Open Mike- Don Scott

[bugalugs213]

Was hoping for an hour long episode looks like only half an hour job Scott must've got sick of him.
Knocked a few questions on the head with somewhat contempt but showed good humor in relation to Kennedy Sr that was good to see.

 

[SinkingDeeper]

Great interview, thoroughly enjoyed it. Straight shooter, doesn't mince his words. Interesting to see his indifference to the club.

 

[Daniel Cherny]

Mike: Well Don you are an odd fellow, but I must say, you steam a good ham.

 

[SydCrow]

can I assume that the elephant in the room was not addressed?

 

[flight23]

can I assume that the elephant in the room was not addressed?

correct

 

[SydCrow]

correct

no Walkley for Mike then. On the same day that this happened

Victorian man Jason Ball's petition to AFL chief Andrew Demetriou to usher in a pride round, similar to the home-and-away season's multicultural and indigenous rounds, was launched yesterday on Change.org. The petition, which received coverage in yesterday's Sunday Age and on television, had received nearly 7000 supporters shortly after midday today.
Ball, who plays in Victoria's Yarra Valley Mountain District Football League, has described his decision to launch the petition and draw attention to his status as a gay footballer as "terrifying". To date there are no openly gay AFL footballers and Ball has written that football clubs at all levels remain a bastion for homophobic views and behaviour.

http://m.smh.com.au/victoria/who-ca...campaign-akermanis-tweets-20120910-25nts.html

 

[gPhonque]

Great interview as usual. Enjoyed it. I too found his views on Hawthorn interesting, but totally understand where he's coming from.

I also find it funny that people bag Mike Sheehan for asking about "non-football" things or "off-field" stuff all the time... and then criticise him when he DOESN'T ask about them, such as in this case.

And besides, it's none of our (or Mike's) business.

(well, maybe Mike's... )

 

[Rod Stroker]

can I assume that the elephant in the room was not addressed?

Did they need too? They were discussing his footy career, rather than being the number one ticket holder at the Mardi Gras.

Good interview

 

[qman]

I thought Sheahan might have asked about his feud with Crimmins .

 

[SydCrow]

Great interview as usual. Enjoyed it. I too found his views on Hawthorn interesting, but totally understand where he's coming from.

I also find it funny that people bag Mike Sheehan for asking about "non-football" things or "off-field" stuff all the time... and then criticise him when he DOESN'T ask about them, such as in this case.

And besides, it's none of our (or Mike's) business.

(well, maybe Mike's... )

Mike normally searches for controversy. Anyway my disappointment is more that Don doesn't feel comfortable making a statement. He is in a powerful position to do so.

 

[hayes]

Didn't enjoy that one. Was a typical old "everything was better in my day" flog. Hopefully next week's better.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

Loved it. Was always a fan, tough as nails and always was a bit of a different cat. Onya Don.

 

[Sprout]

I have to admit I was confused how a guy who led the fight to save the club would claim that he basically couldn't give a rat's arse about it now.

He's an odd one for sure.

 

[Chewy]

Didn't enjoy that one. Was a typical old "everything was better in my day" flog. Hopefully next week's better.

He wasn't like that at all. You misunderstood. Scotty wasn't saying "We played football better than today's athletes. We could kick on both feet and we didn't need all these coaches to hold our hands. We were tough. We used belt the crap out of each other and laugh abut it later." (he did talk about the violence of footy back in the 70's, but more as point of difference, not to big note himself)

He said AFL football & Hawthorn no longer interests him because it has become a business and lost its soul. People around the football clubs don't love the club anymore because they're just professionals doing a job and they could just as easily be working for another club the following year (which was unthinkable back in the 70's.) In his day, people's attitude was all about what they could do for the club, but today, it's more about furthering their own careers and what's in it for them.

Scott is dead right. It cannot be disputed. He might be a stubborn old tosser and set in his ways, but many people lament the path football has taken and like Scotty, have lost their passion for the AFL and prefer suburban footy. Football is not the religion it once was. It has become an over-exposed, over-saturated commodity. There is no magic anymore, just dollars, brands and marketing strategies. Footballers once bled for the jumper and received a pittance, whereas nowadays they get paid $300,000 a year and their agents negotiate $450,000 a year deals with rival clubs from interstate. Everything is money driven. Once upon a time, the game itself was everything.

You could say Scott is one of those people who does not like progress. Or you could say he is a man who lives by his principles and refuses to yield to things he doesn't believe in. Either way, he is an interesting character. Not the greatest interview, but that's Mike Sheahan for you. He is terrible at what he does. 'Open Mike' is interesting in spite of Sheahan's bland questions.

 

[Sprout]

Scott is dead right. It cannot be disputed. He might be a stubborn old tosser and set in his ways, but many people lament the path football has taken and like Scotty, have lost their passion for the AFL and prefer suburban footy. Football is not the religion it once was. It has become an over-exposed, over-saturated commodity. There is no magic anymore, just dollars, brands and marketing strategies. Footballers once bled for the jumper and received a pittance, whereas nowadays they get paid $300,000 a year and their agents negotiate $450,000 a year deals with rival clubs from interstate.

I think it's a pretty cynical, black and white, and somewhat distorted way of looking at it though. Of course with money and a greater degree of professionalism will come change, but we're still a pretty far cry from American sport. Hodge doesn't bleed for the Hawthorn jumper? Hayes doesn't bleed for the St Kilda jumper? For him to ditch the club entirely cause it has lost its "soul" is just eccentricity on his part.

 

[Chewy]

I think it's a pretty cynical, black and white, and somewhat distorted way of looking at it though. Of course with money and a greater degree of professionalism will come change, but we're still a pretty far cry from American sport. Hodge doesn't bleed for the Hawthorn jumper? Hayes doesn't bleed for the St Kilda jumper?

Players are loyal to the group of people they work with: their on-field comrades, the coaches and support staff. Players like Hodgey and Lenny Hayes are highly valued and their clubs build the team around them. I wouldn't call it love of the jumper. They are highly paid, highly respected pillars of their organisations. I'm sure Westpac or NAB also has gun employees high up within their ranks who are well compensated for what they do and have been working there for 15-20 years and have a strong sense of loyalty to company they work for.

The clubs are now money-making franchises with upwards of 160 employees (including players). In Scott's days at Hawthorn, the people around the club were there for the love of it. Past players had far more of a connection than nowadays. That's part of what Scott was saying. On the rare occasions he has gone back to the club, there is nothing there for him - just a bunch of busy employees doing their jobs. The clubs have become businesses. It has no interest for him

There is nothing "distorted" or "cynical" about saying that. It's a fact.

For him to ditch the club entirely cause it has lost its "soul" is just eccentricity on his part.

Scott is eccentric, but he is not the only ex-player who feels this way about AFL football. Most of the old footballers say the same thing. Maybe they have the odd reunion, but the days of players retiring and hanging around the social club drinking beers and reliving past glories are mostly over. I thought it was quite poignant the way he said, "The minute you can't play any more, that's it. It's over. You're finished. The club moves on with the next generation of younger players because that's how it works. Many footballers struggle with that finality."

I think it's all a bit over-stated this business of Scott "turning his back" on the club. He gets questioned that way and so he responds in kind, but it appeared to me that he was laughing at the idea of hanging around Hawthorn and basking in the glory of being a club legend. He has better things to do with his time. He is not some sad case old footballer whose life ended at 33 years of age

A similar thing happened with KB after he was sacked as coach and never went back. People made a lot of it, but I think part of it with KB is that he moved on with his life and Richmond is in the past and no longer that important to him.

Us footy fans have a tough time accepting that our football clubs probably mean a lot more to us than it does to the people we cheer for every weekend. You might get some ex-players who love it and stay in touch, but I reckon the vast majority slip away and move onto other things. Most of the players say they hate watching footy and only like playing it.

 

[Sprout]

You raise some valid points but I think Scott is quite unique in that he has no interest at all in the club, even so far as watching matches (the last Hawthorn game he attended being the GF, which was coincidental as he attends every year out of custom).

Players, coaches and administration will move on, but its still the same entity. To turn your back on the club is in some ways to turn your back on everything it stands for including its history, of which he is a large part.

You might be right in that as someone with an emotional attachment to the game, I am intrigued by someone who can do a complete 180 in his attitude towards the cub he played for, based almost entirely on philosophical grounds. He's gone from the guy who stood in front of a packed community hall whipping them into a frenzy with a jumper thrust in the air (keeping in mind he was retired 15 years by this stage so out of the game for a while), to someone who is completely disengaged.

It's kinda sad, if anything.

 

[Lord Nicholson]

Is there any continuity between the current Hawthorn and the past beyond the jumper? I don't know enough about off-field personnel, but the surprising lack of F/Ss and that break in connectivity between '91 and '08, not that it means anything, is probably a bit sad. Doesn't really matter because to the fans that change isn't as distinct.

That can be restored of course, but I do cherish the few links the current "business" of Essendon has to the past, with Hoops, Jones, and names like Hird, Watson, and Fletcher involved (and Daniher next year).

It doesn't really mean anything I guess, but I think it gives one a sense of comfort to be able to draw lines of continuity through a club's history. I think to a degree that's what Scott's talking about.

 

[The King!]

Couldnt find the orange outfit in the shops

 

[Cosmic Energy]

Is there any continuity between the current Hawthorn and the past beyond the jumper? I don't know enough about off-field personnel, but the surprising lack of F/Ss and that break in connectivity between '91 and '08, not that it means anything, is probably a bit sad. Doesn't really matter because to the fans that change isn't as distinct.

That can be restored of course, but I do cherish the few links the current "business" of Essendon has to the past, with Hoops, Jones, and names like Hird, Watson, and Fletcher involved (and Daniher next year).

It doesn't really mean anything I guess, but I think it gives one a sense of comfort to be able to draw lines of continuity through a club's history. I think to a degree that's what Scott's talking about.

I think you are right there. Also the removal of drafting zones too probably took a little a way from getting players in who were desperate to play for a particular club, rather than just any club as is mostly the case now. So the passion for the club itself is a little diminished. At Geelong we are pretty lucky also to have those strong past links, and even without the father sons we seem to get a fair few local boys from the traditional zone who already love the club.

 

[Davo23]

Players are loyal to the group of people they work with: their on-field comrades, the coaches and support staff. Players like Hodgey and Lenny Hayes are highly valued and their clubs build the team around them. I wouldn't call it love of the jumper. They are highly paid, highly respected pillars of their organisations. I'm sure Westpac or NAB also has gun employees high up within their ranks who are well compensated for what they do and have been working there for 15-20 years and have a strong sense of loyalty to company they work for.

Chewy, I love your Hawthorn passion, but as a player Don himself was always a loner.

Despite playing over 200 games with Michael Tuck and Leigh Matthews, he never talked to them! The 3 of them are linked as the best ruck combination ever, yet he never spoke to them, and never socialised with them.

His current alienation from the club is not very different.

A great, inspiring captain on the footy field, but a strange man.

 

[blueboy25]

Is there any continuity between the current Hawthorn and the past beyond the jumper? I don't know enough about off-field personnel, but the surprising lack of F/Ss and that break in connectivity between '91 and '08, not that it means anything, is probably a bit sad.

Especially when a couple like Tuck and Kennedy have gone on to successful careers at other clubs.

 

[BigVic]

Saw the interview two nights ago and it was as usual, a great interview.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

can I assume that the elephant in the room was not addressed?

I can't ever recall Mike asking any of his guest about their sexual orientation, so why is it "an elephant in the room"?

 

[SydCrow]

I can't ever recall Mike asking any of his guest about their sexual orientation, so why is it "an elephant in the room"?

Look, it's obviously up to Don, I just wondered if Mike even talked to him about taking the opportunity to discuss it in such a friendly forum. It's not like it would be shocking to most people and think what it would mean for the broader cause. And imagine the stories he could tell of being a gay footballer.