On Tuesday night, phone call after phone call interrupted AFL general counsel Stephen Meade’s dinner at the launch of Stoke Grill, a new restaurant at Marvel Stadium.
Only 24 hours earlier, AFL executives, including Meade, had signed off on a non-penalty and accompanying media release encouraging “communications to remain respectful” in response to a slightly ominous message Port Adelaide’s Willie Rioli sent to a teammate of the Western Bulldogs’ Bailey Dale.
That message intended for Dale – Rioli’s opponent on Saturday in Ballarat – suggested the 28-year-old Bulldog should be careful leaving his hotel room in Darwin this weekend when his club travels north to play Gold Coast.
But suddenly, the AFL’s decision – questioned by many media commentators as being too soft in the immediate aftermath – appeared ridiculous as new reports emerged about Rioli upsetting opponents from Geelong and Essendon in the past year with the venom of his on-field sledging.
Meade, and the AFL executives across the decision-making process on Monday, including CEO Andrew Dillon, football operations boss Laura Kane, communications executive Brian Walsh and Tanya Hosch, the inclusion and social policy executive, were blindsided by the new information about Rioli.
So Meade spent dinner time at Marvel Stadium trying to get to the bottom of the issues raised.
Willie Rioli during Saturday’s game in Ballarat.Credit: Getty Images
By Wednesday, as the heat intensified on the AFL non-penalty earlier in the week, two key questions emerged:
How had Monday’s decision happened?
Was it fair to Rioli that his poor decision to send Sunday’s slightly menacing message had suddenly morphed into him being painted as a serious threat to opponents for a few over-the-top on-field comments that were never considered significant enough at the time to reach the AFL’s ears?
Tracing the decision-making process lends some logic to the call eventually made by the league on Monday, even if AFL officials – who spoke off the record to speak freely about the matter – now concede that outcome is open to criticism for being too light.
The first AFL and Port Adelaide officials became aware the Bulldogs were concerned about Rioli directing a threatening message to Dale was when news broke about the incident in the Herald Sun on Monday morning.
Senior Bulldogs’ officials were notified about the issue that day by players who discussed the message among themselves on Sunday. The Dogs soon contacted AFL football boss Laura Kane and Port Adelaide football manager Chris Davies.
Davies was well aware of the gravity of sending such a message and was furious with Rioli, who only weeks earlier was told to be more careful in his use of social media after he lashed out at Hawthorn on Instagram late at night following the Gather Round clash between the two clubs.
But the Bulldogs’ Sam Power was not seeking retribution in discussions with Davies. Dale, although shaken by the message, did not want a big deal made of the incident. He, along with teammates and the Bulldogs, just wanted to be reassured there was nothing for them to actually worry about in Darwin.
Bailey Dale wants to move on from the dramaCredit: Getty Images
They also wanted Rioli – who, Port Adelaide are keen to point out, cops more than his fair share of abuse on the football field and in his daily life – to be reminded that such messages were not on and could affect his opponents.
Davies, straight-shooting yet sensible administrator, already knew that Rioli’s temper had flared on the field before. A year ago, his Geelong counterpart Andrew Mackie made him aware that the small forward overstepped the mark verbally towards a Cats player after giving away two consecutive 50-metre penalties when their clubs met in round nine.
At the request of their player, the Cats chose not to escalate that matter to the AFL. It was an on-field indiscretion anyway, and although upsetting was one of millions of juvenile, idle comments that get thrown around in the heat of elite sport. Davies spoke to Rioli to make him aware of the impact his words had on the Cats player and offered him support.
However, Davies knew the incident with the Bulldogs was different, given the message was delivered outside the heat of battle.
He dealt with the issue, knowing nothing about the Essendon incident. In that case, the player had laughed off Rioli’s words as wild; a comment unique enough to tell teammates and others about, but not scary enough to tell club officials or seek action.
No one at the AFL involved in Monday’s decision knew of either of the Geelong or Essendon incidents. Although some competition officials, who requested anonymity, believe Port Adelaide should have told the AFL of the Geelong incident, Davies was cognisant the Cats had not wanted to escalate the matter at the time.
So on Monday, the AFL acted on the single incident that came to its attention via the media, without even having an official complaint from the Bulldogs. They knew Rioli had been loose on social media post-game in Gather Round but as they contemplated what action was appropriate, from their perspective, this was an isolated event.
A decision is expected from the AFL on Thursday with CEO Andrew Dillon part of the process.Credit: AFL Photos
Hosch was consulted and her view, consistent with the respect and responsibility policy, was that the victim’s view would lead the response.
The AFL heard representations from Port Adelaide – a club well regarded by Indigenous players past and present – who signalled they were well-placed to address the matter with Rioli.
Meade also spoke to AFL Players’ Association CEO Paul Marsh on Monday. Marsh indicated the PA’s view was that if the players involved could sort the issue out between themselves then no penalty was required.
Port Adelaide say they’re trying to support and protect Willie Rioli.Credit: Getty Images
The complex issues around Rioli’s experience as an Indigenous AFL player, as Port Adelaide chair David Koch enunciated on radio on Wednesday morning, were considered too, but they weren’t the only consideration.
After several conversations between the relevant parties (the AFL executives did not sit in a room to thrash it out but communicated intermittently), Rioli sent an apology to Dale. Dale accepted it, reassured he could travel to Darwin without concern and that Port Adelaide was reading the riot act to their player.
In a series of subsequent phone calls involving relevant AFL executives, the decision was made to reprimand Rioli rather than fine or suspend him.
The AFL had the option to override the wishes of the two clubs and deliver a sanction to send a message to all players about Rioli’s behaviour, but decided not to.
AFL officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, concede the debate over that decision was reasonable, but say the subsequent pile-on when further information came to light was not fair to those making the decision, nor, more importantly, Rioli.
But senior officials in the competition, who were granted anonymity to speak freely, say there’s also more substance to the criticism than the simple handling – or mishandling – of the Rioli matter.
The alleged inconsistent application of penalties meted by league headquarters has been a bugbear for a while now, and the Rioli decision brought this into sharp focus, giving clubs and the football public cause to vent their dissatisfaction.
In an environment where multiple players have been fined for giving “the bird” or suspended for making a homophobic comment, and a coach was last year fined $20,000 for bantering with an opposition player and acting like a plane, the decision not to penalise Rioli for the threat to Dale went down badly.
“Whataboutism” appeared to dominate dialogue as reaction to that inconsistency found voice.
Monday’s non-decision, albeit logical in isolation, provided an outlet for that dissatisfaction, and that unfortunately led to Rioli suddenly being painted somehow as a serious threat to opponents, despite no one ever considering his dialogue serious enough to escalate their allegations to the AFL.
Rioli did the wrong thing on Sunday. No one at Port Adelaide, or in football, disputes that.
But making him a public enemy serves no purpose, nor does it aid the players on the receiving end who also want to move on.
By Wednesday the AFL, embarrassed, was revisiting the case, speaking to Rioli and Davies for two hours in the afternoon. A decision is expected on Thursday.
Perhaps that’s when cool heads will prevail and Davies’ message will cut through.
“I don’t believe that sending Willie away from the club is the way to deal with the issue, and I made that very clear at the start,” the Port footy boss said on Wednesday. “We are putting our arms around Willie. He has got an issue to deal with here, but we are not going to stand him down for any period of time.”
Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.
