One year on from the Alen Stajcic sacking, two issues remain to be addressed
Remember Saturday 19 January 2019?
The big news, reported by both Dominic Bossi in Fairfax Nine papers and Ray Gatt in The Australian, on that morning was that then Matildas coach Alen Stajcic was to leave the role five months before the 2019 World Cup, with a 12 midday teleconference called the same day by FFA (on a Saturday!). As we wrote here – “Whoa”.
When I first read the reports, my first thought was that Stajcic had done something wrong.
While there had never been any hint previously of impropriety involving Stajcic, why else would a governing body (ie. FFA) require the departure of a national team coach five months before a World Cup? Why else would Bossi use language such as “a rift between some players and Stajcic”?
The perception that Stajcic had done something wrong was reinforced when FFA Chairman Chris Nikou – 62 days into his tenure – and then CEO David Gallop fronted the media conference to announce that Stajcic’s contract was being terminated immediately. They said the reason was because of non-specific issues of the “culture and environment” of the team. Gallop also referred to confidential surveys of all FFA staff, including the Matildas and Socceroos, conducted by ‘Our Watch’.
The primary purpose of Our Watch is to deal with issues of domestic violence against women and children. It is chaired by Natasha Stott-Despoja AO of Adelaide. If her name sounds familiar – besides being a former Australian Democrats Leader who famously wore Doc Martens to Parliament – Stott-Despoja is also on the Steering Committee of the Women’s World Cup Bid along with former FIFA, AFC and FFA Executive Board member, Moya Dodd. (Coincidentally, Adelaide being a relatively small town, Dodd is also on the Board of Barefoot to Boots, the former charity of Awer Mabil, which is chaired by Stott-Despoja’s husband, Ian Smith).
What both preceded and followed the Nikou/Gallop media conference was the extraordinary and unseemly debacle of then deputy Chairman Heather Reid sending private messages and tweets to many members of the football community, including media, along the lines of “If you knew what I knew …. (Stajcic) will never work in WOSO [women’s soccer] again.”
When I first revealed this exclusively, I had messages and/or tweets in my possession sent by Reid to 10 different individuals.
After publication of the story, I received at least 50 more from different individuals who had all received the same, or similarly worded, message from Reid. She was clearly very busy.
Reid forced to apologise
Just prior to the World Cup in June, he received a public apology from FFA and Reid, as well as a payout. He had already secured another job via Central Coast Mariners.
Reid’s statement read:
“I apologise unreservedly for the damage, distress and hurt that I have caused to Alen Stajcic as a professional football coach and long-time servant to, and advocate for, Australian and women’s football. I understand that my conduct in making public and private statements may have caused serious damage to Mr Stajcic’s reputation, both in Australia and internationally.
On 22 January 2019 The Sydney Morning Herald published a story about the termination of Mr Stajcic’s contract by Football Federation Australia (FFA), in which I was quoted as saying that if people knew the actual facts about Mr Stajcic’s behaviour ‘they would be shocked'.
I also, at around this time, sent personal communications to a number of people including various members of the media, in which I suggested that, if the whole truth could be told, Mr Stajcic would never work again in women’s football. I understand also that these communications ended up in the hands of other journalists who have used my words to compound the speculation and innuendo as to the reason why Mr Stajcic’s employment was terminated.
I withdraw my statements entirely and unconditionally. Mr Stajcic’s contract was terminated by FFA, by a decision of the FFA Board, of which I am a member. FFA elected to terminate Mr Stajcic’s employment contract by it making a payment in lieu of notice. Mr Stajcic’s contract was not terminated by FFA for breach of contract by Mr Stajcic, or because of any misconduct on Mr Stajcic’s part. I accept that I was wrong to imply otherwise.
I regret making these statements. I apologise also for pain and suffering that I have caused to Mr Stajcic’s wife and two young children.”
In some ways, Stajcic was fortunate as it’s more than others have received in similar circumstances. But he should never have been subject to the opprobrium and damage to his reputation that Reid caused in the first place.
An 'independent' inquiry
Under pressure from some of the game's stakeholders to 'do something' about the Stajcic sacking ahead of last year's annual general meeting of FFA, the FFA Board conducted a so-called independent review of the national teams.
Despite it being touted as 'independent', FFA staff members responded to emails from the football public to review committee members, and staff of a large national consulting firm associated with a Board director were present at interviews with the review committee.
It was no surprise that the review didn’t clarify anything much when its executive summary was released towards the end of last year. The summary does nothing to advance knowledge on the matters around the central issue of the 'cultural' issues cited by Nikou and Gallop, or to improve confidence and trust in the structures in place for governance of the game.
The review advocates an “athlete centric” approach as the means of Australia being competitive internationally in football – as if other football associations with much more resources are not also advocating a similar approach as the method du jour.
An athlete centred policy requires athletes to take greater responsibility and have ownership of their results so they develop better self-awareness and make better decisions on the field.
That’s all very well, but what about within the team environment off the field? Does an athlete centred approach mean that the athletes set the rules of camp? For example, does it mean that:
a couple can share a room when they’re in camp?
when a couple breaks-up mid camp that there is a vote to see whose ‘side’ the rest of the squad is on?
if the majority of the squad doesn’t want to pass the ball in training or a game to a particular player because they do not ‘fit in’, that the player should be dropped?
if a player wants to wear pyjamas and ugg boots to team dinner it’s okay?
it is acceptable for senior executive staff of the FFA to be in the rooms of players, lying on the floor, inebriated, because the players say it’s okay?
individuals should use their position to influence player behaviour and elicit favours?
if one player (player A) is known to have done something inappropriate, that the price of silence from other players, is player A’s silence on other inappropriate matters involving other players also?
The review's summary also saw fit to note that it found no “evidence supporting the existence of any formal ‘lesbian mafia’ or that the decision to terminate the Matildas head coach contract was driven by personal bias against Mr Stajcic or in pursuit of other agendas” which the review committee claimed was “vented” in media and social media.
If the FFA Board and the review committee thought this would quell the 'venting', they misjudged things yet again.
Indeed, if the Board had been serious about the issues that arose from the Stajcic sacking, they would have opened up the inquiry for broad community input because the circumstances around the sacking, and the actions of one of their own – Reid – were responsible for significant ill-will in the football community for all of 2019.
No doubt they're counting on the newly appointed CEO, James Johnson, to impress us sufficiently so we forget their mistakes and misjudgements.
Unfinished business
However, there are two matters of unfinished business in respect of the saga.
First, the Reid apology should have been enough for the FFA Congress – who 'hire and fire' the Board – as a minimum to have the gumption to bring on a vote at the annual general meeting to remove her from the Board.
Putting aside that Reid brought herself into disrepute – and that’s for her to be content with as part of her legacy to the game – she also brought the rest of the Board and the sport into disrepute within the meaning of Article 2 of FFA’s Code of Conduct by her activity. She also caused harm to innocent parties such as Stajcic’s wife and their children as well as the loyal lieutenants who resigned after Stajcic’s sacking, such as Nahuel Arrarte and Paul Jones.
With Reid now returned to the Board, and with the Congress failing to take any sort of ethical stand on the issue, the apology from both her and the Board is an empty gesture.
Second, and in the long term more importantly, the ‘cultural’ issues to which reference has been repeatedly made by all parties on this matter, must be addressed properly and comprehensively.
If the Board thinks their national teams' inquiry – which reads like it was written by a first year graduate consultant from the big consulting firm assisting the committee – does this, they are sadly mistaken.
It would be a tragedy if the Board's inaction on cultural issues came back to bite them and, by extension, our sport.