'When I was told I was sacked, I broke down for 15 minutes'

My first and last two cents on the matter:

Look, Aker is a wanker. We all knew that the moment he ran onto the field as a ratbag kid, and we certainly knew that when he came over to us from the Lions. Yes, he brought this on himself because he can't keep his mouth shut -- we also knew this, yet we said go ahead and do your media work because we can't pay you your market rate anymore. And you know what? That was a good thing -- we don't have to be so ridiculously precious about this stuff.

My point is, how has any of this blindsided the club? Were we that naive to think that Aker the media personality, who's entire raison d'etre is to be an opinionated dickhead, wasn't going to say some things that may be a bit.. risque? If we didn't want innocent opinions (and I mean innocent, more on this in a second) to air, then the last person we would want on a dual media/playing contract is Aker.

It just seems to me that the club hadn't really thought through the implications of the contract offer to Aker from the end of last year, and hadn't really done a thorough risk/mitigation audit on its impact, and are now reaping the consequences of this shortsightedness.

I'm not absolving Aker of his part in this mess, but what was he reasonably expected to do? Take a media job but be bland and unopinionated? Take a 50% pay cut with the blessing to do media, but be expected to churn out the same output on the field yet shut up off it? He had two jobs, and as far as I could see, he was doing them both well (enough) in their own sphere -- it seems that the cross-over was where the Dogs had a problem, but they should have thought about it BEFORE they offered the opportunity to him. It was a very badly designed experiment (and let's be frank, if the match committee didn't think he would be able to contribute this year they would have made him retire -- they wanted him, but just on the cheap), and it has blown up in the administration's faces.

My final point will be about the rest of the team: there have been numerous reports about how some of his teammates have been offended about this that or the other. Well, all I can say is, seriously, harden the f**k up, boys -- everything he has said about the club has been, relatively speaking, pretty innocent, if tactless (which, again, can't be a surprise). Other clubs can successfully integrate rapists, murderer's mates, wife bashers et al and still be challenging for a flag, but we get our panties in a knot because a guy is a loud mouth. Surely the players should know by now that Aker's the kind of guy you take with a generous pinch of salt, unless of course their personal and collective insecurity is too great to handle being criticised by a triple premiership player and brownlow medallist. And if the retort to that is that being a rapist etc. is okay as long as you fit into the club rules and culture, then there is far more wrong with our game and our so-called 'club cultures' than I would care to go into.

If we all want groupthink, we will go down together. Some of the best teams in history had people who openly hated each other, but they were professionals and got on with the job. The perceived softness in the group has been regularly linked in the past to a need to be liked and safety in numbers (thus the lack of individual initiative from anyone when close games are on the line), and rightly or wrongly, this is just another example of an inability to display maturity or handle individuality constructively (or even just ignore it) -- if Johnno, Gia, Murph, Coons etc. can't collectively or individually temper Aker, what chance at tempering a rampant Geelong or Hawthorn or St. Kilda (all hard nuts) come September? Well, from past experiences, zero, actually.

Aker made his bed and has to lie in it, but the club bought him the materials and tools to do it, and made themselves and the playing group look just a bit too precious in the process. For those who have said that Brisbane did the same thing, I would observe that the Lions have not experienced any type of success since that time, and while pinning it all on the manner of Akers' dismissal is too long a bow to draw, it was certainly a symptom of the collective insecurity and malaise permeating the club then that they still haven't recovered from.

One can only hope that this isn't just a way of deflecting on our underachieving year (the last 6 weeks notwithstanding), or for underperforming players to blame an external factor as a distraction rather than looking at themselves in the mirror. And of course I still hope we win the flag, but if the reports of players' thoughts on this matter are any indication of our mental state as a group, then I despair.

But that's just my two cents, and I'm sure I'm in the minority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghost Dog

Insulting someone is an opinion of sorts albiet the worst variety. If that's all you can manage to contribute, then that's fine. I'm sure Aker won't lost any sleep either.

---

Thanks for your words of wisdom :rolleyes:

Lantern,

What a fantastic post. I agree wholeheartedly. Every single point you've rasied is right on the money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TAMA

Lantern,

What a fantastic post. I agree wholeheartedly. Every single point you've rasied is right on the money.

---

Seconded.

Best post I've read on WOOF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lantern

Aker made his bed and has to lie in it, but the club bought him the materials and tools to do it, and made themselves and the playing group look just a bit too precious in the process. For those who have said that Brisbane did the same thing, I would observe that the Lions have not experienced any type of success since that time, and while pinning it all on the manner of Akers' dismissal is too long a bow to draw, it was certainly a symptom of the collective insecurity and malaise permeating the club then that they still haven't recovered from.

---

Even though I disagree with some of the points you raised, it was a great read Lantern.

I guess from your perspective the overwhelming positive to come out of this decision (something that TBB has already alluded to on other threads) is that the playing group, in particular the leadership group, have absolutely nowhere to hide now. They will be scrutinised by the wider football public like they haven't been before. It is an area that our players have failed (Aker included) to capture but they now have a gilt-edged chance to change the course of recent history.

Good points, but the difference between those other colourful characters and Aker is that he in a way ratted out on his mates.

It's guess it's ok to be the worst kind of human being, as long as you don't get at odds with your mates.



I agree with the fact that we knew he what aker was like, and that we should of known what we were getting into last year when we renewed his contract. We had a good opportunity to part ways at the end of the season, and this year was always going to be problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sedat

Even though I disagree with some of the points you raised, it was a great read Lantern.

I guess from your perspective the overwhelming positive to come out of this decision (something that TBB has already alluded to on other threads) is that the playing group, in particular the leadership group, have absolutely nowhere to hide now. They will be scrutinised by the wider football public like they haven't been before. It is an area that our players have failed (Aker included) to capture but they now have a gilt-edged chance to change the course of recent history.

---

I understand where people are coming from when they say this, but how many 'events' do we need to 'galvanise' a group? We've been waiting for that event for a while now -- maybe the close loss to the Saints last year, maybe the close loss to the Saints this year, maybe the close loss to Geelong a couple of years ago, maybe Barry Hall, maybe Barry Hall's brouhaha with North, maybe Boydy's injury, maybe Johnno's injury, maybe Aker getting sent back to Willi, maybe that bad umpire's call, maybe Gia's mistake, maybe that horrible Caroline Wilson article, maybe this maybe that.

We have been clutching at straws for a while now -- in fact, from an objective standpoint, and in hindsight, these haven't been galvanising events at all, but actually a pretty consistent pattern of underachievement and self-foot-shooting. Besides, if the playing group continually needs these external motivators, we would certainly one of the weaker playing lists between the ears. Frankly, I would rather a loudmouth off the field than consistently underperforming players on it -- we have not stood up to a single serious challenge this year, and if last year's prelim heartbreak wasn't enough of a kick up the backside I don't think this would 'galvanise' the group any more than any event in our recent history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyberdoggie

Good points, but the difference between those other colourful characters and Aker is that he in a way ratted out on his mates.

It's guess it's ok to be the worst kind of human being, as long as you don't get at odds with your mates.

---

As I said in my post:

"And if the retort to that is that being a rapist etc. is okay as long as you fit into the club rules and culture, then there is far more wrong with our game and our so-called 'club cultures' than I would care to go into."

Maybe that's the problem. I mean, Aker is a wanker, but can anyone seriously tell me he is in the same league of scum as Milne, Didak or Bock? If anyone thinks so (and I know many in the football community would), then I rest my case -- bogan sport, can't argue with idiots and all that.

ps. And by the way, rape and wife-bashing isn't being 'colourful'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lantern

I understand where people are coming from when they say this, but how many 'events' do we need to 'galvanise' a group? We've been waiting for that event for a while now -- maybe the close loss to the Saints last year, maybe the close loss to the Saints this year, maybe the close loss to Geelong a couple of years ago, maybe Barry Hall, maybe Barry Hall's brouhaha with North, maybe Boydy's injury, maybe Johnno's injury, maybe Aker getting sent back to Willi, maybe that bad umpire's call, maybe Gia's mistake, maybe that horrible Caroline Wilson article, maybe this maybe that.

We have been clutching at straws for a while now -- in fact, from an objective standpoint, and in hindsight, these haven't been galvanising events at all, but actually a pretty consistent pattern of underachievement and self-foot-shooting. Besides, if the playing group continually needs these external motivators, we would certainly one of the weaker playing lists between the ears. Frankly, I would rather a loudmouth off the field than consistently underperforming players on it -- we have not stood up to a single serious challenge this year, and if last year's prelim heartbreak wasn't enough of a kick up the backside I don't think this would 'galvanise' the group any more than any event in our recent history.

---

Interesting post. Enjoying these differing, challenging views. The club is certainly under the microscope and opposition heaping it on us. I'm getting it from mates who never before ragged me about being a Bulldogs supporter!

GT weighing in with his 5 cents worth:
http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/blog.aspx...wcomments=true

Can't disagree with the rationale that Aker's form made the decision to terminate him far easier. But what I found especially interesting about GT's article was that there was no mention of Matthew Capuano in it...funny about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lantern

My first and last two cents on the matter:

Yes, he brought this on himself because he can't keep his mouth shut -- we also knew this, yet we said go ahead and do your media work because we can't pay you your market rate anymore. And you know what? That was a good thing -- we don't have to be so ridiculously precious about this stuff.

My point is, how has any of this blindsided the club? If we didn't want innocent opinions (and I mean innocent, more on this in a second) to air, then the last person we would want on a dual media/playing contract is Aker.

It just seems to me that the club hadn't really thought through the implications of the contract offer to Aker from the end of last year, and hadn't really done a thorough risk/mitigation audit on its impact, and are now reaping the consequences of this shortsightedness.

I'm not absolving Aker of his part in this mess, but what was he reasonably expected to do? Take a media job but be bland and unopinionated? Take a 50% pay cut with the blessing to do media, but be expected to churn out the same output on the field yet shut up off it?

It was a very badly designed experiment (and let's be frank, if the match committee didn't think he would be able to contribute this year they would have made him retire -- they wanted him, but just on the cheap), and it has blown up in the administration's faces.

My final point will be about the rest of the team: there have been numerous reports about how some of his teammates have been offended about this that or the other. Well, all I can say is, seriously, harden the f**k up, boys -- everything he has said about the club has been, relatively speaking, pretty innocent, if tactless (which, again, can't be a surprise). Other clubs can successfully integrate rapists, murderer's mates, wife bashers et al and still be challenging for a flag, but we get our panties in a knot because a guy is a loud mouth. Surely the players should know by now that Aker's the kind of guy you take with a generous pinch of salt, unless of course their personal and collective insecurity is too great to handle being criticised by a triple premiership player and brownlow medallist. And if the retort to that is that being a rapist etc. is okay as long as you fit into the club rules and culture, then there is far more wrong with our game and our so-called 'club cultures' than I would care to go into.

If we all want groupthink, we will go down together. Some of the best teams in history had people who openly hated each other, but they were professionals and got on with the job. The perceived softness in the group has been regularly linked in the past to a need to be liked and safety in numbers (thus the lack of individual initiative from anyone when close games are on the line), and rightly or wrongly, this is just another example of an inability to display maturity or handle individuality constructively (or even just ignore it) -- if Johnno, Gia, Murph, Coons etc. can't collectively or individually temper Aker, what chance at tempering a rampant Geelong or Hawthorn or St. Kilda (all hard nuts) come September? Well, from past experiences, zero, actually.

Aker made his bed and has to lie in it, but the club bought him the materials and tools to do it, and made themselves and the playing group look just a bit too precious in the process. For those who have said that Brisbane did the same thing, I would observe that the Lions have not experienced any type of success since that time, and while pinning it all on the manner of Akers' dismissal is too long a bow to draw, it was certainly a symptom of the collective insecurity and malaise permeating the club then that they still haven't recovered from.

One can only hope that this isn't just a way of deflecting on our underachieving year (the last 6 weeks notwithstanding), or for underperforming players to blame an external factor as a distraction rather than looking at themselves in the mirror. And of course I still hope we win the flag, but if the reports of players' thoughts on this matter are any indication of our mental state as a group, then I despair.

But that's just my two cents, and I'm sure I'm in the minority.

---

I did some selective quoting, but I agree with much of this, Lantern... so the minority can be you and I! :)

Lantern, couldn't agree more. When I heard he got the sack, I asked what has he done now - and there was nothing other than mouthing off. The club has failed to contain the type of character who can be bold and be a match winner, losing the small forward we need in the side just as he was returning to form after injury, and has simply opened up the floodgates for negative attention and distraction.