Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 14

Thread: Gil announcement at 12.30pm today (Friday)

  1. #1
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Crowland :-(
    Posts
    2,789

    Gil announcement at 12.30pm today (Friday)

    Not related to this thread but announcement by Gillon McLaughlin at 12.30pm EST. Could it be that it's Gil that's been having the liaison with the young staffer?

  2. #2
    RWOs Black Sheep AnnieH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    At Goodesy's Place
    Posts
    10,410
    No, it seems that two other people were having inappropriate affairs.

    I think Hird the Turd being allowed to hand out the Norm Smith is far more outrageous.

    Ben Cousins will have a turn as well.

    OH MY FAIRY GODMOTHER!!!!
    Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
    Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Mel_C View Post
    No you aren't the only one. I also struggle to make out who is who. I'm surprised the AFL haven't forced either side to wear their away strip.
    Gills a bit busy at the moment.

  4. #4
    Go Swannies! Site Admin Meg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In the Brewongle
    Posts
    2,925
    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    Gills a bit busy at the moment.
    It seems there have been a lot of busy people at the AFL.

  5. #5
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Crowland :-(
    Posts
    2,789
    Quote Originally Posted by Meg View Post
    It seems there have been a lot of busy people at the AFL.
    Rumours there may be more to come on today's events. Not been a good fortnight for the AFL, firstly senior exec bashing a player in a minor league game, now two more senior execs resigning for this. A lot of big pay cheques and futures trashed because of testosterone :-)

    Getting light on for bodies in the higher atmosphere at AFL House.

    Oops, a quick PS after re-reading my first sentence which wasn't intended to be a play on words but now I've seen it looks rather clever!

  6. #6
    pr. dim-melb; m not f
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Northcote
    Posts
    6,232
    Forgive my scepticism, but I have a few questions I'll bet are never answered.

    How did these goings-on come to be public property? Did one or both of the women go to the media? Or did the info come from someone else within the AFL workforce? (I nearly wrote workfarce but decided not to).

    Apart from the males, who (being dickheads) obviously would not get a position at the Swans, did the young (how young?) women concerned consent to the males' suggestions and then change their minds, or was it getting up someone else's nose? Or did one or both of the men change their minds and the woman/women concerned became annoyed?

    How on earth is an admittedly irresponsible bit of nookie equated with a bashing, in terms of punishment? That is, apart from the obvious difference in terms of the law of the land.

    Is this all news because prurience sells papers and television statistics?

    As an outsider I'm most sorry for the men's families - but the degree of publicity doesn't help, rather it makes it worse for them.

    And finally, what business is it of ours?
    He reminds him of the guys, close-set, slow, and never rattled, who were play-makers on the team. (John Updike, seeing Josh Kennedy in a crystal ball)

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by dimelb View Post
    Forgive my scepticism, but I have a few questions I'll bet are never answered.

    How did these goings-on come to be public property? Did one or both of the women go to the media? Or did the info come from someone else within the AFL workforce? (I nearly wrote workfarce but decided not to).

    Apart from the males, who (being dickheads) obviously would not get a position at the Swans, did the young (how young?) women concerned consent to the males' suggestions and then change their minds, or was it getting up someone else's nose? Or did one or both of the men change their minds and the woman/women concerned became annoyed?

    How on earth is an admittedly irresponsible bit of nookie equated with a bashing, in terms of punishment? That is, apart from the obvious difference in terms of the law of the land.

    Is this all news because prurience sells papers and television statistics?

    As an outsider I'm most sorry for the men's families - but the degree of publicity doesn't help, rather it makes it worse for them.

    And finally, what business is it of ours?
    I agree. What they did was wrong and immoral but certainly not illegal and nothing that effected their employer. People have relationships all the time in workplaces, many of which end with the couple having a long term and healthy relationship. How many people meet their partners in the workplace?

    BTW, the women aren't young. Theyre in their late 20s, early 30s. One is a lawyer. It's not like they're 17 year old work experience kids.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by 707 View Post
    Not related to this thread but announcement by Gillon McLaughlin at 12.30pm EST. Could it be that it's Gil that's been having the liaison with the young staffer?
    I'm tipping it McLaughlin and Fitzpatrick. Both of them have been screwing us for years.

  8. #8
    I've followed this story with some interest. Yes I must admit, I do enjoy the goss. Despite two university degrees my favourite pastime when going to Europe was getting a copy of News of the World.

    One of the ladies who was named in the media had her text messages revealed in the News Ltd press. She had text messaged a friend regarding the affair she had with an AFL executive.

    Unfortunately with such detailed text messages the story can never be disputed.

    I have a child who is in Primary School. I need to educate him never to put anything controversial in writing or to film anything. Only use voice and preferably only talk to people face to face about controversial matters. This approach at least gives you a shot at denial.

  9. #9
    Outer wing, Lake Oval Sandridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    448
    Quote Originally Posted by dimelb View Post
    Forgive my scepticism, but I have a few questions I'll bet are never answered.

    How did these goings-on come to be public property? Did one or both of the women go to the media? Or did the info come from someone else within the AFL workforce? (I nearly wrote workfarce but decided not to).

    Apart from the males, who (being dickheads) obviously would not get a position at the Swans, did the young (how young?) women concerned consent to the males' suggestions and then change their minds, or was it getting up someone else's nose? Or did one or both of the men change their minds and the woman/women concerned became annoyed?

    How on earth is an admittedly irresponsible bit of nookie equated with a bashing, in terms of punishment? That is, apart from the obvious difference in terms of the law of the land.

    Is this all news because prurience sells papers and television statistics?

    As an outsider I'm most sorry for the men's families - but the degree of publicity doesn't help, rather it makes it worse for them.

    And finally, what business is it of ours?
    Would like to start off by saying that in no way do I condone extra marital affairs and that I really feel for the wives and children of the men who have been betrayed by their husbands/fathers and had the dirty laundry aired publicly.

    However, I also agree with dimelb that - based on what we know so far- it's no business of the AFL or us.

    Many questions to be considered.

    The women involved were "younger." Were they 16 year old interns? Inappropriate. Were they adults? None of our business.
    Did the men lead the women to believe they were single and available? Yes - inappropriate. No - none of our business.
    Did the women feel that keeping their jobs depended on having a relationship with these men? Yes - inappropriate. No - none of our business.
    Was the relationship being conducted during office time? Yes - inappropriate. No - none of our business.

    I could be wrong but get the feeling that the answers to those questions are "no." If the women involved were old enough to make their own decisions, knew of the mens' marital situations and didn't feel that their jobs were under threat, the situations were nothing to do with the AFL or us. As S.S. Bleeder said, workplace romances happen everywhere and all the time. Some work, some don't.

  10. #10
    RWOs Black Sheep AnnieH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    At Goodesy's Place
    Posts
    10,410
    It takes two to tango.
    In this case, four.
    Why aren't the women being forced to resign from their positions?
    Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
    Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

  11. #11
    Clubman
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Sydney's eastside
    Posts
    1,159
    I don't know much about it but have the impression it may have been other people in the workplace who complained. I'm not sure why nor how they became aware. I also think both women (definitely one) has left the organisation.

    My opinion could change knowing more facts but at first blush I can't see why having a liaison with someone else in the workplace is wrong let alone a sackable offence. One exception would be if the one person supervises the other (easy to see why co-workers might feel underwhelmed by this as well as how this can be potentially exploitative and/or problematic if things sour). In this case I suppose the two blokes were very high up the chain so technically they probably supervise a lot of people (albeit with other rungs in the chain of command between them and some of their underlings). I don't think the fact that the guys were married comes into it - that is their and their partners' business, no business of the AFL or the general public. Provided both people are adults, I don't think age so much as the relative seniority of the people within the organisation is important either.

    So, I would like to know a bit more about why the AFL considered these relationships "inappropriate" and offending against principles of workplace respect and integrity. Failing this I am inclined to see this as PC taken too far.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by bloodspirit View Post
    I don't know much about it but have the impression it may have been other people in the workplace who complained. I'm not sure why nor how they became aware. I also think both women (definitely one) has left the organisation.

    My opinion could change knowing more facts but at first blush I can't see why having a liaison with someone else in the workplace is wrong let alone a sackable offence. One exception would be if the one person supervises the other (easy to see why co-workers might feel underwhelmed by this as well as how this can be potentially exploitative and/or problematic if things sour). In this case I suppose the two blokes were very high up the chain so technically they probably supervise a lot of people (albeit with other rungs in the chain of command between them and some of their underlings). I don't think the fact that the guys were married comes into it - that is their and their partners' business, no business of the AFL or the general public. Provided both people are adults, I don't think age so much as the relative seniority of the people within the organisation is important either.

    So, I would like to know a bit more about why the AFL considered these relationships "inappropriate" and offending against principles of workplace respect and integrity. Failing this I am inclined to see this as PC taken too far.
    I have a friend who was tempted by workplace temptation. An attractive young lady at work, 9 years his junior, would talk to him about some inappropriate topics. She would talk to him about her grooming, her past romantic encounters and even asked him if he had ever thought about what it would be like to sleep with her. He was married with two kids and resisted the temptation.

    Many men would have succumbed to this temptation as she was very attractive and funny by my friends account.

    This women knew my friend was married but continually tried to break down his defences.

    My mate never reported this lady to HR because he thought it unnecessary. If a man had made similar comments he probably would have ended up in a HR complaint and been fired.

    Does this women bear any responsibility for trying to uproot the marriage of my friend for her own desires?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO