Why critics of the Adelaide Football Club have missed the point in targeting fan engagement issues
There are many issues the Crows must address but their fan and public engagement, which is no worse than at any other AFL club, is among the least of their concerns, writes Graham Cornes.
The Advertiser’s open letter to the Adelaide Football Club and the opinions of the 167 fans (146 of which were publishable) who contributed to it, proved one thing: they need a history lesson!
Among the many considerations when the Adelaide Football Club was first formed in October 1990, there was one non-negotiable: the new club had to be a club for all South Australians. Of course we knew that not all South Australians would barrack for the new team.
For instance the Port Adelaide supporters who thought it should have been their team in the new AFL would never embrace the Crows but they were a bitter minority anyway.
Then there were the rusted-on fans of established VFL teams who flirted with the idea of changing allegiances. They were few in number but in the end remained loyal to Victorian clubs, even though they lived in South Australia.
Stream every match of the 2019 Toyota AFL Finals Series before the Grand Final live and on-demand on KAYO SPORTS. Get your 14-day free trial and start streaming instantly>
The South Australian theme was vital, particularly as the restrictions from the AFL were that we could only list players from the already ravaged SANFL, or out-of-contract South Australians returning from the VFL — players like Tony McGuinness, Bruce Lindner and Danny Hughes.
They did make one concession to the South Australian theme in that we could list two players from the VFL if they were over 30 and out of contract.
Footscray champion Doug Hawkins teased us for a while but he was never going to leave Victoria and finished his career with the doomed Fitzroy.
Nevertheless, we embraced the SA theme passionately. The guernseys were in our state colours and importantly they looked like a football jumper.
The nickname, “The Crows”, was chosen over “The Sharks” as an oblique reference to our sobriquet of “Crow-eaters”. Besides, crows are tough and clever. We were proudly South Australian and when we played we knew that the whole state was watching. The Adelaide Football Club was our state’s club.
When Malcolm Blight, one of our state’s greatest football players, returned home to coach the Crows to successive premierships state pride was at an all-time high.
Economic disasters like the collapse of the State Bank of South Australia became a faded memory and morale escalated. Our footy club became a much-loved state institution.
But slowly, with increasing professionalism, football changed.
Players were recruited from all over Australia. The footy clubs as we had known them slowly got bigger and bigger and eventually morphed into corporations.
Tribalism no longer fuelled football loyalties. Fans could no longer go back to the clubrooms after a game and mingle with their footy heroes.
Despite claims to the contrary, there are no AFL clubs who can claim that they escaped this corporate transition.
Hawthorn is no more a “family club” than Adelaide is.
Port Adelaide will brainwash its fans with 150 years of history next season but its AFL journey is shorter than Adelaide’s and its forays into China indicate it’s as much a corporation as the Crows are.
The only thing that will appease and unite a football club’s supporter base these days is a year of unexpected improvement like Brisbane’s or Carlton’s, or premiership success.
This has been a miserable year for the Crows. When measured against expectations, the team has failed.
Performances were disappointing and inconsistent. Selection policies were puzzling. Game day strategies failed.
A playing list that was assembled and expected to challenge for the flag over the past three seasons now looks aged and decidedly unbalanced.
Players that the club let walk have flourished at other clubs. The coaching staff was too static on match day.
All these are valid criticisms and should have been expressed by The Advertiser’s open letter to the Crows.
However, the other criticisms: “members feel disconnected; the club is not listening to the fans; requests and suggestions fall on deaf ears; lack of transparency; it’s a boys club; the club is fractured and split”, have no basis of fact and are the ramblings of some “supporters” who think they are bigger than the club.
In one respect Mark Ricciuto with his, albeit ill-timed comments, was correct.
The one thing that will undermine a football club’s morale is a group of supporters who think they are bigger than the club taking pot-shots from the cheap seats.
“If you don’t love us leave us”, is a brutal thing to say but it was just one sentiment taken out of context of a general discussion about the status of the football club.
Ricciuto’s critics conveniently overlook the fact that he was one of the first persons elected to the Crows’ board by the members, and while his position is now board appointed he still represents the members as effectively as the other two member-elected board members, Rod Jameson and Kym Ryder.
So much for members not having a say at board level.
No doubt Roo’s injudicious comments offended many Crows fans but surely, given his history of loyalty to the club, they can accept his apology.
The criticisms that the club doesn’t listen to its fans or doesn’t engage with the fans is simply incorrect.
The Adelaide Football Club has over 60,000 official members and the number of South Australians who barrack for the Crows could be anywhere between 600,000 and 800,000, depending on which survey you believe.
The club holds an annual information meeting at Adelaide Oval to which all members are invited. Any question can be asked of the chief executive and the club chairman.
Ironically there are rarely more than 150 people in attendance. Any genuine email that is sent to the club is answered.
Chief executive Andrew Fagan often calls or meets concerned members personally.
The one thing that will disprove the bleatings of a disaffected minority is a cursory glance at the Adelaide Crows Facebook account where every question is answered.
Comments like: “Thanks for the reply. Always appreciate your fan engagement”; or “Loving the clarity re the external review from the @Adelaide_FC media team”, belie the claim that the club doesn’t engage with its fans.
Another said “Thanks guys, I really appreciate this (the reply). Sorry I have been a pain but sometimes you need to do what you gotta do”.
The fans have demanded an external review of the club’s football department. While football intellects like Malcolm Blight and Paul Roos have disagreed with this approach, the club has acted.
It is an independent, external review. The review will precipitate change, which may appease the fans, although there are some that will never be satisfied.
Chairman Rob Chapman, whose only lapse in judgment in the past may have been blind loyalty to his colleagues and staff within the football club, stated quite unequivocally this week: “If the review reveals problems with people, we’ll fix it. If the review reveals problems with systems we’ll fix it.”
Unfortunately, the reality is that the club may have to go backwards before it goes forward. Won’t the haters have a field day with that.