What was acceptable 10 years ago isn't today.
Even just 10 years ago it would have been expected that all players, regardless of race, colour, etc would be required to adopt the same single minded focus of the club. One in, all in.
Today, clubs are expected to treat individuals differently - to take into account cultural differences.
Clarkson to take leave to 'focus on his wellbeing'
Moderator: bbmods
-
What'sinaname
- Posts: 20035
- Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 10:00 pm
- Location: Living rent free
- Has liked: 2 times
- Been liked: 9 times
Shaun Burgoynes lack of support to the indigenous player’s allegations is what has been underplayed. Maybe he also witnessed the lack of professionalism and commitment required for elite sport by the aggrieved players and agreed with how Clarko and co handled the situation.
As for clubs/employers crossing into private lives, that has been going on for years and is actually getting worse with employers reprimanding or sacking people because of social media comments or posts outside of work hours.
Michael Long expressed concern for Cyril and the direction in which he was going in a few years ago. Is this overstepping the line??
My observation is that Clarko, Fagan and Burt approached the situation with the best of intentions for the players and club as a professional sporting organisation. If they get found to have crossed the line into private lives, then that will set a serious precedent moving forward with all unprofessional and misbehaving players.
Maybe Dane Swan can revise the pressure Collingwood put on him to move away from his mates….I mean, how dare they!!!
As for clubs/employers crossing into private lives, that has been going on for years and is actually getting worse with employers reprimanding or sacking people because of social media comments or posts outside of work hours.
Michael Long expressed concern for Cyril and the direction in which he was going in a few years ago. Is this overstepping the line??
My observation is that Clarko, Fagan and Burt approached the situation with the best of intentions for the players and club as a professional sporting organisation. If they get found to have crossed the line into private lives, then that will set a serious precedent moving forward with all unprofessional and misbehaving players.
Maybe Dane Swan can revise the pressure Collingwood put on him to move away from his mates….I mean, how dare they!!!
- Side By Side -
-
schuey07
- Posts: 1445
- Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 5:01 pm
- Location: Mount Waverley
The players just wanted cash. One of them was allegedly a theif. This was always about money. Today you can make up anything to try and get a pyday. If what I have heard is true from some pretty reliable sources, the accusers should be charged, I just hope the accused take them, the AFL and Hawthorn to the cleaners. It's sad fact of the times we live in that people can make false accusations and get away with it.
-
think positive
- Posts: 40185
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 8:33 pm
- Location: somewhere
- Has liked: 212 times
- Been liked: 84 times
Exactly what I meantWhat'sinaname wrote:What was acceptable 10 years ago isn't today.
Even just 10 years ago it would have been expected that all players, regardless of race, colour, etc would be required to adopt the same single minded focus of the club. One in, all in.
Today, clubs are expected to treat individuals differently - to take into account cultural differences.
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
-
stui magpie
- Posts: 54645
- Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 10:10 am
- Location: In flagrante delicto
- Has liked: 71 times
- Been liked: 73 times
I've read the statement from the Indigenous families, pretty powerful stuff and very specifically worded.
My read of a few parts is that they acknowledge there may be a difference between what was said and what was heard, hence the truth telling session where they wanted to explain "what they heard" and to give the accused the opportunity to explain why they thought they were doing the right thing.
I agree with david's points above about coaches making interventions in players lives, but only to a point. Yes they may not be qualified social workers, but the club is making a big investment in new draftees and they have a short window to either make it or be delisted. It's a very different workplace to a normal one so sometimes they are going to intervene in a players "personal" life in an attempt to give them the best opportunity to succeed. A mutually beneficial outcome. That will often include telling a player who they should and shouldn't associate with.
My read of a few parts is that they acknowledge there may be a difference between what was said and what was heard, hence the truth telling session where they wanted to explain "what they heard" and to give the accused the opportunity to explain why they thought they were doing the right thing.
I agree with david's points above about coaches making interventions in players lives, but only to a point. Yes they may not be qualified social workers, but the club is making a big investment in new draftees and they have a short window to either make it or be delisted. It's a very different workplace to a normal one so sometimes they are going to intervene in a players "personal" life in an attempt to give them the best opportunity to succeed. A mutually beneficial outcome. That will often include telling a player who they should and shouldn't associate with.
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
-
think positive
- Posts: 40185
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 8:33 pm
- Location: somewhere
- Has liked: 212 times
- Been liked: 84 times
Good. True to any degree or a fabrication, the info should not have been in the public domain until it was tested in a courtroom. Clarkson and co. Don’t deserve the innocent until proven guilty presumption?
The shit show that resulted from the fact finding missions at collingwood and hawthorn probably means other clubs won’t bother to try and better things.
The shit show that resulted from the fact finding missions at collingwood and hawthorn probably means other clubs won’t bother to try and better things.
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
-
think positive
- Posts: 40185
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 8:33 pm
- Location: somewhere
- Has liked: 212 times
- Been liked: 84 times
Re: Clarkson to take leave to 'focus on his wellbeing'
Well I’m gunna back peddle after reading the case.
Disgraceful and oh so cruel.
Too much that can be backed up by multiple witnesses
Wright mentioned once, not as bad as someof the stuff listed , gees
Disgraceful and oh so cruel.
Too much that can be backed up by multiple witnesses
Wright mentioned once, not as bad as someof the stuff listed , gees
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
Re: Clarkson to take leave to 'focus on his wellbeing'
I too read the statement of claim which can be found here https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/asse ... -Claim.pdf
They've gone scatter gun, listing every possible grievance, no matter how minor. It's hard to know what it means until a defence is available.
Its easy to make an allegation, harder to prove it. Burt has already denied that the key conversations ever took place. I assume that Clarkson and Fagan will say the same thing. Most of the player's allegations are not corroborated by others. The best they can say is that "he told me about it after it happened" or something similar. But, of course, they can be challenged as they stand to make money by saying that.
One complaint is that Hawthorn intruded too much into the player's financial lives. In contrast to that, another complaint is that a player asked Hawthorn to arrange and presumably pay for flights for his family from Perth to Melbourne and return, because the family could not afford it, and Hawthorn was difficult about that. Another complaint was that Hawthorn's indigenous cultural advisor (or something similar) was only contracted to work 5 hours per week, but believed that he should have been appointed to a full time position. That would equate to five days' work each week, dealing with 5 players!
It's amazing what great memories the players have though. They can remember almost exactly what was said in lots of text messages years ago, and on which days those text messages were sent or received, even though they no longer have copies of them. It will be interesting to see how good their memories are in the witness box, when the 7 lawyers that signed off on the statement of claim can't answer questions for them.
They've gone scatter gun, listing every possible grievance, no matter how minor. It's hard to know what it means until a defence is available.
Its easy to make an allegation, harder to prove it. Burt has already denied that the key conversations ever took place. I assume that Clarkson and Fagan will say the same thing. Most of the player's allegations are not corroborated by others. The best they can say is that "he told me about it after it happened" or something similar. But, of course, they can be challenged as they stand to make money by saying that.
One complaint is that Hawthorn intruded too much into the player's financial lives. In contrast to that, another complaint is that a player asked Hawthorn to arrange and presumably pay for flights for his family from Perth to Melbourne and return, because the family could not afford it, and Hawthorn was difficult about that. Another complaint was that Hawthorn's indigenous cultural advisor (or something similar) was only contracted to work 5 hours per week, but believed that he should have been appointed to a full time position. That would equate to five days' work each week, dealing with 5 players!
It's amazing what great memories the players have though. They can remember almost exactly what was said in lots of text messages years ago, and on which days those text messages were sent or received, even though they no longer have copies of them. It will be interesting to see how good their memories are in the witness box, when the 7 lawyers that signed off on the statement of claim can't answer questions for them.
-
qldmagpie67
- Posts: 6000
- Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 10:41 pm
- Been liked: 74 times
Re: Clarkson to take leave to 'focus on his wellbeing'
For mine I find some of the allegations to be quite serious if found to be true but others fall into a category of what’s in the players beer interests
Asking them about possible drug or alcohol abuse would be in the players best interests not to be involved in same would apply to financial management assistance
I can’t speak for what happens inside AFL clubs but I was employed by news Ltd for a few decades as a bean counter. During this time my services where redirected to the Brisbane broncos once they took ownership during the super league saga.
My job primarily was to ensure the club operated inside a budget and was compliant with the club salary cap restrictions
With this we worked on when players received lump sum payments, along with weekly or bi weekly wages (to ensure cash flow was not hampered)
Part of this was working with individual players on their own personal finances requirements and assisting them with things like bank loans, budgeting, retirement planning and general expenditure.
We made it compulsory that all new players along with there manager or in some cases parents as well, attended individual 1 on 1 meetings to decide how best to tailor their payments to suit their financials commitments.
We would direct wage payments to rental agencies or banks as required, have money set aside for larger bills while leaving them disposable income.
We never felt this was a invasion of their privacy it was more so our responsibility to ensure a player didn’t live beyond there means and also that when the time came they had something to full back on financially.
I would often sit a couple hours a week with different players (once established) to assist in investment advice or loans applications for investments.
Many are still friends and call me for some “free” advice now that they’ve transitioned from football to other careers post playing days.
I don’t understand why a player would feel a club invaded their privacy by offering to ensure the money they earned while playing wasn’t squandered frivolously.
Professional athletes have a small window (generally) and the majority aren’t going to make the mega deals some others make. So getting the opportunity to make the most of that income while it’s there is a bonus really.
Asking them about possible drug or alcohol abuse would be in the players best interests not to be involved in same would apply to financial management assistance
I can’t speak for what happens inside AFL clubs but I was employed by news Ltd for a few decades as a bean counter. During this time my services where redirected to the Brisbane broncos once they took ownership during the super league saga.
My job primarily was to ensure the club operated inside a budget and was compliant with the club salary cap restrictions
With this we worked on when players received lump sum payments, along with weekly or bi weekly wages (to ensure cash flow was not hampered)
Part of this was working with individual players on their own personal finances requirements and assisting them with things like bank loans, budgeting, retirement planning and general expenditure.
We made it compulsory that all new players along with there manager or in some cases parents as well, attended individual 1 on 1 meetings to decide how best to tailor their payments to suit their financials commitments.
We would direct wage payments to rental agencies or banks as required, have money set aside for larger bills while leaving them disposable income.
We never felt this was a invasion of their privacy it was more so our responsibility to ensure a player didn’t live beyond there means and also that when the time came they had something to full back on financially.
I would often sit a couple hours a week with different players (once established) to assist in investment advice or loans applications for investments.
Many are still friends and call me for some “free” advice now that they’ve transitioned from football to other careers post playing days.
I don’t understand why a player would feel a club invaded their privacy by offering to ensure the money they earned while playing wasn’t squandered frivolously.
Professional athletes have a small window (generally) and the majority aren’t going to make the mega deals some others make. So getting the opportunity to make the most of that income while it’s there is a bonus really.
Re: Clarkson to take leave to 'focus on his wellbeing'
The abortion related allegations are the serious ones. I find it really hard to accept that the accused people said what is being alleged. Burt has already denied that it occurred as alleged. There may have been a conversation but his recollection of it may be very different
Along the lines of the history that you have referred to, one player told the club that he was going to retain a player manager. The response was along the lines of "why, you're on a one year rookie contract and it will only cost you money". It's clear to me that the club said that with the best interests of the player at heart, but the player doesn't see it that way. I remember years ago our receptionist answered the phone, said "good morning, how can I help you" and the response was an angry "don't you be so condescending to me", which was followed up with a complaint about the receptionist. Lucky for her, there was someone else standing there with her, and the exchange was overheard.
Along the lines of the history that you have referred to, one player told the club that he was going to retain a player manager. The response was along the lines of "why, you're on a one year rookie contract and it will only cost you money". It's clear to me that the club said that with the best interests of the player at heart, but the player doesn't see it that way. I remember years ago our receptionist answered the phone, said "good morning, how can I help you" and the response was an angry "don't you be so condescending to me", which was followed up with a complaint about the receptionist. Lucky for her, there was someone else standing there with her, and the exchange was overheard.