Gold Member
Brownlow Medallist
http://www.hawthornfc.com.au/season2008/news/blogarticle/tabid/10850/default.aspx?newsid=75868
Kennett letter to the AFL
11:29 AM Wed 29 April, 2009 | Back
Jeff Kennett
for hawthornfc.com.au
Blog Article Content
Fellow Members,
As you are aware, the AFL has deemed fit to impose a penalty on the Club for comments I made recently regarding confusion surrounding what I consider to be inconsistent decisions in the adjudication of our game by umpires.
It had not been my intention to debate this publicly, as I had assumed the correspondence and arguments were to be discussed privately between myself and the AFL.
However, today the AFL has gone public through their General Manager-Football Operations, Mr Adrian Anderson, on talkback radio station 3AW, justifying the AFL’s position. Therefore I think you are entitled, as members of the Club, to read my letter of explanation to the AFL in response to their charges.
My arguments were totally rejected by the AFL and that has resulted in them imposing a penalty on the Club.
Finally, I make the point that at no time did I criticise an individual umpire, nor name one. We at Hawthorn play the ball not the man. My comments were general and the result of watching or viewing many games this year.
I am clearly still considering my position and will communicate that to you via this website in the next 48 hours.
My letter to Adrian Anderson is as follows:
27 April 2009
Mr Adrian Anderson
General Manager – Football Operations
Australian Football League
GPO Box 1449N
Melbourne VIC 3001
Dear Mr Anderson
I refer to your letter to me dated 23 April 2009.
You initially wrote to Ian Robson, our CEO, asking him to explain my comments. Clearly that was inappropriate, as a CEO can’t answer for his President. Therefore I appreciate you redirecting your letter to me.
In your letter you have asked me to explain recent comments I have made regarding umpires.
My response is as follows.
1. You take offence at my use of the words “bloody umpires”.
I used the word “bloody” out of sheer frustration. Akin I guess to the phrase “bloody idiots” being used to describe drink drivers.
For better or worse, “bloody” is commonly used in Australia today. It can I suppose be offensive, but it can also be a term of endearment, it can be a term of jest, regardless I would hardly think in this day and age it would generally be thought to be offensive but if that is your take on it so be it.
2. You refer to my “negative comments” regarding umpires on the SEN interview I gave last Saturday 18th April. I consider them to be simply factual.
My comments did not apply specifically to the Brisbane vs. Collingwood match, nor to any specific umpire, nor to any specific incident during any of the first four games this year, but was a generalisation as a result of personally attending three matches this year, and watching many more on television, I like many others find that the performance and inconsistency of umpires increasingly confusing and frustrating.
This is not necessarily the umpires’ fault alone but the result of regular rule changes by the AFL, and the increased focus on umpires by ‘wiring’ or ‘miking’ them for sound, which has made them a greater focus of attention.
The AFL sheets the ‘miking’ of umpires to the broadcasters, but this is a cop out, as the AFL attempts to control every aspect of the game. The AFL has clearly sanctioned the ‘miking’ of umpires and therefore they, the AFL, must accept responsibility for the increasingly difficult circumstances in which umpires are operating.
Again you may wish to interpret my comments as negative but I argue they are simply factual and shared by many in the community.
A good umpire should aspire to unnoticed perfection.
The AFL has made this almost impossible for umpires today.
It is interesting and again factual, that soccer, the most popular and professional code of football in the world, do not introduce rule changes annually, and do not ‘mike’ their umpires.
The practice set by world soccer allows for greater understanding, knowledge and comfort of the game and its rules, by umpires, coaches, players, supporters and commentators – and even Presidents.
You get that wonderful ingredient of simplicity of application.
It would not be a bad example for the AFL to follow.
By removing the microphone from umpires you would reduce the public focus on them, you would also eliminate the intrusion that their running commentary often creates when watching a television broadcast.
You might even consider removing the numbers from umpires backs – numbers are worn by players. If you think necessary replace them with their names to distinguish a player from an umpire. But again in soccer there are no numbers and no names. Why? To leave the umpire as anonymous as possible.
It is AFL policy that has singled out umpires to be more than unnoticed professionals.
I am sorry if you found my comments offensive but I consider them to be both factual and constructive.
I will take up your suggestion to raise the issue of umpiring at the next AFL Presidents meeting, in the hope that we can have genuine discussion, where the views of the Presidents will be appreciated and hopefully accepted.
May I finally conclude that if you are serious about the welfare of umpires and attracting others to serve in the profession, the AFL should very seriously review their policies that are increasingly making the umpires the focus of attention.
Yours sincerely,
Jeff Kennett
President
Hawthorn Football Club
-------------------------
Stir the pot Jeff.
AA and Vlad are dills.
Kennett letter to the AFL
11:29 AM Wed 29 April, 2009 | Back
Jeff Kennett
for hawthornfc.com.au
Blog Article Content
Fellow Members,
As you are aware, the AFL has deemed fit to impose a penalty on the Club for comments I made recently regarding confusion surrounding what I consider to be inconsistent decisions in the adjudication of our game by umpires.
It had not been my intention to debate this publicly, as I had assumed the correspondence and arguments were to be discussed privately between myself and the AFL.
However, today the AFL has gone public through their General Manager-Football Operations, Mr Adrian Anderson, on talkback radio station 3AW, justifying the AFL’s position. Therefore I think you are entitled, as members of the Club, to read my letter of explanation to the AFL in response to their charges.
My arguments were totally rejected by the AFL and that has resulted in them imposing a penalty on the Club.
Finally, I make the point that at no time did I criticise an individual umpire, nor name one. We at Hawthorn play the ball not the man. My comments were general and the result of watching or viewing many games this year.
I am clearly still considering my position and will communicate that to you via this website in the next 48 hours.
My letter to Adrian Anderson is as follows:
27 April 2009
Mr Adrian Anderson
General Manager – Football Operations
Australian Football League
GPO Box 1449N
Melbourne VIC 3001
Dear Mr Anderson
I refer to your letter to me dated 23 April 2009.
You initially wrote to Ian Robson, our CEO, asking him to explain my comments. Clearly that was inappropriate, as a CEO can’t answer for his President. Therefore I appreciate you redirecting your letter to me.
In your letter you have asked me to explain recent comments I have made regarding umpires.
My response is as follows.
1. You take offence at my use of the words “bloody umpires”.
I used the word “bloody” out of sheer frustration. Akin I guess to the phrase “bloody idiots” being used to describe drink drivers.
For better or worse, “bloody” is commonly used in Australia today. It can I suppose be offensive, but it can also be a term of endearment, it can be a term of jest, regardless I would hardly think in this day and age it would generally be thought to be offensive but if that is your take on it so be it.
2. You refer to my “negative comments” regarding umpires on the SEN interview I gave last Saturday 18th April. I consider them to be simply factual.
My comments did not apply specifically to the Brisbane vs. Collingwood match, nor to any specific umpire, nor to any specific incident during any of the first four games this year, but was a generalisation as a result of personally attending three matches this year, and watching many more on television, I like many others find that the performance and inconsistency of umpires increasingly confusing and frustrating.
This is not necessarily the umpires’ fault alone but the result of regular rule changes by the AFL, and the increased focus on umpires by ‘wiring’ or ‘miking’ them for sound, which has made them a greater focus of attention.
The AFL sheets the ‘miking’ of umpires to the broadcasters, but this is a cop out, as the AFL attempts to control every aspect of the game. The AFL has clearly sanctioned the ‘miking’ of umpires and therefore they, the AFL, must accept responsibility for the increasingly difficult circumstances in which umpires are operating.
Again you may wish to interpret my comments as negative but I argue they are simply factual and shared by many in the community.
A good umpire should aspire to unnoticed perfection.
The AFL has made this almost impossible for umpires today.
It is interesting and again factual, that soccer, the most popular and professional code of football in the world, do not introduce rule changes annually, and do not ‘mike’ their umpires.
The practice set by world soccer allows for greater understanding, knowledge and comfort of the game and its rules, by umpires, coaches, players, supporters and commentators – and even Presidents.
You get that wonderful ingredient of simplicity of application.
It would not be a bad example for the AFL to follow.
By removing the microphone from umpires you would reduce the public focus on them, you would also eliminate the intrusion that their running commentary often creates when watching a television broadcast.
You might even consider removing the numbers from umpires backs – numbers are worn by players. If you think necessary replace them with their names to distinguish a player from an umpire. But again in soccer there are no numbers and no names. Why? To leave the umpire as anonymous as possible.
It is AFL policy that has singled out umpires to be more than unnoticed professionals.
I am sorry if you found my comments offensive but I consider them to be both factual and constructive.
I will take up your suggestion to raise the issue of umpiring at the next AFL Presidents meeting, in the hope that we can have genuine discussion, where the views of the Presidents will be appreciated and hopefully accepted.
May I finally conclude that if you are serious about the welfare of umpires and attracting others to serve in the profession, the AFL should very seriously review their policies that are increasingly making the umpires the focus of attention.
Yours sincerely,
Jeff Kennett
President
Hawthorn Football Club
-------------------------
Stir the pot Jeff.
AA and Vlad are dills.
,maybe he will save our great game from a similar peril!.
