I got this correspondence in my email today – last year we got a family membership to the Colliwobbles Football Club and enjoy going to most matches. I always email the words of our coach Mick Malthouse explaining the game on Saturday in hindsight on Mondays onto my son and sometimes if they are sufficiently cliched, to my daughter. They are always words of great wisdom. Mick is really a performance artist with coaching a football side as his theme. In them he says things like “you’ve got to hand it to the boys”. “They fought it out to the end 1”.
Anyway, some of you may be vaguely aware that Mick Malthouse had an altercation with a player on the other side last Saturday. I haven’t read up on all the details, but someone called him a Poofter – and he called them a rapist. Which seems like a reasonable exchange. Anyway, people objected to this and it has blown up. Some Troppodillians will probably know more about this than me. But I thought all Troppodillians would want to read Mick’s words this Monday showing just how he navigated the ethical issues that the situation produced.
Following my apology for inappropriate comments I made to Stephen Milne, I would like to take this opportunity to inform you of the reasoning behind the initial position I took in the post-match press conference on Friday night.
When asked if I was directing comments at St Kilda players or my own players, I chose the latter option basically under the old code of what happens on the field stays on the field.
I largely took this decision based on my belief that, if I had said I was directing comments at a St Kilda player(s), this would lead to follow up questions such as “who were you talking to?”, “what did you say?”, “were you responding to provocation?”, etc etc. This would in turn create unnecessary angst and controversy for both clubs, and individuals from both clubs.
However, having seen that St Kilda and their players were obviously aggrieved the next day, and with St Kilda wanting to take the matter further, and having reflected on my involvement in the verbal exchange, I felt it was necessary for me to acknowledge the inappropriate nature of my comments, and to offer the subsequent apology.
I strenuously object to being branded a liar. I acknowledge my original position has caused me much embarrassment and my family great distress, but the reason I reacted to the question the way I did was because at that moment, I felt it was the best outcome not to drag the two clubs and a number of individuals into an obvious controversy.
I’ve been involved in the game for over four decades and have always had the best interests of the game at heart, and will continue to do so.
I hope this explanation, in conjunction with my record and reputation, gives you, the Collingwood supporter, a greater understanding of this situation.
- as opposed, for instance to sitting down and having a sandwich