The Big Stick Approach, Has it Worked?

Sport whether we like it or not draws out passion in those of us who play, and those of us who support.

Often in playing the passion is born of a moment, and frequently players themselves will tell you that they were surprised at their own reaction, and how much a particular moment meant.

Then there are the rivalries that incite passion. The Ashes is a prime example. A contest that has been going on for 146 years. Is it therefore any surprise that emotion becomes a big part of these individual and team contests?

In many cases there are matches in which the result means far more to one side than the other. For example Scotland, and Scottish fans love nothing more than to beat the English, The Dutch feel the same way about beating Germany. Whereas to the English and the Germans a victory to them does not mean nearly as much.

Many great rivalries come about from one incident, or one match in particular. Others are born out of a history far greater than any sporting contest.

Ask any who follow football in Australia and they know that it was the migrants who came to this country that gave the sport life, and who kept it alive for decades. Regrettably, the ‘football cleansing’ that occurred in 2003 witnessed many of the contributions made by these clubs ignored, and attempts to erase them. This showed a complete disregard for the history of the sport in Australia, and a disrespect for the contributions made. (Football Cleansing A Step Too Far) Fortunately this was reversed in 2019. (Going Down a Seperate Path)

While these clubs have in the main made huge contributions to the game it cannot be denied that some of the rivalries, sporting or otherwise, have been carried over in Australia, and sadly on some occasions emotions have spilled over.

This was the case in Round 2 of the State League Division One in 2023. This was a fixture between Dianella White Eagles, a team with Serbian roots and Gwelup Croatia a team with Croatian roots.

What exacerbated the build up to this match was that these two teams had been drawn in the third round of the Australia Cup. This cup game was played on the 18th of March. The game finished 1-1. Gwelup Croatia would win the penalty shoot-out away from home 4-2.

Just two weeks later the two teams would meet again at the same venue in round 2 of the league season. Some will say it is good to be wise after the fact, but should this fixture have been moved, so that time could heal the outcome of the match 14 days previously? Some at the clubs claim to have raised this suggestions with the powers that be at Football West, but the game’s administrators opted for the match to go ahead.

Did Football West send their own staff down to the match to act as stewards, or to monitor events?

Dianella, like all home sides provided the stewards on the day. Like those who put their hand up to do this every week around the grounds what formal training have they been given by Football West to not only control any potential issues when they occur, but to spot them before they do and take action? Surely if you are going to ask volunteers to carry out such a role the least you can do is give them the proper training?

At the match in Round 2 Gwelup Croatia were once again the victors, and following the final whistle ugly scenes ensued. Scenes that some said were the worst seen in local football for a while.

Initially Football West announced punishments to both clubs without a hearing. Once the Governing body was reminded that a hearing must take place, Dianella were forced to play games behind closed doors, and Gwelup’s president was suspended from attending games.

Just over a week ago Gwelup Croatia faced a hearing over the incident in which they were charged as a club with bringing the game into disrepute. This hearing had been delayed, but the outcome was that the club was told that last weekend’s game had to be played with no fans allowed into the ground.

When Football West and the various State bodies were created to govern the game in the various states of Australia back in 2003 the emphasis was very much on “promoting” the game. It is interesting to see how that role has now shifted to “developing” the game. A cynic would say that “promoting” the game costs money while “developing” it, becomes a revenue earner.

The game that Gwelup Croatia was forced to play behind closed doors was one against another club with Croatian roots, the Western Knights. This game would clearly have attracted a great many fans. It would also have possibly been a game at which the club would have been bale to achieve its best financial return, from gate takings, food and beverages. If you were looking after the welfare of the game and the clubs and promoting football would you not have allowed this game to go head with fans?

What makes this decision all the more baffling from a common-sense perspective is that this weekend will see Dianella White Eagles as the visitors to Gwelup Croatia.

This weekend Gwelup Croatia has been told that they must not open the bar; although NTFS understands that the bar at Croatia House is in fact seperate from the football club, and they have no control over that. They have also been told that they must hire six external experienced security guards to act as Stewards.

So the organisation that originally was created to promote the game, as well as administer it, has stripped a club of the opportunity to make money, and then is enforcing extra costs upon them.

At a time when all clubs playing in the semi-professional ranks are doing it tough and crowds are hard to come by one would have thought that common-sense would prevail. Surely had the game between Gwelup Croatia and Dianella White Eagles been forced to be played behind closed doors there would have been few, if any complaints from anyone. It would have been a decision that most fans would have understood, and agreed with.

The big stick approach appears to have misfired.

Sadly, the decision handed down has further tarnished the reputation of the game’s governing body in terms of making decisions that are for the good of the game, and those who play it.

Football West can rightly argue that they are simply obeying their own constitution which under 1.1 Objects, subsection b) states that their role is “to govern Football throughout the State and protect Football from abuse.” Clearly they feel that what ensued in Round 2 was abuse of the game. Certainly it brought about unwanted publicity.

Could that have been avoided had that fixture been moved?

Administering and governing sport sometimes requires hard decisions to be made, and maybe this was one of those times. Hindsight may well see a different approach in years to come, but hopefully lessons have been learned.

(The author declares that he played for the Western Knights many years ago)