I feel ashamed for using such a cliched, fundamentally hollow term in the thread title, but this concept has become so ingrained in our analysis of football clubs that I may as well just go with it...
What is the state of our culture? Are our players turning up to work in an environment that is conducive to getting the best out of them?
We have undoubtedly made exceptional progress in this regard over the last decade (although we were virtually forced to, as the competition as a whole ramped up its level of professionalism). I've been thinking about two issues recently, however, that I think may have had more of a detrimental effect on our culture and the playing group's collective psyche than people would think.
1. The delisting of Setanta O'hAilpin. People may well point to Setanta's knee injury as evidence that we made the right call, but I am genuinely concerned by the message this decision sent to the other players. O'hAilpin had worked incredibly hard on his game over the years, adjusting to a variety of different (and often unsuitable) positions in order to best assist the team before eventually finding his niche as an ultra-competitive tall forward. I know not every hard-worker should be immune from delisting, but I thought this decision was a terrible slap in the face to one of our most lionhearted players (in a team sorely lacking them). Our privileging of talent over determination is completely out of whack, in my opinion. It's almost like some players know that they are 'good', and safe as a consequence.
And on a different point, few people seem to appreciate that O'hAilpin is actually a very effective key forward. He might not look pretty but his ability to create a contest and compete fiercely and consistently at ground level are attributes very much suited to the current setup.
2. Leaving Brad Fisher stuck on 99 games. Club officials have in recent years often made public statements pertaining to loyalty, especially with the expansion clubs lurking in the shadows. Well, loyalty is a two way street, and when a fantastic clubman like Brad Fisher is treated like that, surely the players are going to take notice. Fisher was one of the most popular players at the club, and to not allow him the privilege of having his name on the #14 locker - which I think he had clearly earned after playing some excellent football for us in our darkest period - was just a terrible decision.
If I recall correctly we had plenty of games against lowly opposition in which Fish could have come in and played a role across half-forward and bring up his ton, but instead he was left to rot. The club were trying to take the ruthless 'We don't gift games to anyone' line, but I think it backfired badly, instead sending a subconscious message to the players that 'We don't care about you as soon as you're not useful to us anymore'. Sure, that's the reality of the situation, but when the players are then expected to take a pay cut or resist overtures from other clubs (see Grigg and Jacobs), Carlton might not look as appealing as it originally did. Put it this way, if one of my best mates received similar treatment, I would be pissed off.
Again, just because a player is popular with his peers doesn't mean he won't be delisted (see Mark Austin). But to treat a respected club stalwart like he's an embarrassment is just not good enough, and again sends a very poor message in my opinion.
And to take this rambling to its conclusion, it is starting to become evident that Carlton have in recent years neglected the hard workers in favour of 'classy' players. This view is often mirrored in the supporter base. For example, Dennis Armfield has been OUTSTANDING this year but some people still carry on as if he is no good. The reality is that Armfield has furnished into an extremely effective footballer. David Ellard is similar, often being pilloried for his deficiencies when he has in fact a very important and capable inside mid at AFL level. Ellard slaved away dominating the VFL unrewarded for almost three seasons before getting his call up. Ellard's and Andrew Carrazzo's stories of persistence are the kind we should be espousing to our new recruits.
What all that means, I'm not too sure. Tough decisions need to be made at football clubs, undoubtedly, and the players should never be over indulged, but the treatment of O'hAilpin and Fisher will never sit right with me. I'm not suggesting that our players are so mentally fragile that the delisting of a mate will turn them into petulant, half-hearted footballers... But it's decisions like these that set the tone at Visy Park, and the club need to be able to stand by them. I'm not sure they can in both these instances.
What is the state of our culture? Are our players turning up to work in an environment that is conducive to getting the best out of them?
We have undoubtedly made exceptional progress in this regard over the last decade (although we were virtually forced to, as the competition as a whole ramped up its level of professionalism). I've been thinking about two issues recently, however, that I think may have had more of a detrimental effect on our culture and the playing group's collective psyche than people would think.
1. The delisting of Setanta O'hAilpin. People may well point to Setanta's knee injury as evidence that we made the right call, but I am genuinely concerned by the message this decision sent to the other players. O'hAilpin had worked incredibly hard on his game over the years, adjusting to a variety of different (and often unsuitable) positions in order to best assist the team before eventually finding his niche as an ultra-competitive tall forward. I know not every hard-worker should be immune from delisting, but I thought this decision was a terrible slap in the face to one of our most lionhearted players (in a team sorely lacking them). Our privileging of talent over determination is completely out of whack, in my opinion. It's almost like some players know that they are 'good', and safe as a consequence.
And on a different point, few people seem to appreciate that O'hAilpin is actually a very effective key forward. He might not look pretty but his ability to create a contest and compete fiercely and consistently at ground level are attributes very much suited to the current setup.
2. Leaving Brad Fisher stuck on 99 games. Club officials have in recent years often made public statements pertaining to loyalty, especially with the expansion clubs lurking in the shadows. Well, loyalty is a two way street, and when a fantastic clubman like Brad Fisher is treated like that, surely the players are going to take notice. Fisher was one of the most popular players at the club, and to not allow him the privilege of having his name on the #14 locker - which I think he had clearly earned after playing some excellent football for us in our darkest period - was just a terrible decision.
If I recall correctly we had plenty of games against lowly opposition in which Fish could have come in and played a role across half-forward and bring up his ton, but instead he was left to rot. The club were trying to take the ruthless 'We don't gift games to anyone' line, but I think it backfired badly, instead sending a subconscious message to the players that 'We don't care about you as soon as you're not useful to us anymore'. Sure, that's the reality of the situation, but when the players are then expected to take a pay cut or resist overtures from other clubs (see Grigg and Jacobs), Carlton might not look as appealing as it originally did. Put it this way, if one of my best mates received similar treatment, I would be pissed off.
Again, just because a player is popular with his peers doesn't mean he won't be delisted (see Mark Austin). But to treat a respected club stalwart like he's an embarrassment is just not good enough, and again sends a very poor message in my opinion.
And to take this rambling to its conclusion, it is starting to become evident that Carlton have in recent years neglected the hard workers in favour of 'classy' players. This view is often mirrored in the supporter base. For example, Dennis Armfield has been OUTSTANDING this year but some people still carry on as if he is no good. The reality is that Armfield has furnished into an extremely effective footballer. David Ellard is similar, often being pilloried for his deficiencies when he has in fact a very important and capable inside mid at AFL level. Ellard slaved away dominating the VFL unrewarded for almost three seasons before getting his call up. Ellard's and Andrew Carrazzo's stories of persistence are the kind we should be espousing to our new recruits.
What all that means, I'm not too sure. Tough decisions need to be made at football clubs, undoubtedly, and the players should never be over indulged, but the treatment of O'hAilpin and Fisher will never sit right with me. I'm not suggesting that our players are so mentally fragile that the delisting of a mate will turn them into petulant, half-hearted footballers... But it's decisions like these that set the tone at Visy Park, and the club need to be able to stand by them. I'm not sure they can in both these instances.
