Clarkson to take leave to 'focus on his wellbeing'

David · I dare you to try Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda

Agreed, PP – well said.

What'sinaname · Joined: 29 May 2010 Location: Living rent free

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.

slangman · Joined: 11 Aug 2003

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!!!

David · I dare you to try Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda

It's why I've always thought the AFLPA (and employment law more broadly) needed to take a much firmer line on this stuff. Given what some are saying, it seems there's a pretty slippery slope between "having an interest in a player's welfare" --> "helping" them with their living arrangements --> interfering in their relationships and family planning and telling them who they can or cannot be in contact with.

Clarkson, Fagan and Burt may well have believed that they were acting in the players' personal best interests. But their job was also to get the most out of them as footballers and ensure maximum on-field success for the club – which is, not trivially, also something that personally and financially benefits them – and that's an inherent and substantial conflict of interest. Even if they were qualified to be staging interventions (and they're unequivocally not; they're football coaches, not social workers), this alone would be reason enough for them to need to take a step back.

The fact that the players are Indigenous has been the headline of the story and race has been the main angle here – not unjustifiably, all things considered – but what was alleged to have been done would have been utterly appalling regardless of whether the players were black or white. So someone somewhere needs to draw a line in the sand and say that this is completely unacceptable.

Hopefully, if nothing else, what Clarkson et al have gone through in the past eight months will make future coaches and staffers a little more gun-shy. If so, all the better. It's not a fraction of what these players seem to have suffered, but it's something.

PyreneesPie · PyreneesPie Joined: 22 Aug 2014

schuey07 · Joined: 05 Aug 2008 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 · Side By Side Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere

stui magpie · Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2023 10:27 am

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.

K · Joined: 09 Sep 2011

"Hawks face massive financial settlement to Clarkson"

(Caro, The Age)

think positive · Side By Side Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere

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.