Hi PtS, I am not even certain I can get on the site I think I have been shut out.

Ahhh, Greg! They were heading days. I remember walking into Victoria Park back in 1966 and standing on a wooden fruit box to see over the adults’ shoulders at One Eyed Hill. It was pretty much standing room only then unless you were in the old wooden stand. It was the roar of the beer and the smell of the crowd! And, when you went to the away games you knew that you faced a gauntlet from Geelong to Moorabbin.

Hi PtS! I seem to recall in an agreement with the State Gov Collingwood agreed to spend $10 million on the parks around the Holden Centre and the Yarra if the Govt matched dollar for dollar. They feed about 300 homes each night and have emergency accommodation for women and children in danger and train and support the local Wurundjeri people. If Collingwood’s sponsors abandon it and merch sales drop, I doubt they will cut the football department first.

It has always been everyone against Collingwood! Its nothing to do with Maguire. It is all the club has ever known. I’ve been following the Pies when Tommy Sherrin was President. Back then, people still called you a “mick” or a “paddy” for following them because they were a team of Irish Catholics from the slums, abattoirs, and tanneries.

Its an interesting world when one of the few people who will say anything positive about Maguire is Peter Gordon, a rival president speaking on ABC TV. His point was that everything said about Collingwood could be said of every other club and that Collingwood at the instigation of Eddy Maguire, had done so much for the community that is never mentioned for example a series of 5 year plans with the local Wurundjeri people including the use of the Holden Center to train people in media and TV, feeding and sheltering about 300 homeless each night, and development of public spaces along the Yarra.

Dragging up a player as a current expert on Collingwood when has not been around the club for 7 years and only played 6 games when he was there is just junk journalism.

I think there are quite a few players who never got an apology. I also think there was a behind post that might have been feeling a bit sorry for itself!

I think the whole thing was manufactured outrage by journalists looking for a headline rather than having to think about what the report really meant. When I looked at the footage, I felt it was clear that Maguire meant he was proud that Collingwood had commissioned the report rather than of its findings.
I think Clarkson is a great coach and any club should be pleased to have him. That said, I am not unhappy with Buckley as a coach. While I have never analyzed it, I think the figures would show that in the long run coaches get better with time and that successful clubs in the post salary cap era have held onto coaches rather than turned them over.

No, I was there so I know what happened. (Winmar tore the Pies to shreds that day.) I have no doubt that Winmar was abused. What I was saying is that it did not happen in the location described in Do Better. The images clearly show what happened, but not where. My recollection was that it was either at the end of the old wooden stand or in front of the social club: they were next to each other. I was looking along the boundary line from One-eyed Hill where the TV cameras used to be. The cheer squad was always behind the goals or the unofficial squad was in the outer. I would still say that it was an long time ago and my recollection could be wrong, that is why I wanted to check if there was a better image showing more of the ground.

Are you serious? Have you not read what has been happening internationally in soccer and cricket?

I think where it really went wrong is what was foreshadowed in the report. Which is that Collingwood is extremely defensive when they are confronted. I suspect that Collingwood is the focus of so many attacks that Maguire’s standard response is to circle the wagons and have all guns pointing outwards.
Considering Jodie Sizer’s experience and background as a Djab Wurrung/Gunditjmara woman, I would have liked Maguire to give her the running on this issue. It would have taken away the normal lets all target Eddie because its easy, “half of Australia already hates him” thought process.

I agree, and it is also why there are fundamentally problems with reviewing history and assessing people against modern values that had not yet been formulated. However, if you want to consider how people can change consider Leigh Matthews comments about why his behavior as a player and some of his sledging was inappropriate. In this respect, and some others, I think Matthews is a great example of what we could aim to be.

Boy, I remember Muir. I think he may be the most reported player in history, I recall he was reported for about 55 games and only played about 70 in total. I think that he was reported 7 or 8 times in a single match! I also think there were a couple of kicks and was reported for hitting an umpire in South Australia.
He had amazing speed and size for his day with great ball skills, but even as a spectator he frightened me as a kid.

As an old bloke, I can the games between Collingwood and Carlton and the fights between Lee Adamson and Sid Jackson. Their scraps seemed to go on for years. I also seem to recall that Lee Adamson broke his hand on Jackson’s head more than once. Jackson normally got 4 weeks and Adamson got the same, but took 6 to 10 weeks for his hand to repair while Jackson was back after a few weeks.
By my recollection, some of the other stories in the report are not accurately reported. (Though it doesn’t really change the validity of the Do Better report and advice.) I do not recall Nick Winmar lifting his jumper to the cheer-squad, I though that it was at the end of the stand that used to be near the old members social club. This was a long way from the cheer squad. But, I might be wrong on this no doubt a wider photo would show it, but the only ones I could are ambiguous.

Skilton was called chimp because of his looks, he had a massive chest and arms and a face to match. I still remember seeing him play at the Albert Park ground. Either way, I doubt that he liked his nick name. Ultimately, that should be the yardstick, you should be treating people as they would reasonably wish to be treated.

You do not need to look any further than the woman who was sitting next to Eddie.

Hi PtS! Long time no scribing from me.
You are correct. In fact, the report mentioned that Collingwood has a fortress mentality, which does not always serve it well. While the authors felt this can stand in the way of learning and improvement, my perspective that there is a degree of inside verse outside the tent on this. If the club was truly against improving the Do Better report would never have been commissioned. If they wanted a white wash they would not have chosen the rapporteurs they did but again that doesn’t lead to improvement.
At the moment, there is some sort of belief going around that some how Collingwood is the only club in Australia that can lift its game on racism. Frankly, having read the report, I think any organization where I have been involved would do well to read the report and consider how it applies to them. I respect Richmond and the Dogs enormously for their leadership and how they have turned the clubs around, I bet they have already been through this report and are asking the same questions of themselves.

Clearly, you have not read the report or the positives it says Collingwood has achieved.

The public reaction to the Do Better report is axiomatic of why the world has seen the low quality politicians we and the rest of the world have suffered through for the last decade. It is too easy to be fed ideas that seem to be correct rather than look at the substance. It doesn’t seem like many have bothered to read the report, yet many seem comfortable in commenting on its contents.
The report is only 30 pages excluding the Appendices and is a worthwhile for any one involved in an organization football, private business, or public service. It is painful reading for anyone who loves Collingwood, but in truth any club could probably cross out Collingwood and put in their own name. Certainly, this is true for the clubs, businesses and Government departments where I have worked.
Having read the report in full, it is clear that many of the commentators maxed out at the executive summary. Even most of the comments in relation to Heritier Lumumba ignore the report’s first paragraph and fail to acknowledge that firstly he publicly refused to be involved saying it would be a white wash. It is disingenuous to initially dismiss the report because you think it would be untrustworthy then to turn around and use it to beat the club. The implication being that the report is correct only because he can use it to attack Maguire and the Club rather than it being based on a robust methodology and conclusions.
Collingwood could have had a white wash report that made them look better. We all see many reports like this from Governments of all types during the course of a year, the starting point is to choose a friend to investigate. I am aware of reports that were dictated to the independent investigator by the group commissioning the report. However, Collingwood deliberately chose strong and independent thinkers who they knew would not be swayed and would be tough on them. A report like this is commissioned because you want to be better in spite of the pain along the way. In itself, that does take courage and having the nerve to do it is something about which that Collingwood fans can be proud. Do Better acknowledged the courage of Collingwood in the way they initiated and committed to the report (p3); something I have seen acknowledge in only one of the many columns about the report. Surprisingly, it was from a Fox journalist!!
Interestingly, Do Better commented on Collingwood having an all guns facing out approach (p15) when they are challenged. This was again evident at the press conference with Eddie Maguire to at least some degree, this defensiveness is/was predicted by the report and by the general rule in football that everyone should hate Collingwood even if they have never heard of them.
Organizations are reflective of the societies in which they exist and they incorporate the values of that community (p4). While the report notes some cases of racist behavior, it also notes that the Club had already acted and introduced training etc to some groups associated with the club. More challenging are the issues around structural racism because they can be hidden within organizational practices, but here again Collingwood has already taken some measures that are recognized in Do Better.
Calls from journalists and other thought leaders for Eddie Maguire’s resignation might send the wrong message to the head of any organization who was considering any type of review. Why put our head(s) on the chopping block? If you really are against racism and value having all the recommendations implemented take a look at the Appendices of Do Better. Then ask how would a lack of organizational stability effect such a challenging schedule for implementation? I would suggest that at the moment, if you value actions against racism over political point scoring you might recognize the value of leadership stability through until the next club elections.
While it is expected that the normal rough and tumble of inter-club rivalry would lead to most of the comments around the place from the Joe on the street, it is disappointing that those who set themselves up as thought leaders have taken such a superficial perspective, and therein lies the connection how we get the political leaders we deserve.

I love your work!

Then, Cook was a good selection on the part of Geelong, and well done Geelong to hunt the best available. If Geelong was a normal business, none of this would really rate a comment. Alternatively, if it were a player and success was clearly measurable a club would take the very best they could from anywhere.
Too much emphasis is placed on football experience over administrative abilities in selecting people for club administrations. When it comes down to it, clubs produce a product and sell the product. If the product is poor people do not buy memberships and merch, and sponsors do not buy association. The best way to have the best product is to have the right person at the right time in every role. Where they came from or the level they played is irrelevant.

I don’t think you can be an AFL coach and be anything other than smart. But, clearly there are other characteristics required to be a successful head coach. While I accept that Pyke’s position is under pressure, I am comfortable with the idea he is not the problem at Adelaide, so only changing him will not solve it.

I had also read and heard it was Burton who introduced the Adelaide practice of no farewell speeches for players leaving and how Lever was treated. I was gob smacked when I read about it, I thought that stuff went out in the 1980s.

Why do you think I am a Victorian? I am not.
That mind set is at the root of Adelaide’s problems. Rather than considering if there is anything of substance to what I have said, it is easier to dismiss it because of where you thought I lived and I therefore had to be biased!
Confronted with all of the evidence about the culture in AFC any board should have set about a process of cultural change. Have we seen any evidence of this?

That is an interesting observation, its sound like a list with a bunch of journeymen rather than top heavy with talent. From and Adelaide perspective, it makes it sound like their current position is about right for the list.
The age v games structure is possibly a bit skewed because of the players who have left over the last 6 years, but to me it also suggests a list that may has not have been correctly managed to recruit precocious young stars with durability. These are recruits are frequently the players that develop into 200+ game leaders and the people who maintain club culture.