportunity to respond to questions and the allegations BEFORE the report was published. It says they did not respond.

I imagine a court would rightfully point to the last part. If Fagan & Clarkson wanted the record corrected, or wanted to deny the allegations, or wanted to produce proof that the story was materially ‘untrue’, or wanted to commence a ‘concerns notice’ seeking them to stop the story, or wanted to seek an injunction by a court to temporarily halt the story - then the ABC is saying they have them that chance to take any of those actions and they didn’t take it. If the ABC gave them a reasonable time to respond (which is not exactly clear) then they have to get around that as well as proving that ‘truth’ can’t be used a defence. Not an easy or cheap thing to do from where I sit.

I think it’s simple. If the journo, management and lawyers from the ABC did their jobs right they should be fine to defend a potential defamation claim, whether or not a subsequent investigation determines anything different. As a tax payer, and someone interested in fairness, I hope the ABC dotted their i’s and crossed their t’s. I think we will see soon enough though, and it’s pretty simple, they’ve got the right to claim they’ve been potentially defamed. The ABC has the right to reveal to a court why they aren’t on the hook for it. The media circus will be next level if that happens. Will that be worse than just the story out there and do the coaches want to pump in millions in lawyers fees on a tight run thing? Lots of water under the bridge irrespective of what the AFEL find/claim to have found.

Nah its not defamation it's a worksafe issue as Hawthorn were the employer. It's also possibly a health and safety act issue, a negligence issue and a breach of duty of care as well.

[merantau]

The colonial mindset lives on. "We know what's best for you", actually means: "We will do whatever it takes to get what WE want. You have no rights so just get on with it or f off."

That, I'm afraid is the brutal reality. There is still a long way to go before things get better. Daisy Pearce spoke so well on SEN. She gets it - why don't others?