JASON MIFSUD
Friday 2 March 2012
RECENT assertions that Indigenous players lack resilience and the skills to withstand the rigours and demands of AFL football are somewhat bewildering and factually incorrect.
The Indigenous community does not lack resilience. As a community we have been jumping hurdles for the past 210 years, some obvious and some not. There is compelling evidence to support and demonstrate an ability to adapt and also to adopt a winning mindset -- against the odds.
For the record, the statistics on longevity of primary listed players in the AFL over the last five years are:
- Average of 7 Indigenous players delisted per year;
- Delisted Indigenous players averaged 99 games and 7 seasons compared with an overall average of 110 games and 7 seasons for all players -- hardly a significant difference when one considers the circumstances Indigenous players must overcome in relation to where they have been recruited from and the isolation experienced when away from family and community;
- More compelling is the fact that of the 36 Indigenous players delisted in the past 5 years, 15 have played 100+ games and of those, eight have played 200+ games;
- If we include rookies, Indigenous players averaged a playing career longer than that of the average player.
The myth that Indigenous players lack resilience is predicated on five players who -- for very different reasons and circumstances -- left the system last year, as well as some recently highly publicised personal challenges some players have faced this year. To conduct this debate and to make assumptions based on race is extremely damaging, dangerous and unhealthy to everyone.
Why don’t we scrutinise the non-Indigenous players who suffer mental health and other social issues on the basis of race? The "walkabout" syndrome is a terrible legacy of past generations that has been dealt with; however it seems the legacy is still alive and well.
Make no mistake: if Indigenous players are failing, equally our clubs are failing. Responsibility for overall performance is a shared onus. Clubs are swift to claim the prize for outstanding performances or efforts from all players.
While there are some notable exceptions, collectively, AFL clubs have some way to go to ensure their environments are culturally inviting, safe and secure for Indigenous players. AFL clubs employ approximately 1300 employees (outside of the players) yet:
- Only five of these are Indigenous;
- Only one Indigenous person is on a club executive;
- No Indigenous people are on club boards;
- Out of the 150 coaches, only two are Indigenous.
These facts demonstrate a gap in leadership and strategy when searching for a solution.
There is no doubt Indigenous people need to take some responsibility for the imbalanced numbers. However it is also an outcome or reflection of opportunity and their confidence, trust and belief in the system.
So if we agree that the facts are correct, we need to look more holistically at what role do the clubs play in all of this with some fundamental questions including:
- How effectively do clubs identify, select, transition, develop and retain Indigenous players and who is measuring this?
- What strategies are in place in clubs to improve cultural knowledge and understanding, without placing an additional burden on their players?
- What measures of accountability are clubs subjected to when they loose an Indigenous player?
- How do clubs intend to close the gap on recruiting the right skill set, and knowledge base within their football departments, and broader business?
As an industry, including the AFL, we have some work to do.
There has been some progress. The AFL itself across Australia employs more than 70 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and there are Indigenous employment programs that provide cultural and professional development for Indigenous and non-Indigenous people.
It has also been suggested recently by James Hird and Paul Roos that Indigenous players will be phased out of the game because they lack endurance.
A disturbing view of the situation from two highly respected and regarded leaders of the competition. Their comments are destabilising and hurtful to Indigenous players past and present as well as those aspiring to compete in the demanding AFL environment. No special favours are required, no easy pathways -- merely a balanced consideration and equally fair assessment and opportunity to succeed. That's all -- nothing more nothing less. Comments like these are somewhat symptomatic of the recent apathy associated with Indigenous players.
Adam Goodes (who Roos coached for eight years) is arguably the best speed/power/endurance athlete we have seen in the past 10 years and on the evidence to date, Lance Franklin seems likely to outstrip his title. Bradley Hill broke the beep test record at last year's draft camp (16.1 to break the old Jarryd McVeigh record of 15.6) and Andrew Walker has been the best endurance athlete at Carlton over the past six years or so.
Players such as Andy McLeod, Nicky Winmar, Pete Matera (the list goes on) were all great speed/endurance-based players with exceptional footy resumes.
Clearly the numbers do not support Hird's and Roos' assertions.
The logical application of their statement is that we should manage out Cyril Rioli, Liam Jarrah and Chris Yarran because they can't run 15 beep tests and revert back to the dark -- and not so secretive -- days of race-based draft selections.
Of course, this is absurd.
Neither Hird nor Roos would argue for the phasing out of Cyril Rioli, however the effect of their statements -- consciously or unconsciously stereotyping on the basis of race -- has just such an implication.
We know Indigenous players add an incredible amount of excitement, instinct, creativity and skill to our game; equally we should not for a moment underestimate the resilience, dedication and discipline these guys possess. Sometimes these innate talents are lost in the overall evaluation.
As an industry we have made significant steps in the past 15 years. It would be easy, and wrong to focus on the obstacles, and not the opportunities. A subtle shift in mindset is all that is required to continue on the great work done recently, or similarly to completely dismantle or destroy all of that great work and effort experienced over a very long history. One degree of separation -- that’s all -- however the ramifications are completely and utterly at either end of the scale.
Currently we have 2.7% of the population making up 10% of AFL lists -- or 80 players. As a comparison, Tasmania, the same size population, makes up 4% or 30 players.
In order to grow this we all need to keep building the capacity of Indigenous players and the clubs.
We all need to raise the measures of success and continue to recognise the contribution of Indigenous people in senior leadership positions -- on and off the field.
And we all need to focus on the solutions and deal with the facts and realities, not myths, assumptions and stereotypes.
We have a responsibility to ensure that the progress is maintained and accelerated and we handover to future generations a significantly better set of circumstances than we have inherited.
Now that would be progress.
Jason Mifsud is the AFL's National Community Engagement Manager.
This article, which appeared in Fairfax Media today, is reprinted here with his permission.
Last Modified on 06/03/2012 08:32