Whereas the Labor Party was once riven on turning back the boats and the Coalition more lately divided on climate and energy policy, Essendon’s board was split six votes to four on four specific questions.
These were, in approximate order: 1) the need for an external or internal review of an under-performing football operation; 2) the choice of president between media executive David Barham and ex-Westfield boss Peter Allen; 3) the manner in which the club, via Barham, pursued Alastair Clarkson; and 4) whether the senior coach Ben Rutten should be sacked.
Four Essendon board members departed on Wednesday.Credit:Getty Images
The schism in the board, which opened up earlier this season as the team struggled, turned into a clear-cut division when the Clarkson/Rutten quandary came to a head, forcing a reckoning on each of those overlapping issues.
The question of whether Rutten should be removed with a year on his contract was, of course, the crux of the divide, and it is where the split also ended on Wednesday when the outnumbered gang of four chose to walk from the board rather than let division fester.
The departing chief executive Xavier Campbell had been more or less in the camp of the pro-Rutten four, rather than the Barham six. Campbell might have stayed on, given he had signed a two-year contract, but he – rightly, given the division and his ownership of the Rutten appointment, in particular – read the play and pulled up stumps after nine years at the helm, presumably with the necessary payout.
Campbell’s tenure was defined by success in navigating the diabolical aftermath of the drugs scandal off the field – the club having wiped off a debt of more than $10 million, retaining aggrieved players and sponsors – but foundered in on-field results, as first senior coach John Worsfold then Rutten and football bosses Rob Kerr and Dan Richardson were moved on.
The minority faction of four board members consisted of decorated ex-players Simon Madden and Sean Wellman, Allen and the departed/deposed president Paul Brasher. They took a pragmatic, yet principled decision that should be a template for others within Essendon.
Barham’s camp consisted of the three women on the board – ex-CEO of the Pegasus Leisure Group Kate O’Sullivan, marketing and advertising executive Melissa Green and the ex-AFL executive and KPMG partner Dorothy Hisgrove – plus the Good Guys former owner/chairman Andrew Muir and, not least, the club’s iconic former coach Kevin Sheedy.
Wellman and Allen will need to be replaced, as finance and football experts respectively. Ideally, Sheedy, who risks becoming a lightning rod and hurting his magnificent legacy if he remains, should be given a stark choice between his six-figure gig as a paid club ambassador and the board position, although technically only the members can remove him from the board.
Sean Wellman is one of the departing board members.Credit:Getty Images
Campbell spoke to Sheedy about his misguided 5AA interview last week, in which the coaching legend suggested that Clarkson would take North Melbourne to Tasmania; whether this was another instance of “just ‘Sheeds’ jesting” or not, it was poor form at a time when the Dons were vainly attempting to land Clarkson.
One would imagine that Sheedy would prefer the paid ambassador role – in which he excels – rather than the dull business of board meetings, albeit Essendon’s have been racier than most clubs.
Sheedy also has voiced support for a contentious and prodigal return of Hird as senior coach, already a potential fault line between Essendon people; Sheedy and his politically aligned recruiting boss Adrian Dodoro are in the Hird redux camp, while ex-greats Jobe Watson and Matthew Lloyd have taken a contrary view and if social media is any guide, the membership too, will split on Hird.
But the spectre of Hird is bigger outside Essendon than within. Sources said Hird had not even been discussed at board level and, in fairness to Hird – who, to this point, has quietly been taking modest steps back into footy after a traumatic period – he is yet to put on record that he wishes to coach Essendon again.
Though Essendon insiders think he will apply, the Barham board can quell the prospect of a Hird media circus by putting a line through it, as it should. I doubt it is a realistic proposition, regardless.
Barham and his board, meanwhile, should “re-calibrate” the new president’s comment that they are seeking “an experienced coach”. As Lloyd and other pundits observed, “experienced” ought to include the Craig McRae (or Chris Fagan) prototype of a highly experienced assistant.
Otherwise, the field of candidates is fairly narrow, starting with Ross Lyon, who might have been burned by Carlton leading him on this time last year.
Carlton were in a remarkably similar position when the coach and CEO departed, four board spots changed, and a new bold president made the brutal calls. Greg Williams was in a Sheedy-like role, too, as a board member with a paid gig. Their rise – and Collingwood’s – show Essendon how mess can beget (relative) success.
The Blues, though, had managed their external review and had a superior core of gun players.
We will be obsessed by whoever coaches Essendon next and that’s certainly important. The next CEO – and the outcome of the external review – will be more consequential given the divisions and imminent decisions. AFL senior executive Travis Auld, should he miss on Gillon McLachlan’s job, would be a logical next Essendon chief executive.
Wellman, Madden, Campbell and co have given the surviving six what was more badly needed than a key defender: an agreed position.
Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.
