News Adelaide Crows Camp Allegations and Rumors

[Mego Red]

I think where people get angry is the tone. Caro's argument that if it happened at Richmond or Collingwood it would be front page news is correct, but so was the crows. But the difference isn't the fact the club gets reported on, its the way the club is reported on. Every time we stuff up, we have a tonne of vic journalists lining up to pot shot the AFC from every angle, then they smash every person from the club who speaks out, analysing every word and determining it wasn't good enough, they fundamentally exaggerate reactions i.e. claiming Silvers delivered a controversial apology, but doesn't state who found it controversial. Then you have a massive pile on about speculation of punishment. This is something we just dont see to the same levels when we see a vic club. This is why people complain about the media. The media even hijacked Eddies book to push the agenda and totally forgot to talk about other aspects of his book.

I would think the Collingwood racism crisis has one received a fraction of coverage as the camp, and is a far bigger issue.

 

[Mego Red]

I disagree. None of them would have had the impression he was going to retire because there was never any indication, or if they did, they certainly shouldn't have. I really dont agree with any premise they need to be consulted at any stage. Even if it was to just do a well being check in relation to it. Whats the point in discovering they are unhappy if the club has no intention of listening to them. Which btw the club shouldn't.

Now having said that, maybe in initial talks last year after the racism incident the club and welfare officers may have talked about how next year (2022) his contract expires. Maybe some of them just went in thinking this would be the end.

The club absolutely should have checked in with their indigenous players around the incident with Tex - when it occurred.

I don't think they should be consulted almost a year later when he's being re-signed. That seems ridiculous

 

[John Who]

This hasn't forwarded the argument at all.

If the club was blindsided by CM we wouldn't have continued to use them.

We did, therefore we weren't.

The end.

To be fair, CM was associated with us making the GF in 2017, and also the camp was associated with us being in the top 4 for the majority of the first half of season 2018. Betts also never made any intention of taking time off for “personal reasons” (aka mental health). So there were no overt signs our ties with CM should be cut straight after the camp.

So putting it into context, continuing with CM until mid-season (when we dropped out of the top 8) made some sense. It would have been genuinely silly if we pursued with them for the rest of the season.

 

[John Who]

I don't think its the reporting its the way they report. Its over the top and its designed to fit a narrative.

And the narrative is:
The AFC is sh!t in helping their players deal psychological stress.

Except the fact that...
The AFC also helped players to get through with the shock/trauma of their coach being murdered, helped them build mental resilience to improve each year and progressing up the ladder, and making even a Grand Final.

Did Caro/McClure acknowledge any of the club’s efforts during 2015-2017? Or are they choosing to focus on the 3 day event? A bit of bias perhaps?

 

[Smoooothy]

Did Caro/McClure acknowledge any of the club’s efforts during 2015-2017? Or are they choosing to focus on the 3 day event? A bit of bias perhaps?

ever heard the saying that it can take years to build respect, and moments to lose it?

that applies here. there aren't brownie points for good things we did years ago

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I don't post in these threads, as my POV's are often at odds with the prevailing thinking .....and I have neither the energy or will to explain .....and like political discussions, you're welcoming a beating

However, I did find this piece an interesting discussion point:

Speaking on 7AFL’s The Field podcast with Danger & JJ, Jenkins said he is now “absolutely” at peace with his experiences at the camp and vowed to move on.

“I don’t have the energy nor the desire to be on the phone endlessly about this and talking to people, accepting apologies and those sorts of things,” the 147-game Adelaide player said.

But with all parties involved desperate to ensure players are never again put in a similar position, Jenkins questioned Dangerfield on the Geelong superstar’s role and responsibilities as AFLPA president.

Patrick Dangerfield answers burning AFLPA question from ex-Adelaide player

The AFL Players Association president has faced the music over a pressing concern out of the Crows’ camp revelations.

7news.com.au

My questions are; was Jenkins objective, in raising this now, a swatback for the way he was treated in his last year at the Crows .....was he encouraged to speakup by SEN, his employer .....or was it a bit of each

The AFLPA President, Dangerfield ....is best mates with Jenkins & do a Podcast together ....how can the AFLPA say they didn't have all the facts ?

 

[arrowman]

But it’s called the director of football?? That’s more than simply a board role no ?

Football Director, not "Director of Football". The director, on the board, who has a special focus on football matters. It is indeed "simply a board role".

The budget for this would normally be part of the annual approval process, unless it was significantly outside the normal bounds. Which it might have been?

Medical/player welfare staff type stuff would normally be the sort of operational decision not for the board, but the board might be informed if it was considered a governance matter

In general though, the board would be informed but not asked for approval.

I briefly heard Olsen on ABC 891 this morning, damn I wish I had pad more attention / taken notes, and this is going to be very vague - but he did say something about governance, changes in process or structure (a board committee?) that were oriented towards greater board oversight of this sort of thing. Sorry I can't be more precise, but I did think it was a positive that he acknowledged the governance issue (without conceding actual governance failures in the past).

My questions are; was Jenkins objective, in raising this now, a swatback for the way he was treated in his last year at the Crows .....was he encouraged to speakup by SEN, his employer .....or was it a bit of each

I think the charitable view is that JJ wanted to back up / support Eddie, with perhaps a touch of butting in with his own story, but that that's also as far as he wants to take it, he doesn't want this to be an ongoing thing.

- Now you might say that if he doesn't want that, he shouldn't have opened his mouth in the first place, but IMO he was right to open his mouth and equally entitled to say that's as far as it should go.

 

[jenny61_99]

Not sure if this has been posted, but this is Malcolm Blights viewpoint on Riccuito.


Blight however has slammed those going after Ricciuto, saying the board would not be aware of every aspect of the camp and that the responsibility falls to the club’s football department.

“There’s a lot of uneducated people out there who don’t know how a board works,” Blight told Sportsday SA.

“At the end of the season, they get beaten in a Grand Final, they brainstorm improvement – if they’d asked me I would have said, ‘forget about it, move on, everyone’s going to lose’.

“They come up with other activities to try and get better and there’s nothing wrong with that. They come up with a camp, they get testaments from other organisations from somebody inside the Adelaide Football Club.

“What actually happens is the executive, the working people who get paid – the board do not get paid – the executive present a case for abnormal activities and/or costings. That’s presented to the board.

“Questions are asked by the board members and of the infinite details, they don’t go down to the bottom. They don’t ask, ‘who’s going to say this, what’s the agenda, where they’re going to go up a tree, whether they’re going to go over an obstacle course, are they going to play Richmond music’, the board doesn’t ask that question, that’s got to be done at executive level. Not board level.

“So anybody out there including Mark Robinson, Gerard Whateley and anybody else talking about Mark Riccuito or those board members, it wouldn’t have gone down that far.

“Boards don’t operate that way. The executives run everything and eventually present to the board.

“Why has Ricciuto (been under siege)? Give me the argument why Mark Riccituo and the other Adelaide board members shouldn’t be there. They don’t know every infinite detail. That’s not their role.”

Blight served on the inaugural board of the Gold Coast Suns, joining in 2009 and stepping aside in 2012.

Malcolm Blight launches staunch defence of Mark Ricciuto, Adelaide board

“There’s a lot of uneducated people out there who don’t know how a board works.”

www.sen.com.au

 

[baysandtownies]

I just rewatched the car crash interview with Burton and pkye midway through 2018 . Pyke was actually not too bad but Burton was absolutely horrendous. How the hell did he get the job! Roo needs to go for appointing such an arrogant condescending idiot .


Not the MO dude

Football Director, not "Director of Football". The director, on the board, who has a special focus on football matters. It is indeed "simply a board role".

I briefly heard Olsen on ABC 891 this morning, damn I wish I had pad more attention / taken notes, and this is going to be very vague - but he did say something about governance, changes in process or structure (a board committee?) that were oriented towards greater board oversight of this sort of thing. Sorry I can't be more precise, but I did think it was a positive that he acknowledged the governance issue (without conceding actual governance failures in the past).


I think the charitable view is that JJ wanted to back up / support Eddie, with perhaps a touch of butting in with his own story, but that that's also as far as he wants to take it, he doesn't want this to be an ongoing thing.

- Now you might say that if he doesn't want that, he shouldn't have opened his mouth in the first place, but IMO he was right to open his mouth and equally entitled to say that's as far as it should go.

It was anything but positive. Roo is bigger than the Club and he confirmed consideration of his role “not on the agenda”. He’s only just taken reins so can’t comment on what happened before… except the fact that former board and Chair said nothing to see here, which is why we’re in this mess; no one has taken full responsibility just half here and there.

Tell me this. Forget the player, which club would employ Roo as a Football Director based on his experience and merits as a Football director? If the answer is none, then the problem is we are stuck with him for a reason other than he’s best person for the job.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Not sure if this has been posted, but this is Malcolm Blights viewpoint on Riccuito.


Blight however has slammed those going after Ricciuto, saying the board would not be aware of every aspect of the camp and that the responsibility falls to the club’s football department.

“There’s a lot of uneducated people out there who don’t know how a board works,” Blight told Sportsday SA.

“At the end of the season, they get beaten in a Grand Final, they brainstorm improvement – if they’d asked me I would have said, ‘forget about it, move on, everyone’s going to lose’.

“They come up with other activities to try and get better and there’s nothing wrong with that. They come up with a camp, they get testaments from other organisations from somebody inside the Adelaide Football Club.

“What actually happens is the executive, the working people who get paid – the board do not get paid – the executive present a case for abnormal activities and/or costings. That’s presented to the board.

“Questions are asked by the board members and of the infinite details, they don’t go down to the bottom. They don’t ask, ‘who’s going to say this, what’s the agenda, where they’re going to go up a tree, whether they’re going to go over an obstacle course, are they going to play Richmond music’, the board doesn’t ask that question, that’s got to be done at executive level. Not board level.

“So anybody out there including Mark Robinson, Gerard Whateley and anybody else talking about Mark Riccuito or those board members, it wouldn’t have gone down that far.

“Boards don’t operate that way. The executives run everything and eventually present to the board.

“Why has Ricciuto (been under siege)? Give me the argument why Mark Riccituo and the other Adelaide board members shouldn’t be there. They don’t know every infinite detail. That’s not their role.”

Blight served on the inaugural board of the Gold Coast Suns, joining in 2009 and stepping aside in 2012.

Malcolm Blight launches staunch defence of Mark Ricciuto, Adelaide board

“There’s a lot of uneducated people out there who don’t know how a board works.”

www.sen.com.au

Can anyone familiar with this stuff tell me when Blight refers to "executives", who is he talking about? Would that be Burton/Pyke in this case?

 

[baysandtownies]

ever heard the saying that it can take years to build respect, and moments to lose it?

that applies here. there aren't brownie points for good things we did years ago

Roo’s MO - I single handedly got Jordan Dawson! Great Enter names of players you’ve lost… what’s the sum as football director?

 

[arrowman]

Can anyone familiar with this stuff tell me when Blight refers to "executives", who is he talking about? Would that be Burton/Pyke in this case?

Burton definitely - and Fagan. Pyke, dunno. But if Pyke reported to Burton (the coach reports to the Football Manager, doesn't he?) ... depends. Maybe the next line down would be involved in any presentation to the board, maybe not. I would think that in a football club the coach's input / support for a proposal would be pretty important, even if it's only delivered to the board by proxy. That is "thanks Brett, is Don, as the coach, on board with this?".

 

[baysandtownies]

Burton definitely - and Fagan. Pyke, dunno. But if Pyke reported to Burton (the coach reports to the Football Manager, doesn't he?) ... depends. Maybe the next line down would be involved in any presentation to the board, maybe not. I would think that in a football club the coach's input / support for a proposal would be pretty important, even if it's only delivered to the board by proxy. That is "thanks Brett, is Don, as the coach, on board with this?".

The common thread here in appointments and influence is Roo.

 

[Mutineer]

Sanders

 

[Mego Red]

Tell me this. Forget the player, which club would employ Roo as a Football Director based on his experience and merits as a Football director? If the answer is none, then the problem is we are stuck with him for a reason other than he’s best person for the job.

NO ONE EMPLOYS ROO TO BE FOOTBALL DIRECTOR

 

[baysandtownies]

Sanders

Sanders

Who brought Burton in?

 

[baysandtownies]

NO ONE EMPLOYS ROO TO BE FOOTBALL DIRECTOR

Correct. Why do we?! Are Olsen’s hands tied? Or just weak leadership?

 

[Geoffa32]

Not sure if this has been posted, but this is Malcolm Blights viewpoint on Riccuito.


Blight however has slammed those going after Ricciuto, saying the board would not be aware of every aspect of the camp and that the responsibility falls to the club’s football department.

“There’s a lot of uneducated people out there who don’t know how a board works,” Blight told Sportsday SA.

“At the end of the season, they get beaten in a Grand Final, they brainstorm improvement – if they’d asked me I would have said, ‘forget about it, move on, everyone’s going to lose’.

“They come up with other activities to try and get better and there’s nothing wrong with that. They come up with a camp, they get testaments from other organisations from somebody inside the Adelaide Football Club.

“What actually happens is the executive, the working people who get paid – the board do not get paid – the executive present a case for abnormal activities and/or costings. That’s presented to the board.

“Questions are asked by the board members and of the infinite details, they don’t go down to the bottom. They don’t ask, ‘who’s going to say this, what’s the agenda, where they’re going to go up a tree, whether they’re going to go over an obstacle course, are they going to play Richmond music’, the board doesn’t ask that question, that’s got to be done at executive level. Not board level.

“So anybody out there including Mark Robinson, Gerard Whateley and anybody else talking about Mark Riccuito or those board members, it wouldn’t have gone down that far.

“Boards don’t operate that way. The executives run everything and eventually present to the board.

“Why has Ricciuto (been under siege)? Give me the argument why Mark Riccituo and the other Adelaide board members shouldn’t be there. They don’t know every infinite detail. That’s not their role.”

Blight served on the inaugural board of the Gold Coast Suns, joining in 2009 and stepping aside in 2012.

Malcolm Blight launches staunch defence of Mark Ricciuto, Adelaide board

“There’s a lot of uneducated people out there who don’t know how a board works.”

www.sen.com.au

Agree with this. There's no reason why the Board would know the details of the program back then. Although now this is submitted to the AFL, and I assume signed off at Board level.

But the Board would have been involved with the fall out and attemp to cover it up.

This should be the emphasis on why Roo (and other Board members) need to stand down.


And of the day it is the "Optics" of the situation. For the media heat to go away the most public Board member of that era needs to stand down.


Much like Eddie McGuire over Collingwood's racism issues.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Sanders]

Not the board in total only roo . He has conflicts everywhere and I have a pretty close source to know was heavily influencing in buttons appointment which was a major conflict given his friendship. Also he’s not only a board member but also has the title of director of football. If he’s not across a camp for all of our team in that capacity then why have a separate title? Should just be a board member

The title of director of football is his board role.

You seem unwilling to let go of your egregious misconceptions.

 

[Sanders]

The only truth we know is Burton was appointed with a friendship bias

We don’t know that at all

 

[Sanders]

Correct. Why do we?! Are Olsen’s hands tied? Or just weak leadership?

Shush

 

[baysandtownies]

Agree with this.

But the Board would have been involved with the fall out and attemp to cover it up.

This should be the emphasis on why Roo (and other Board members) needs to stand down.


And of the day it is the "Optics" of the situation. For the media heat to go away the most public Board member of that era needs to stand down.


Much like Eddie McGuire over Collingwood's racism issues.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Correct. Name a player in the AFL who had a more destructive influence on their club post footy than Roo? I can think of one.

 

[From The Pocket]

I briefly heard Olsen on ABC 891 this morning, damn I wish I had pad more attention / taken notes, and this is going to be very vague - but he did say something about governance, changes in process or structure (a board committee?) that were oriented towards greater board oversight of this sort of thing. Sorry I can't be more precise, but I did think it was a positive that he acknowledged the governance issue (without conceding actual governance failures in the past).

Olsen on ABC Breakfast at 1:54:30 and then continued at 2:51:00 here.

Breakfast - ABC listen

The people, the stories, the news, the laughs. Wake up with ABC Adelaide Breakfast.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Geoffa32]

Correct. Name a player in the AFL who had a more destructive influence on their club post footy than Roo? I can think of one.

James Hird.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[jackster83]

We don’t know that at all

Burton made a "compelling case" for the role according to Fagan.