Akermanis remains defiant until the bitter end
By Justin Rodski, 23 Jul 2010 Justin Rodski is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- AFL, AFL Footy Show, Jason Akermanis, Rodney Eade, Western Bulldogs
Last night on the Footy Show, it became clear that there are no winners in Jason Akermanis’ sacking. The often controversial and always outspoken Akermanis came out swinging and certainly landed a couple decent blows along the way.
In the end, though, it wasn’t the Bulldogs or Gary Lyon, or anyone else for that matter, that delivered the knock out punch.
It was Jason himself.
Ironically, his pride and self-belief has taken him to great heights as an AFL footballer. But now we’ve seen how quickly they’ve again been his biggest downfall, as well.
It still baffles me how he didn’t see writing on the wall. A club doesn’t sack a player out of the blue without good reason.
But when he almost condescendingly scoffed at the Bulldogs’ team process and said “I shouldn’t have to come in and put up with that bullshit,” to me, that showed the club has made the right call.
Herein lies the problem for Jason.
He seems almost delusional about the circumstances happening around him, as if he only listens when people are saying what he wants to hear.
Now, by his own admission, he said “this is the life you live sometimes and if you run to close to the edge…” And in the end, he did, and he fell off.
Just like in Brisbane when Leigh Matthews described his exit as Russian roulette, eventually the bullet is going to hit.
Maybe this time it was in the back, but ultimately he left the Bulldogs with no other reasonable choice and the club is now bracing for the continued backlash.
He says he ate ‘humble pie’ playing in the VFL, as if he’s too good for that league. Therein lies another mistake: every player must at some stage do his time in the lower ranks, not complain and call an opposition player a “dribbler.”
Akermanis took aim at Captain Brad Johnson and alleges he alluded that the players had completely lost trust in him by listening to player feedback about a ‘tell all book’ in an open forum at Whitten Oval, and then raising those concerns with the football department and the club’s board.
For the third time in the space of a couple of weeks, Aker claims he had been subjected to this form of ‘workplace bullying’ in an environment he believes is unfair and actually incited even greater division amongst the players.
If the political worm had been implemented at this stage of the night, I think Akermanis would have been slightly in front, winning audience approval and sentiment for the fleeting moment he appeared to be the victim.
And maybe he is.
But for me, by the end of the one-on-one stoush with Bulldogs CEO Campbell Rose, he showed exactly why he is in fact the villain.
Now Sam Newman described it as a ‘disgraceful vendetta’ as well as intimidating, belittling and degrading. However, it was clear from the outset that Sam had a guilty conscience from his own part in Akermanis’ demise.
After all, the idea of a leadership group must be a hard concept to grasp for someone from a bygone era like Sam. Jonathan Brown agreed, telling Sam: “you’re that far removed from the inner sanctum of a football club, you’ve got no idea.”
In relation to this point, Akermanis then hit back at coach Rodney Eade, explaining that one of the specific legal reasons the Bulldogs gave him for his sacking was that “he gave private and confidential information to Sam Newman and Steve Price”
But he claims the information must have been leaked through another source to the press the following day, and the only other person at the club with access to that information was coach Rodney Eade.
His legacy in football has also been a much debated topic over the last few days and many football pundits including former Bulldog and now Fox Sports commentator Rohan Smith believe he won’t be remembered for his three premierships or his Brownlow Medal, but rather the embarrassing way he left two separate clubs amid acrimony and before the end of his contract.
To that he fired back “well Rohan, at least I’ll be remembered.” And Aker there’s no doubt you will, but could there be one last chapter for Jason Akermanis?
One thing is for sure, it will be a darn good read.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
- Explore:
- AFL, AFL Footy Show, Jason Akermanis, Rodney Eade, Western Bulldogs

John @ Williamstown said | July 23rd 2010 @ 8:51am | Report comment
Could not of summed up a difficult situation better. Really well written. Aker’s form at Williamstown did not entitle him to be in the Dog’s best 22 and if all he was going to do was go back and whinge every week then it was an untenable situation. As a Williamstown VFL supporter we are trying to win a premiership too this year and don’t need to baby sit players who don’t want to be there!
gg said | July 23rd 2010 @ 9:29am | Report comment
He could have gone with class. I know he’s angry but he looks lile a child. He and Tamsyn Lewis remind me of each other. Both just don’t know when not to talk and have a family (especially brothers) that enable and support their behaviour. It doesn’t surprise me Tamsyn Lewis’ brother has supported Aker on his Twitter account. Such a pity Aker’s brilliant career is overshadowed.
Chip said | July 23rd 2010 @ 9:30am | Report comment
I think Aker was a long way ahead of the political worm at times last night, but brought undone by a couple of overly petulant comments. Still don’t think the Dogs have handled this in a very professional manner – it was good viewing but it did not reflect well on the club.
Redb said | July 23rd 2010 @ 9:34am | Report comment
Sam Newman was a complete blinkered fool last night. He is lucky Jono Brown stay composed and didn’t flatten him.
As for the bogans in the Footy Show crowd who cheered Aker, you cant think for yourselves and have no idea what is required in a team environment.
In saying that, the Footy Show was compelling viewing last night, kudos to Garry Lyon who asked some pertinent questions.
Richard said | July 23rd 2010 @ 9:39am | Report comment
Good article. That session last night on the Footy Show on Akermanis was excruciating. Obviously he has no ability to reflect upon himself and his deeds. He must be kidding if he thinks the Bulldogs were just out to get him. They invested a lot in Akermanis and there is no doubt that their preference would have been to have a fit, co-operative, team oriented Aker in the team for the finals. For Akermanis though, the fact that he fell out with the Lions, and that he has now fallen out with the Bulldogs, is no reason to take a good hard look at himself. Well here’s news for you son. Take a good hard look at yourself. You’re a self opinionated, self centred clown. That said, Sam Newman’s rant was unintelligible. His outburst of righteous indignation was completely hypocritical – phoney to the last. And Campbell Rose was ill advised to get into that verbal fracas with Akermanis in public. Those sorts of things, counselling of a poor performing employee, should be done in private and left there. All in all, an excruciating process which delivered no honour to any of them.
Michael DiFabrizio said | July 23rd 2010 @ 10:07am | Report comment
Very nice read, Justin. It certainly made for great TV last night. As you say, Aker did get his nose in front at times. The point he and Sam raised about the fact him not playing the other week hit the press before Sam’s comment – meaning someone else at the club would also have to be leaking information – was quite interesting. The workplace bullying call would have won a few over, as would the fact Campbell Rose didn’t give direct answers to a lot of questions and instead chose to relate every answer back to the word “trust”. Looking back, though, it’s easy to understand why he did that, because a lot of what Aker said validated what Rose was saying. Comments like “I shouldn’t have to come in and put up with that bullshit,” and telling Rose to “piss off” right after shaking his hand at the end meant Aker just kept shooting himself in the foot.
JP said | July 23rd 2010 @ 10:19am | Report comment
As an Industrial Lawyer I find it hard to believe the so called professional environment of an AFL football club would allow the “employees” (players) dictate who plays and who does not. From the information provided through the media and players, the problem would appear to be the fact that the players are meeting and deciding on the future of other player’s contracts. When did management loose control of this right and obligation under the true employment relationship?
Brad Johnson’s involvement in the ultimate decision to terminate Akermanis is startling and the way it appears to have arisen should be questioned. Rodney Eade appears to have no managerial skill in terms of controlling his playing group, including Akermanis, and consequently preventing this situation from occurring in the first case. It is such a shame it ended this way because good management could have averted this outcome. I would enjoy running a case on Bullying and Harassment for Akermanis given what has been published.
Graham Smith said | July 23rd 2010 @ 11:52am | Report comment
Maybe you could seek advice from the famous Western Bulldogs supporter Julia Gillard, who also has a background in industrial law. You probably know that she was a partner in the law firm Slater & Gordon, of which former Western Bulldogs president Peter Gordon is a director.
Surely she could use her experience and political persuasion to support Aker after this clear case of workplace bullying and unfair dismissal.
JP said | July 23rd 2010 @ 12:03pm | Report comment
Ha ha not a bad suggestion Graham. I do recall a comment from Julia recently however something to the effect of “there’s more chance of me becoming the full-forward for the Dogs than there is any chance of a change in the Labor Party”!! Perhaps she was part of the Aker “solution”?! In any case I agree with your comment about Victorian umpires at Etihad. Genius.
Graham Smith said | July 23rd 2010 @ 1:38pm | Report comment
I can’t wait to hear her views about the Aker “solution”. It’s scary to think that Aker could determine the 2010 election result !!
susie@brighton said | July 23rd 2010 @ 10:23am | Report comment
Last night was ugly, and did nothing to clear the air …The Footy show scenario was by the media for the media and Jason came out badly.
Who knows who is right and who is wrong it is abundant to everyone who is really present in life that if you are an individual and outspoken you will come up against all manner of controversy and sometimes it hurts. Your greatest strength will always be your greatest weakness.
John said | July 23rd 2010 @ 10:33am | Report comment
Last night came down to one point for me, he was supposedly sacked because he lost the trust of the players. However as Jason said what trust is important here? Did they think he wouldn’t train hard or put on the shephard for his team mates? That is the trust that is required. The real reason he was sacked is because he wasn’t popular at the club and certain people with power didn’t like him. So campbell rose next time you are asked why it happened don’t spout the word trust as that is a lie, just say he wasnt liked!
Graham Smith said | July 23rd 2010 @ 10:48am | Report comment
Aker will sue the Bulldogs for all they’re worth. He will build a case that he was dismissed unfairly, which he obviously already had in mind when he refused their offer to resign. And good on him. Power brokers like David Smorgon need to learn to pull their heads in every now and again. The AFL quickly leapt to the defence of the Bulldogs by getting ex-Bulldog Luke Darcy to write an article on their website saying how the decision to sack him was the right decision. They moved faster than a Victorian umpire reaching for his whistle to help a Victorian team kick a crucial goal at Etihad Stadium.
Redb said | July 23rd 2010 @ 11:11am | Report comment
Just curious, what would Aker sue the Bulldogs for?
They have paid out his contract which expires at the end of the 2010 season.
His playing prospects next year are dubious at best, thus the potential earnings calculation would be limited. By his own admission he thought about retiring at the end of the 09 season.
Workplace bullying? – becuase he didnt like the feedback?
Maybe he should sue the fans who have booed him over the years for making him feel bad!
Graham Smith said | July 23rd 2010 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
Unfair dismissal, workplace bullying, damage to his professional reputation etc etc. Clearly it isn’t just about contract payments. The fact is that a strong framework has been built to protect players’ rights. This wouldn’t be the first unfair dismissal case against an AFL club. He could easily present a strong case that his teammates were awarded executive power over his contractual agreement with the club. He isn’t an employee of the fans.
Redb said | July 23rd 2010 @ 1:03pm | Report comment
Graham,
Akermanis had a contract – that is a defined period of employment. Contracts can be terminated, balance has been paid out. The Bulldogs were under no obligation to re-sign for 2011 on continued employment.
I beleive the Bulldogs tried to help him, he is the classic case of someone who cannot see the world through others eyes. Planet Aker is all he knows. What Aker has to ask is why did the group need to put him out on his own in the first place.
I do feel a bit sorry for him becuase he clearly is not able to see his faults and is looking for the silver bullet from the Bulldogs, “show me where I went wrong”. Rose described it well “a death of thousands cuts”.
I like Aker, reckon he has always been interesting in the media and previously a great player. I sam him first hand at the Ess v Bulldogs game 6-7 weeks ago, he looked slow and out of touch, only contributed when the Bulldogs had a belated run in the last qtr when the game was over!
Aker could sue, but for what purpose? His media career has received a significant boost, his earnings from football tailing off anyway.