An imperfect resolution seemed a perfect summation.
The Hawthorn cultural study and subsequent racial investigation is finished from a football perspective.
There are no adverse findings against Alastair Clarkson and Chis Fagan.
Over eight months, the independent panel didn’t accumulate evidentiary proof to corroborate the allegations that threatened the reputations and careers of the coaches.
Upon further review of the evidence – which at the end did include the statements of Clarkson and Fagan – no breach of AFL Rules could substantiated.
It became clear months ago a football resolution and consequence was going to be impossible.
And for all the possibilities, last night there were: No specific apologies. No admissions of cultural insensitivity. And no financial settlement.
EXTENDED CHAT | Luke Hodge talks through the role he played in the Hawthorn investigation.@WhateleySEN | #AFL pic.twitter.com/GjMC8kYQO1
— SEN 1116 (@1116sen) May 31, 2023
There was an acknowledgement of hurt, pain and anguish and a pledge to action on numerous fronts including a Recommendation of indigenous board representation across all 18 clubs.
In those initiatives will be long term change in the footy industry achieved by the families at the centre of the agreement.
The AFL’s anger toward Hawthorn was undisguised.
The commissioning and oversight of the Binmada Report has been disastrous.
We’ll learn quickly whether action will be taken but I don’t see it being an on-field punishment.
Chris Fagan’s anger was visceral citing a farce of a process and a travesty of justice.
His declaration profound:
I am not a party to the agreement between the complainants, the investigation panel and the AFL. But I stand vindicated by it.
I have made no concessions. There are none to make. I have always vigorously defended myself, and will always do so, as I have done nothing wrong.
For the First Nations families at the heart of the matter they can now pursue their complaints against Hawthorn and its staffers through the Australian Human Rights Commission.
Ultimately that might lead to evidence under oath and without the veil of anonymity which, in hindsight, was probably the most appropriate course all along.