The Clarke Experiment, Private Schools and Perceptions.

[mjp]

I think we've all being watching the situation over the past couple of seasons with Clarke with a LOT of interest. As a draft story he had a very different background to so many other players and in so many ways his selection (pick 21) really was a show of faith in 'the little guys'.

There has been a lot of talk in recent years that the AFL has become the bastion of players who grow up in South East Melbourne (and attend an APS school), the Adelaide Hills (and attend a private school) and the eastern suburbs of Perth (and attend a private school). There are a few hotbeds outside of that - Geelong (private school of course), Ballarat (ditto) and the Wodonga region (ditto). Outside of that...good luck.

There are lots of questions why and the simple answer given by the clubs is simple - maturity. The real reason isn't maturity - but more an understanding that being able to follow simple rules and be in a certain place, dressed in a certain way - and ON TIME - is absolutely ingrained into the kids with these backgrounds. Add in the fact that they are generally well spoken (and conversational) and well versed in managing the day-to-day responsibilities of (what is a pretty protected/privileged life) is another thing.

There is no doubt that it is - and I'll use WA examples due to familiarity - that the 'average' kid from the eastern suburbs is a lot more 'ready' than the 'average' kid from the south-east corridor. The kid from the south-east is probably working a part-time job, racing around to training, has mates from footy, school, work...and there will be a lot of intermingling. They will have 'done' things and 'tried' things due to this range of experience - and will have a big picture view of the world...they will have their own ideas about whether some things are important or otherwise - and will have been juggling priorities for a LOOOOOONG time. The kid from the eastern suburbs wont be working - mum and dad (mostly mum) will be transporting them around, the kids they play with they no doubt see at school...and they go to parties with that same crew. I mean sure, maybe the kids from Scotch will run into the kids from Christ Church at the same parties but you get what I'm saying.

There is NO DOUBT the kids who don't 'live' the private school pathway have a lot harder time getting on-board with everything going on at an AFL club. When I look back at the kids I have coached - and more than 120 have been drafted so I know a bit about this - the ones who have REALLY made it fit the private school/incredibly close + supportive family model. Others - some of whom had talent by the wazoo - just couldn't get it together...there are (of course) exceptions from both categories (I mean, of course!) but if you consider that most males don't really 'mature' until age 22-23 (and indigenous males are so often a couple of years behind that) then the difficulty in 'making it' for someone from Clarke's background is incredibly HIGH.

I have my own thoughts about the low number of First Nations draft candidates being drafted in recent years and the reasons why - but I am certain that the difficulty of getting them 'up to speed' in terms of the way they need to conduct/present themselves from day-to-day in a foreign environment with no peer support...it's actually not hard to figure out the reasons why.

Does any of this mean the club is wrong to delist Clarke? Probably not. But at the same time I will say if they were going to draft him then what EXACTLY did they expect? And even if they told him clearly what was expected, did they really think he was going to be able to step into line within two seasons?

I'm not concerned about individual cases like Clarke. But I am concerned about the overall trend. Once upon a time clubs had access to kids from 15 years old (WAFL and SANFL clubs still do I guess) so as they come through they build relationships with senior players and develop familiarity with coaches and administrators. This - like it or not - helps TEACH them what is needed/required to succeed in a SENIOR footy environment (which is what they are going to need to do). I worry that so many kids are being lost because they have been taken away from their clubs (and prospective role models)...the private school kids don't need them (they have rules, structure and family)...so many others do.

[Rocco Jones]

Outstanding post mjp. Very insightful.

[Pleather Sole]

Agreed. Charlie deserved more time to prove himself. Key position players like Buss get longer to get up to scratch and I'm glad, 2 year contract extension and hasn't even made a debut, same draft year. Yes, obviously they're different cases but thats the point.
Bedendo had setbacks and had 4 years with us.
If we pride ourselves on being a club that gets behind and invests in kids like Charlie, who historically have been our main demographic then we have to be willing to follow through.

Interesting timing that this decision and announcement is post the departure of Jamie Maddocks. He was a staunch supporter of Charlie.

[mjp]

Agreed. Charlie deserved more time to prove himself.

I neither agree nor disagree with your comments about Clarke - and I don't want to make this about 'him'...I guess I was just using the example of drafting Clarke - which 100% went against the grain with regards our other draftees (and Busslinger is a good example - not from the Eastern Suburbs to be fair but inner city, middle class + family, private school) and how hard it is for kids who don't 'fit the profile' to not only get drafted, but to actually make it.

[bulldogtragic]

I wonder what role being kicked out of the St Kilda NGA had with Clarke/clubs thinking and then his apparent maturing after that? I wonder if the club thought that was the penny falling for him?

[GVGjr]

Regarding the lower numbers of indigenous players being drafted I wonder if the cut backs to the footy department since the Covid years has played a part in accelerating the slide of players being drafted? Also the cut back to the list sizes has probably played a part as well.
We can all understand there is a real requirement to not only have a development plan in place when you draft FN players but also plenty of off field support as well and that is probably one area that some of the clubs felt they had to cut back on.
Has it actually gotten back to previous levels? Probably not.

Clubs have probably decided to go for what the stats might say are the safer selection options and we can understand why.

Regarding Clarke, and I know he is just one of the examples in the thread, I do feel that an extra season was deserved given his first season was wrecked because of frequent injury niggles. Over the preseason for this year he was in vastly better condition and even performed well in some of the time trials. It's a tough business for those who clubs let go early on.

[Pleather Sole]

I think I understand what you're saying about not making it about Charlie, but the title of the thread is "The Clarke experiment, etc"
And he's referred to in half of the paragraphs so I think its reasonable to assume he'll be brought up in it. And it happened today.

Edited because the emoji translated to weird text.

[mjp]

I think I understand what you're saying about not making it about Charlie, but the title of the thread is "The Clarke experiment, etc"
And he's referred to in half of the paragraphs so I think its reasonable to assume he'll be brought up in it. And it happened today. ����

Yeah - totally get that...just didn't want to turn this into a "Clarke should/shouldn't still be on the list" type argument. His circumstances just echo some of the issues I have with the draft at the moment...

I think we should be doubling down on academies for non-Private school kids, I think the clubs should be funding them/running them under AFL supervision (with consistent programs) and I think too many are being excluded...

Full time coaches at Talent league clubs is a cool story but when half the kids in those programs are private school kids anyway the point is being missed (and not by a little bit)...

[jeemak]

Fantastic, though provoking post.

Clubs will take the most expedient and lowest risk pathway to developing talent. The idea of them focusing on academies for kids not in private schools etc. is a good one, but not sure the AFL (which is full of private school kids) really believes things aren't right as they are. Well, sufficiently to throw money to the clubs to help them fund programs like that.

[mjp]

Well, sufficiently to throw money to the clubs to help them fund programs like that.

If the programs could be based at the AFL clubs, most of the facilities are ALREADY there...

It's not a massive cash problem. Providing access to gyms and rehab facilities, indoor training facilities (these guys aren't game planning but do need individual skill dev) and class room facilities isn't going to be a multi-billion $ excise.

And if you think the boys need this support, have you guys seen a thing called the AFLW???

[hujsh]

Does any of this mean the club is wrong to delist Clarke? Probably not. But at the same time I will say if they were going to draft him then what EXACTLY did they expect? And even if they told him clearly what was expected, did they really think he was going to be able to step into line within two seasons?.

I'm just seeing this news now (you are basically breaking it to me) and the bolded bit is kind of how I feel. Obliviously the club knows more than I but what was the plan with using a pick in the 20as on someone like Clarke who was already a long way back last year, just on reports of fitness even before all the things you mentioned, if you didn't plan to give him at least 3 years?

[mjp]

I'm just seeing this news now (you are basically breaking it to me) and the bolded bit is kind of how I feel. Obliviously the club knows more than I but what was the plan with using a pick in the 20as on someone like Clarke who was already a long way back last year, just on reports of fitness even before all the things you mentioned, if you didn't plan to give him at least 3 years?

I always laugh at the 'hard arse' attitudes we see in so many talent based environments. "If they can't do this, they are out. If they can't do that, they are out...".

Whilst ultimately those things are true, in a lot of cases when you calmly explain to someone what the requirements are, they probably agree it's achievable...but they don't actually KNOW. 'Cos they don't have the experience in that area to know whether it is actually something they CAN achieve (right now)...

Once they have had a go - sure, then they might realise - "Oh, right...I really needed to do some more preparation for that..."...but because they don't have experience, well, they're finding out on the fly.

Like I said, I'm not trying to defend Clarke (I don't know him or really have an opinion - I've watched him play less than 5-times) but rather point out he was coming from a long way back and a lot of the criticism I see about his attitude/work-ethic etc...well, those things are learned behaviours and he was coming from a long way back.

Even the whole thing with the Saints academy - which is my issue with things like that - he's in the academy because he's been identified as talented...but then gets kicked out...I mean, you have to have a level of what you accept (of course) but at the same time, how is kicking out someone from the exact environment you are trying to nurture out of the program going to help??

[Go_Dogs]

Great post Mike.

I have my own bias because I’m from one of those private schools in Adelaide (oh dear, I’ve outed myself). While I’m sure there are nuances state to state, what you say rings true.

The part I don’t quite understand is:

For kids who don’t go through the private school pathway, are the talent programs not sufficient in making sure players have basic skills of knowing how to present on time in a reasonable state on a daily (or every other day) basis?

Many of the kids may have work / part time jobs - this is in many ways a lot harder to manage than a private school - why aren’t these things being highly regarded or seen as a sign of maturity? In many ways a football program is like a school program (I imagine) and therefore, it’s not so much needing maturity (I actually think you learn maturity once you’re out in the real world without those levels of structure - that’s when the rubber hits the road) but about being able to adhere to structure and time management. Dunno. Maybe I’m wrong.

I suppose my next question is, what complementary skill building can talent programs provide to help kids who don’t come from the cookie cutter pathway, and how do they get engagement in those programs so they’re actually moving the needle?

The academies is a great concept to help here if executed well, but it seems like more of the “well rounded young man” stuff that’s what’s missing and that’s going to be hard to replicate outside of a school environment.

[Rocco Jones]

I always laugh at the 'hard arse' attitudes we see in so many talent based environments. "If they can't do this, they are out. If they can't do that, they are out...".

Whilst ultimately those things are true, in a lot of cases when you calmly explain to someone what the requirements are, they probably agree it's achievable...but they don't actually KNOW. 'Cos they don't have the experience in that area to know whether it is actually something they CAN achieve (right now)...

Once they have had a go - sure, then they might realise - "Oh, right...I really needed to do some more preparation for that..."...but because they don't have experience, well, they're finding out on the fly.

Like I said, I'm not trying to defend Clarke (I don't know him or really have an opinion - I've watched him play less than 5-times) but rather point out he was coming from a long way back and a lot of the criticism I see about his attitude/work-ethic etc...well, those things are learned behaviours and he was coming from a long way back.

Even the whole thing with the Saints academy - which is my issue with things like that - he's in the academy because he's been identified as talented...but then gets kicked out...I mean, you have to have a level of what you accept (of course) but at the same time, how is kicking out someone from the exact environment you are trying to nurture out of the program going to help??

I work in education. Your think really reminds me of positive and effective ways to teach behaviour. Taking anyway the frustration and identifying what they need to learn. Behaviour is like any other learning area. The not knowing the 'how' is a great point.

[Grantysghost]

Don't we have a few guys from outside the bourgeoise ?

Gags. Freijah. Marra, Treloar without even looking.