Every action has a consequence.
This is a phrase frequently used in business, but it applies to all aspects of life. It basically means that for every decision we make it will result in an outcome, whether positive or negative, and that these outcomes can have a knock-on effect down the line. The impact of those decisions may not be clear immediately, but their impact will become apparent later.
In scientific terms it is often referred to as Newton’s Third Law, and is phrased slightly differently, “for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.” The basic principle of this is that for every action (or force) there is an equal and opposite reaction. So if object A exerts a force on object B, then object B exerts an equal and opposite force back on object A.
This philosophical and scientific phrase is in fact very relevant in sport today.
In simple terms when a team or an association appoints a coach there will be consequences, positive or negative. How that coach interacts with his players, the players he signs, his selections, etcetera will all have consequences. Consequences that will affect the club, the team, the players, and the fans. If the decisions are perceived as being negative the push back will be there, and should be expected.
In the past 30 years the consequence of government’s realising that by being seen to invest in sport they can win votes at the ballot box has had a huge impact on the sports themselves. Election promises are made in relation to investments that will be made if they are elected. Often that party is not elected, and so the promise of investment falls by the wayside. Some promises are kept, others are revisited, and then dismissed as there is now no budget.
Governments have however foolishly thrown money at sports without ever putting in place checks and balances to ensure that the money is being spent where it was intended.
The growth of staff numbers at numerous sporting administratve bodies in the past 30 years has been truly astounding. Many have tripled their staff levels, nearly all have in fact become bigger since the year 2000. Whether they are better run is something open for debate in each sport. However, this growth in the administration has of course meant that the operating costs have risen considerably.
Many sports are top heavy with a CEO and then senior management positions created at the next level. Positions that eat up vast amounts of money, meaning that there is very little left for those at the coalface doing the real day-to-day work. So much so that thet sports regularly go for a cheap option of staff with no experience fresh out of school of university, and wonder why things don’t always run smoothly.
The action of growing these organisations staffing levels has to have an impact, so too has the restructuring of competitions. Money has to be found to fund both.
If we look at the sport of Hockey as an example, in 2019 the International Hockey Federation’s (FIH) FIH Pro League commenced.
In 2017 fans of the sport were advised that this six-month global league had “been four years in the making and follows an excessive consultation and evaluation process.”
The then CEO Jason McCracken famously said that, “We strongly believe that this new competition will fuel the growth of our sport for many years to come, significantly increasing revenues for hockey. As a result it will make hockey a career choice for athletes who will regularly be given the opportunity to perform in big, bold, packed and loud venues both in their homeland and overseas. It will also allow fans to engage with more world-class hockey more often, whether on TV or live at their national venue.”
The truth has been very different. The consequence of the decision to push on with this competition without an airline partner to fly the teams around the world has had a huge impact, as the costs for the participating nations have been huge. Many believing that they simply cannot afford to be a part of it. Some nations have even cut funding to their development programs to prop up their participation. That cannot be good and certainly will not help grow the game. So it has certainly failed to generate the income that was forecast.
As for players making a career choice and becoming full time players, it would appear that is further away for many than it was before the Pro League started. The six-month league now lasts eight months, and the sporadic playing of matches has made it hard to follow, and it has virtually disappeared from sight in terms of television coverage. Which of course has impacted the sponsorship of the competition and the teams participating.
The same year that Australia entered the FIH Pro League a decision was made to overhaul the Australian Hockey League and bin close to 100 years of history. Hockey One was launched in 2021. It was to all intents and purposes a rehash of the FIH Pro League but on a smaller scale. (Whose Idea Was This?)
The promises were remarkably similar when you revisit the documents that were distributed. The Australian Hockey public were going to see, “activation of venues to create fun and connection to a community. They were going to build “entertainment with fans off the back of ‘celebratory moments’ and breaks of play.”
Like the FIH’s Pro League players were told that Hockey One would be “the catalyst for hockey in Australia becoming a professional sport where players receive payments to play in the competition and the league can attract marquee players from overseas.” (Hockey, One Step In the Right Direction)
Sadly, in some states some players are still being asked to put their hand in their own pocket despite the league now being four seasons old. As for the marquee players, some have had a greater impact than others. For example retired Dutch captain Eva de Goede showed her true class as part of the Perth Thundersticks unbeaten run to the Championship in 2024. However, what she also did was highlight how far behind the Australian hockey is to the Netherlands.
It is alleged that the cost for Australia being the FIH Pro League is $1.5million a year, per team. The cost of running a Hockey One side it has been claimed is around $3-400, 000 a year; on top of the $575,000 to be a part of the league in the first four years.
Not surprisingly to help underpin the national team, although it has been couched in other terms, the fees for your weekend players has risen. In some states another rise has occurred to support the Hockey One side, as the state bodies own these “Franchises.” Which as many have asked would tend to imply they are nothing close to being franchise teams.
Rises in fees for hockey players in other countries with teams in the Pro League have also occurred in the past two years. In fact fees across many junior sports have risen dramatically – as we have covered on many occasions – and now many parents simply cannot afford for their children to play organised sport at the weekends, as with a rising cost of living something has to give.
Many sports in Australia are now seeing the participation numbers amongst juniors on the decline. Cost would be one of the main reasons. You know that something is going wrong when you now have Masters players asking if they can pay their fees for the season in instalments, and this is happening. Which of course puts extra pressure on the clubs for whom they play.
These cost increases are in simple terms the consequence of decisions being made by those at the top. Do they have a whole of game vision, or is their focus myopic, and only focussed on the high performance side of the game and the national teams?
Another example of a decision that has been made within hockey that has resulted in Not the Footy Show being contacted in the past week by people from three different countries, has been the decision to make it compulsory for all defenders to wear a face-mask when defending a penalty corner. The FIH decided to make this mandatory in all of its tournaments, and then independently many National Associations have followed their lead.
To many this is a sensible and responsible decision. Others have argued that it would have been easier to reduce the danger by simply changing the rule to say that whether a hit or a drag flick the ball must hit the back board to be a goal from a penalty corner. That is a debate for another day.
Clearly there was no forewarning that this rule change was going to come about in these countries, as in all three countries the retailers and the manufacturers have been taken by surprise, and they do not have the stock to meet the demand. One would have thought that those making the decision would have given the manufacturers the heads up that this rule was going to be put in place on a certain date, so that they could meet the increase in demand. It would appear that this did not happen.
The same did not happen when many cricket competitions made it compulsory for junior batsmen and women to wear helmets. There was a scramble for the equipment that caught both the manufacturers and suppliers by surprise.
With four defenders joining the goalkeeper to defend a penalty corner, each team every weekend is going to require a minimum of four face-masks. Of course with rolling substitutions it means that more than four players will end up defending a penalty corner in a match. Is the onus on each of those players who defend a penalty corner to purchase their own face-mask? Could they pass on skin infections by sharing face-masks? Just asking this as some are bound to say that this is unhygienic with sweat.
As one club that contacted us said, if they have to supply face-masks for every team, and they have over 50 teams playing each weekend, the cost to the club is a very big one. They may be faced with having to sell to individual players, but stated that they would prefer not to, as it is yet another cost being passed onto the players.
One concern that was sent to us was that now there is the distinct possibility that we may see some brave defender rushing out at a penalty corner wearing a substandard mask, because the regulation one’s are not available. They could end up suffering even worse damage if they get hit. This individual also said that they worried that some people were likely to cash in on this short term problem, making sub standard masks to meet the demand, and then closing up the business before any claims are made against them.
This situation once again highlights the disconnect that is happening in sport. Many at the top simply do not consider the ramifications of the decisions that they are making, and the impact that they will have on the majority. Such a decision as this will have little or no impact on an international player, as a supplier will either given them a mask by way of sponsorship, or the national body will supply one.
With the National Associations simply jumping in line with the FIH do they realise the impact it has on individual players, the clubs or schools that the players play for? How many actually had a conversation with the suppliers or manufacturers before announcing this rule?
Newton’s third law of motion was explained as “object A exerts a force on object B, then object B exerts an equal and opposite force back on object A.” If we make Object A the administrators or rule makers, and object B the clubs and players, is it any surprise that there is tension between the two parties? There has to be more collaboration, more consultation, and most of all more understanding as to the pressures clubs and those playing the game are being put under as costs to play keep rising.
The Government, or the civil servants running the funding in the Sport and Recreation departments have to change the way money is allocated in terms of junior development, and find a way to reduce these costs so that families can afford for their children to play. When one throws in equipment costs and teh fact that many schools and clubs no longer have communal kit as they did in the past, the cost for a child to play many sports is very high. It is becoming urgent that this issue, is addressed as the impact will be far reaching in ten years time in terms of Australia’s performances at international level, but more importantly the health and well-being of the nation will be severely affected.
The administrative fat in many sports needs to be trimmed, for the benefit of those starting out in various sports. Why are so many staff required for sports which are only played for six months of the year? How many positions become virtually redundant once the season finishes?
Every action has a consequence, means that every decision or action we take can lead to a certain outcome, be it big or small, good or bad, visible or invisible.
In today’s fast-paced world where leadership is lacking in many areas of life, many people are left to their own devices, and told to make a decision. So, they take matters at face value and rush into decisions without giving them the thought that they require.This is not the responsible way of going about doing things when you are acting on behalf of numerous stakeholders. There is an obligation to study matters carefully, and from every angle, to weigh up the pros and cons before making a decision that could impact hundreds or thousands of individuals.
Why are you doing this? What is the outcome you are looking for? How can you implement it? When will it take effect? Where will the problems be? How can you alleviate certain issues?
Just as any player who has played sport will be able to tell you, after they have made a bad decision in a game that has cost them or their team, every action has a consequence. Their decision would have been made in the fraction of a second. Those running the various sports are blessed with more time. So it is important that they use that time, and make the decision that has the best outcomes for the majority. After all sport is for everyone, not just those at the top.
Interestingly when we asked why people had contacted Not the Footy Show the universal response we were given was that it was because their administrators “do not listen.” Yet these are the people who are employed to answer the needs of the clubs and those who play. It is so important to remember that for every action there is a consequence…
