Why Cyril Rioli left Hawthorn

[KTigers]

Kennet is a rat and he needs to go for this . Cyril needed to be more clear . How hard would it be to say there were plenty of good blokes at hawthorn too .

I have no love for that scumthorn but imagine if one of ours spread this stuff and tarnished the whole club and based off things that happened with only a handful !

But why is it always incumbent upon the indigenous person to say there are some decent white fellas too. Just so that everyone can
feel okay again. Cyril is not talking about them. He is talking about the people at the club who treated his wife poorly. And Caroline
Wilson is talking about the club who blew off the concerns of its own players Rioli and Burgoyne over the booing of Adam by thousands
of Hawthorn members and supporters. Should she have mentioned there were likely a few "good blokes" in the Hawthorn supporter
ranks that didn't boo him? Would that have evened up the ledger too?

[stevoswan]

Kennet is a rat and he needs to go for this . Cyril needed to be more clear . How hard would it be to say there were plenty of good blokes at hawthorn too .

I have no love for that scumthorn but imagine if one of ours spread this stuff and tarnished the whole club and based off things that happened with only a handful !

I agree with the first sentence. The next two.....nah. The last.....you make a fair point, it wouldn't be nice but.....in Hawthorn's case, Kennett, as President, represents the whole club. He's the man at the top, setting the standards for the rest to follow.....and Rioli was not liking what he saw.

I think Cyril was quite clear and the fact that Hawthorn did not act reflects on the entire organisation. If the same happened at the Swans, I think we'd see a more appropriate response but I am fairly confident that these types of incidents just don't happen at the Swans.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

How hard would it be to say there were plenty of good blokes at hawthorn too.

By "good blokes" are you referring to those that remained silent while this crap went on?
Even if they were genuinely unaware, I have a higher benchmark for "good" than utterly oblivious/insensitive/obtuse. Such blokes could lay claim to "mediocre" or "average" blokes at best.

[TheBloods]

By "good blokes" are you referring to those that remained silent while this crap went on?
Even if they were genuinely unaware, I have a higher benchmark for "good" than utterly oblivious/insensitive/obtuse. Such blokes could lay claim to "mediocre" or "average" blokes at best.

As i have said many times , you would all be shocked at some of the characters on our payroll .

[i'm-uninformed2]

How do you know what each commission members view point was at this particular meeting? Are there meeting minutes publicly available or do you have inside knowledge?

A mix of public reporting (Caroline Wilson and Mark Robinson were best on the subject) and a bit of what I hear from the Swans.

I’ve said on here before. I’m lucky enough to know two people there (and one ex-swans person). They’re more on the admin than football side. In all cases, I was friends with them before they were at the Swans. For that reason, I don’t ask them for inside info, as they are friends first and foremost and they don’t need me bugging them for crap. Above all, it’s not the right thing to do to a friend.

I’m sure there’s a thousand things I don’t know. For example, I never asked and it never came up in discussion so I had no idea what the Swans plan for Patty McCartin was - hence I openly asked on here what others thought of recruiting him. What I do know tends to be irrelevant and comes up in general chit chat. For example, when I’m raving about my love child JMac, they’ll confirm how highly he’s rated internally, both as a footballer and a professional.

There’s also some stuff I’d never post on here, as it comes up in the context of two friends chatting and should never be disclosed. I’ve had two exceptions to that. One, based on what we were all seeing but also what I was hearing, bullishness about where we were in 2020 despite the results. Two, Dawson, as I also had the version from the Adelaide end is I knew it was right that at club level at least, the Swans despise him. The little turd deserves contempt for what he and his manager did leaking his conversation with Horse.

With the Goodes stuff, my info isn’t consequential for the Swans and is largely consistent with at least some of the public reporting (after all, I suspect but don’t know, Caro’s stuff came a lot from the Swans).

And I should be really clear about my earlier post: I don’t pretend to know the view of all Commission members, just the basic three way split and some individuals. It should surprise no one Sam Mostyn was on the side of the angels as she’s a great person, great corporate leader and been an ally of Adam for years.

Anyway, that’s a long way of saying I don’t know a lot, and most of my posts should be seen as the contribution of a drug addled, functional alcoholic. But few things have made me more enraged in life than what happened to Adam, so anywhere, anytime, I get to crap on those that did it, I’m all in.

[mcs]

As i have said many times , you would all be shocked at some of the characters on our payroll .

Every organisation has its good, bad and ugly people involved. No one is going to argue against that - the Swans included.

But that is a very weak deflection from the point being made here. A 'look over there' comment at best - just like suggesting why didn't Rioli say there were good blokes at Hawthorn.

The good actions of some don't offset the very poor actions of those in question, in any shape or form. And too often it is a tactic used in the media and by leaders to deflect heat from an issue so to sweep it under the carpet as just some 'exception'.

It should simply be seen for what it is - completely unacceptable.

[TheBloods]

Every organisation has its good, bad and ugly people involved. No one is going to argue against that - the Swans included.

But that is a very weak deflection from the point being made here. A 'look over there' comment at best - just like suggesting why didn't Rioli say there were good blokes at Hawthorn.

The good actions of some don't offset the very poor actions of those in question, in any shape or form. And too often it is a tactic used in the media and by leaders to deflect heat from an issue so to sweep it under the carpet as just some 'exception'.

It should simply be seen for what it is - completely unacceptable.

If you have ever worked in law you would know Cyril left himself wide open . He spoke too broadly . Believe me i am on his side but he needed to make it abundantly clear who the guilty parties were instead of saying the whole organisation and using vague terms and definitions .That opens up grounds for libel and defamation if anyone involved in the organisation at that time felt wrongly accused by association . Terms like "the leadership" Wtf is that ? Is that Hodge ? Is that Hodge Lewis and Mitchell ? Is it Mitchell and Lewis only ? You gotta be specific when you are coming forward with allegations this big and heavy that could have ramifications . Cover your bases and know exactly who you are accusing .

I bring up the ratbags at our club because if an ex player came forward with similar stuff , based on that sloppy VAGUE standard , quite a few of ours would get thrown under the bus too . Don 't think for a second we 'd be any different . You'd all be feeling differently then if you were being told it was your club that was racist and every bloke involved was being painted with the same brush !

[mcs]

If you have ever worked in law you would know Cyril left himself wide open . He spoke too broadly . Believe me i am on his side but he needed to make it abundantly clear who the guilty parties were instead of saying the whole organisation and using vague terms and definitions .That opens up grounds for libel and defamation if anyone involved in the organisation at that time felt wrongly accused by association . Terms like "the leadership" Wtf is that ? Is that Hodge ? Is that Hodge Lewis and Mitchell ? Is it Mitchell and Lewis only ? You gotta be specific when you are coming forward with allegations this big and heavy that could have ramifications . Cover your bases and know exactly who you are accusing .

I bring up the ratbags at our club because if an ex player came forward with similar stuff , based on that sloppy VAGUE standard , quite a few of ours would get thrown under the bus too . Don 't think for a second we 'd be any different . You'd all be feeling differently then if you were being told it was your club that was racist and every bloke involved was being painted with the same brush !

Different issue, same old projecting of a single opinion as if it is the gospel read from upon high, combined with carte blanche claims about what others may think with zero credible basis for doing so. You have no idea how people would be feeling if it was the Swans involved - I suspect there would be a variety of responses from people.

I don't think a majority of people have translated this incident as equalling everyone at Hawthorn at that time was racist just because Rioli 'spoke too broadly' and didn't name specific names. I think it is not unreasonable to suggest most people are able to separate the idea of the incident broadly reflecting poorly on a club as an entity, without that necessarily translating into every one at the club must condone racism and/or be racist because Rioli didn't name names.

The legal context in itself is something altogether else of course - but that is not the point of discussion in this thread.

[TheBloods]

Different issue, same old projecting of a single opinion as if it is the gospel read from upon high, combined with carte blanche claims about what others may think with zero credible basis for doing so. You have no idea how people would be feeling if it was the Swans involved - I suspect there would be a variety of responses from people.

I don't think a majority of people have translated this incident as equalling everyone at Hawthorn at that time was racist just because Rioli 'spoke too broadly' and didn't name specific names. I think it is not unreasonable to suggest most people are able to separate the idea of the incident broadly reflecting poorly on a club as an entity, without that necessarily translating into every one at the club must condone racism and/or be racist because Rioli didn't name names.

The legal context in itself is something altogether else of course - but that is not the point of discussion in this thread.

You don 't need to throw the toys out , like i said i am on Cyril 's side on this , racism is wrong plain and simple , but what you now have are a bunch of hawthorn related people coming out trying to cover their back sides to ensure everyone knows - it wasn 't them ! Just in the last few days it 's been Hodge , O'Meara , Mitchell, Kennett , Burgoyne etc . Everyone is busy talking about who did what and who was on the good side , who stuck up for Cyril who didn 't, who has reached out to Cyril and who hasn 't

Instead of focusing on the racist incidents that happened and how to FIX it going forward . This is because Cyril cast a line out there that 's now turned into a who dun it . Only way to hold them truly accountable is to name names , otherwise they just come out with their "we are sorry" phony crap to try on behalf of the whole organisation and they make it die down and make sure no individual really cops the blowback . Believe me i worked in legal and corporate worlds once upon a time and this is exactly how it works . Cyril dealt them the softest hand and as i said he has opened himself up to legal action , luckily i doubt any one would dare given the nature of his allegations . But he should 've been represented before he blabbed to Caro wilson who is not to be trusted .

[KTigers]

You don 't need to throw the toys out , like i said i am on Cyril 's side on this , racism is wrong plain and simple , but what you now have are a bunch of hawthorn related people coming out trying to cover their back sides to ensure everyone knows - it wasn 't them ! Just in the last few days it 's been Hodge , O'Meara , Mitchell, Kennett , Burgoyne etc . Everyone is busy talking about who did what and who was on the good side , who stuck up for Cyril who didn 't, who has reached out to Cyril and who hasn 't

Instead of focusing on the racist incidents that happened and how to FIX it going forward . This is because Cyril cast a line out there that 's now turned into a who dun it . Only way to hold them truly accountable is to name names , otherwise they just come out with their "we are sorry" phony crap to try on behalf of the whole organisation and they make it die down and make sure no individual really cops the blowback . Believe me i worked in legal and corporate worlds once upon a time and this is exactly how it works . Cyril dealt them the softest hand and as i said he has opened himself up to legal action , luckily i doubt any one would dare given the nature of his allegations . But he should 've been represented before he blabbed to Caro wilson who is not to be trusted .

If it gets turned into a whodunnit its because these officials and ex players are worried about themselves and their public image.
Why do there always have to be so many rules, provisos and caveats before an indigenous footballer speaks his mind about racism
at footy clubs? I'm always reminded of "tough guy" Dermott saying the Carlton supporters at the SCG should have been warned before
the game that Adam might be doing a war dance that he had earlier done with an U16 team because it was "frightening". Dermott
didn't say how. Maybe a post on the Carlton Supporters facebook page? Or maybe Adam should have left an A4 flyer (entitled "U16 War
Dance Warning") on the seats in the bay where the Carlton fans were sitting?
It won't be long before sections of the AFL community are pushing for NDIS funding for white fellas feeling threatened by statements
about racism in football from indigenous players even though "it wasn't them".

[i'm-uninformed2]

You don 't need to throw the toys out , like i said i am on Cyril 's side on this , racism is wrong plain and simple , but what you now have are a bunch of hawthorn related people coming out trying to cover their back sides to ensure everyone knows - it wasn 't them ! Just in the last few days it 's been Hodge , O'Meara , Mitchell, Kennett , Burgoyne etc . Everyone is busy talking about who did what and who was on the good side , who stuck up for Cyril who didn 't, who has reached out to Cyril and who hasn 't

Instead of focusing on the racist incidents that happened and how to FIX it going forward . This is because Cyril cast a line out there that 's now turned into a who dun it . Only way to hold them truly accountable is to name names , otherwise they just come out with their "we are sorry" phony crap to try on behalf of the whole organisation and they make it die down and make sure no individual really cops the blowback . Believe me i worked in legal and corporate worlds once upon a time and this is exactly how it works . Cyril dealt them the softest hand and as i said he has opened himself up to legal action , luckily i doubt any one would dare given the nature of his allegations . But he should 've been represented before he blabbed to Caro wilson who is not to be trusted .

I kind of get your broader point about the motherhood statements being used to deflect. But I'm also not sure there is a single quote in the article from either Cyril or his wife that anyone could point to as meeting the legal test of defamation.

I am curious about your claim that Caro isn't to be trusted. I personally find her one of the better ones usually (though she obviously lost the case re Adelaide and its offseason camp), and she was leader of the pack on Adam. If I had a critique of her article it was the ripped jeans incident meant the focus fell on Kennett, and it was obviously the final straw and he's not someone I'm here to defend. But the bulk of the incidents happened whilst that turd Newbold was president, and he doesn't rate a mention.

[TheBloods]

I kind of get your broader point about the motherhood statements being used to deflect. But I'm also not sure there is a single quote in the article from either Cyril or his wife that anyone could point to as meeting the legal test of defamation.

I am curious about your claim that Caro isn't to be trusted. I personally find her one of the better ones usually (though she obviously lost the case re Adelaide and its offseason camp), and she was leader of the pack on Adam. If I had a critique of her article it was the ripped jeans incident meant the focus fell on Kennett, and it was obviously the final straw and he's not someone I'm here to defend. But the bulk of the incidents happened whilst that turd Newbold was president, and he doesn't rate a mention.

She isnt to be trusted because she is a reporter . She is just doing her job but that is to get the story out of Cyril . She wouldn 't give a rats you know what if there was any blowback for him

- - - Updated - - -

If it gets turned into a whodunnit its because these officials and ex players are worried about themselves and their public image.
Why do there always have to be so many rules, provisos and caveats before an indigenous footballer speaks his mind about racism
at footy clubs? I'm always reminded of "tough guy" Dermott saying the Carlton supporters at the SCG should have been warned before
the game that Adam might be doing a war dance that he had earlier done with an U16 team because it was "frightening". Dermott
didn't say how. Maybe a post on the Carlton Supporters facebook page? Or maybe Adam should have left an A4 flyer (entitled "U16 War
Dance Warning") on the seats in the bay where the Carlton fans were sitting?
It won't be long before sections of the AFL community are pushing for NDIS funding for white fellas feeling threatened by statements
about racism in football from indigenous players even though "it wasn't them".

If your going to come out with any accusation you need to know who you 're accusing . Doesn 't matter if its about racism or anything else . How else are consequences supposed to be handed out if no one is taking the hits ?