AFL would be better off sticking to football

IS the AFL a professional sporting organisation or is it an activist group determined to engineer social change, asks Rita Panahi.

Adam Goodes and Tanya Hosch. Picture: Mark Brake

• Eddie to sit out Thursday Night footy
• Andrew Bolt: We must call out the real sexes
• Did the AFL get it right on Eddie and Brad Scott?

IS the AFL a professional sporting organisation or is it an activist group determined to engineer social change?

The AFL’s identity crisis deepened further on Wednesday when chief executive Gillon McLachlan breathlessly announced the appointment of the general manager of, wait for it, Inclusion and Social Policy.

It would be difficult to imagine a more mirth-inducing title for the professional social justice warriors of the AFL, but let’s try.

Who will they appoint next?

An executive director of Safe Spaces? A Non-Heteronormative Diversity and Intersectionality officer?

Or perhaps a commissioner to Combat Manspreading Micro-aggressions and Patriarchal Hate-Speech.

The announcement came two days after McLachlan called a press conference to lecture a compliant football media, one that is becoming increasingly out of touch with its audience, on the evils of jokes.

AFL's new head of diversity, Tanya Hosch with chief executive Gillon McLachlan. Picture: AAP

“The fact that the comments were made on radio a week ago, and were not called out, is an indictment on everyone working in football,” he thundered.

On Wednesday, at another press conference, we were regaled by details of the AFL’s virtue and moral superiority as indigenous rights campaigner Tanya Hosch was announced as the second woman to join the league’s executive ranks.

It was fitting that the image-conscious competition took advantage of this week’s hysterical furore — in which the game’s most powerful woman was presented as a subjugated victim and an oft-repeated joke was interpreted as a vicious gender-based attack akin to an act of violence — to show how progressive they are by appointing a woman as head of diversity.

It is the position that former Labor senator Nova Peris is said to have coveted.

According to the AFL, the role will involve Ms Hosch formulating and implementing strategies to promote inclusion and diversity.

The likes of McLachlan may be skilled at thrashing out advantageous broadcasting agreements but at what point did the head honchos at the AFL decide they were the ethical arbiters on the social ills plaguing the nation? What does the AFL think about nuclear power and renewable energy? What is the league’s official position on negative gearing?

Next, the politicians and ideologues who populate league headquarters will provide how-to-vote cards to we mortals who would be lost without their moral guidance.

Why are those within footy, both at the AFL and club level, so keen to alienate a significant portion of their supporter base by continually dabbling in divisive issues?

The AFL’s cynical use of the game to push Left-wing dogma not only disaffects many fans but it also leaves the game exposed to all sort of ugliness that has no place in football.

Earlier this year we saw the boofheads from the United Patriots Front unfurl a large “Go Pies! Stop the Mosques” banner at the MCG.

It’s hardly surprising others now see the competition as a means of pushing their own political agendas.

‘Last year we saw the league accept the most absurd interpretation of the ill-feeling towards Adam Goodes and falsely condemn swathes of its own supporter base as racists.’

IS there any danger that those charged with running the game could focus on the considerable task at hand and leave the social change advocacy to the many campaigners committed to such causes? Our great game should not be used to push any ideology that is unconnected to football, is divisive or at odds with reality.

The AFL is sometimes too eager to adopt a fringe view and then declare that all those who disagree are “ignorant”; a favourite tactic of the Left or those who prefer feelings over facts.

Last year we saw the league accept the most absurd interpretation of the ill-feeling towards Adam Goodes and falsely condemn swathes of its own supporter base as racists.

One look at the hot mess that is the AFL’s illicit drug code shows not just how pig-headed the league can be but also how disingenuous it is in adopting a policy that is designed to protect the brand while trumpeting that player welfare is the primary concern.

All of that would be hard to justify even if the league was kicking goals on all fronts, but the truth is that while the AFL has been busy playing politics, it has overseen a period characterised by scandal and mismanagement.

It has floundered in several key areas and, despite broadcasting riches, too many clubs are not financially viable and unable to survive without handouts.

We’ve seen the past three years of the competition overshadowed by a drugs controversy that resulted in 34 former and current players being banned for 12 months.

The AFL ultimately shares responsibility for the failures that led to the systematic doping of dozens of its players.

Every club has been hurt by the so-called supplements saga, which has caused enormous damage to the game’s reputation and will continue to have an impact as doped players explore their legal options.

The AFL’s enthusiasm for embracing every daft socially “progressive” policy or principle has distracted it from its core business: football.

Luckily for those charged with running the game, Aussie rules is such an integral part of our lives that no matter how badly the code’s administration insults fans or mismanages the game, we will continue to watch and support our teams. But football fans are increasingly weary of sociopolitical issues intruding on the game they love.

Australians have finely tuned bulldust detectors; the AFL would be well advised to quit the hypocrisy and grandstanding that continue to damage its standing in the community.

RITA PANAHI IS A HERALD SUN COLUMNIST

[e-mail]

@ritapanahi