It is an indictment on the culture of elite sport that it took a confession regarding the alleged sexual misconduct of footballers for the AFL community to finally turn its collective back on former Carlton President and Elders IXL chief, John Elliott. The controversy was ignited last week when Elliott, while at a sportsman’s function in Tasmania, claimed that while he was President of Carlton, the club paid at least four women $5000 each to prevent them from making public claims of sexual harassment.
Elliott then appeared on his Channel 31 television program, but refused to elaborate on his comments.
It is understood that Victoria Police subsequently interviewed Elliott regarding his claims.
The football fraternity was certainly not impressed by Elliott’s rare display of honesty, with the Carlton identity “uninvited” from an official club function last Friday. Former Carlton Premiership player, Mark Maclure was especially critical, alleging that Elliott “destroys everything he touches — companies, families, relationships, football clubs … and now we actually know … what a complete moron this bloke is.”
AFL chief, Andrew Demetriou, also attacked Elliott, claiming that he “does not speak on behalf of the AFL. His comments are totally unacceptable, his position is totally unacceptable.” Demetriou continued, “I find his comments abhorrent. They are from an age that I don’t understand. They are from an age that is a bygone era. We have done everything we can and will continue to do everything we can to rid the industry of those sorts of Neanderthal attitudes.”
It is not Elliott in this case who has shamed himself, but rather, the entire AFL fraternity. If what Elliott claimed regarding the “hush money” is true (and there would seem little reason for Elliott to fabricate the entire story), the criticism should be reserved solely for the perpetrators of the alleged actions. Elliott in this instance appears a whistleblower. Demetriou’s claims are especially mystifying — one would wonder exactly which part of Elliott’s current position (aside from his unwillingness to actually name the perpetrators) is “unacceptable”? Would Demetriou prefer the knowledge of such crimes to go unmentioned and for possible criminals to remain unpunished? Is seeking justice for victims of s-xual assault from a “bygone era”?
There is no doubt that if the allegations are true, the actions of Elliott in paying the “hush money” was truly appalling. The decision to not report the incidents, but to protect the alleged perpetrators was morally and legally indefensible. But that was then. The criticism of Elliott does not appear to relate solely to his actions then, but rather, his decision to make public those events last week in Tasmania.
In fact, the treatment of Elliott over the past week indicates the appalling hypocrisy of football. From the mid-1980s until the early 2000s, when Elliott was wealthy, the Carlton football club and the VFL/AFL, were more than willing to turn a blind eye to his many indiscretions. Neither Carlton, nor the League batted an eyelid when Elliott was implicated in a foreign exchange scandal while CEO of Elders. (Elliott was accused of making hidden profits using Swiss bank accounts by the National Crime Authority based on volumes of evidence and the sworn testimony of former Elders executive, Ken Jarrett. Elliott was eventually acquitted solely due to an erroneous decision (later overturned on appeal) by a sole Victorian Supreme Court judge.)
Throughout the entire incident, Elliott remained dominant at Carlton and one of the most powerful AFL figures. Elliott was able to remain President of Carlton even after the Blues were implicated in systematic rorting of the competition’s salary cap.
It was only after the club “won” its first wooden spoon and approached insolvency that Elliott was eventually replaced as President. However, despite Elliott declaring personal bankruptcy (leaving creditors with a payout of only a few cents in the dollar) and being banned from acting as a company director after Water Wheel (a company which Elliott chaired) was found to have traded while insolvent, Elliott remained a life member of the AFL.
It appears that Elliott’s actions in the corporate world were of little concern to the AFL fraternity — it was only when Elliott lifted the lid on possible illegal s-xual conduct that suddenly, he is no longer welcome at Carlton.
Elliott’s claims regarding possible s-xual offences committed by former Carlton players should be treated with the utmost seriousness. Elliott must name the players in question, and the claims must be fully investigated (this however, may be difficult as it understood that Victoria Police botched earlier investigations).
Regardless of Elliott’s behaviour in the past, the AFL must stop playing the man, and start playing the ball.
Well said, Adam. You have expressed my feelings on this matter eloquently. The sooner the rest of the world (and its media!!!) catches up with you on this, the better. Well done!
David
I agree,I also note that the boss of the AFL was also Boss of the players assn at the time of one of the alleged sexual affairs,which puts him in an interesting position if this is bourne out.
What I find interesting is the total lack of cover of this outside Vic,in WA it is just not mentioned,the Morning presenter on a commerical radio station raved long and loud about the same thing in the NRL,about this total silence.
Good thing I,m not a cynical person or I could think he thinks the AFL is never wrong and its his job along with AFL sports casters journalists to protect AFL from this,I think its called a double standard.
It is very annoying how there is one set of rules for NRL players and another lesser set for AFL players
is John Elliot the new Dale Lewis, Lewis was exiled for daring to admit that afl players had come in contact with cocaine. I think the AFL are trying to play this story down as many in the upper echelons of AFL were part of the team culture at the time and may have knowledge that they wish they didn’t.
Why else does Mr Demetriou refer to his statement of 2003? which was that any woman with information should come to the AFL. Once again putting the onus on the allegeed victims. Wasn’t he head of the players association when these incidents occured? Nothing was brought to his attention?Also Mr Maclure using weasel words was careful not to say he didn’t know anything but that he didn’t see anything. Justin Madden called himself an employee of the club. Did he serve the tea?or was he a teammate of the alleged offenders?
The Andrew Johns scandal was a pandora’s box and the PR companies will make more money after they break than if they get out ahead of the story so just shut up and everyone will be ok.
Until the next time somebody opens their mouths.
Demetriou’s comments and attitude aren’t all that acceptable, either. Victorian attitudes is what I’m thinking, and I’m not referring to the state here.