Things are murky right now. The sense of unease arises from the rank distaste of racial vilification. And it’s too easy to lump at the feet of just one man.
Football has been aspirational in this regard. It was alerted to a problem by men who were treasured and slowly set down a path of reform the likes of which society rarely realises.
The football community has basked in the change it has achieved. Everyone feels a share in it from administrator to fan. That’s why it is acutely pained when a violation occurs.
But who amongst us will take responsibility for it?
The distaste was real when Lance Franklin was subjected to taunts from a crowd member in Launceston. The media seized the role of vigilante hell-bent on identifying the villain.
Majak Daw is as inspirational as any story unfolding in AFL circles yet it didn’t insulate him from hurtful jibes from an ignorant man. The crowd around him acted swiftly. Punishment was expedient.
We already knew for all the good that’s been done, nothing has been cured and it’s arrogant to think otherwise.
Sadly Justin Sherman proved this to be true.
The heartbreaking aspect of last weekend’s incident was the victim was in his first AFL match. Think for a moment of the wildly differing experience of two young men fulfilling a life’s ambition.
Mitch Brown kicked a goal in the first minute of his league career. Everything he could’ve imagined would’ve immediately blanketed his senses. That moment is a permanent mark on his soul regardless of what else his journey holds.
The mark for the 19-year-old Gold Coast player is a scar. It can never be mended. His first memory of football will be one of anguish. We would all share a sense of shame and pity for that reality.
And yet we failed him. Where this man needed compassion and understanding he found only voyeurism and exploitation.
He should never have been named. Every person who named him knew he had an enshrined right to confidentiality. Few gave a stuff about that.
Some of those who thrust his name into the national news cycle did so in the very same breath as hailing the AFL’s racial vilification policy - a policy that specifically acknowledges the intensification of harm that comes with being identified.
How can you laud the system while wantonly undermining it?
There are moments in journalism when the full story isn’t disclosed. Sometime it is by intervention, sometimes by convention, sometimes it’s a question of ethics.
Victims of crime routinely have their identities protected when their identities are commonly known.
Such compassion isn’t afforded in AFL circles.
Then the debate skewed down the sadly predictable path of hysteria.
The penalty was declared wildly inadequate. Suddenly it was pick a number and no number was high enough. It was suggested a player be fined half his annual income. Or be suspended for a year.
The policy, formulated by far better minds than football commentators, values education over punishment. Yet the “failure” was laid at the feet of the AFL. Despite the suspension being a direct result of the mediation taken on by the two players.
It’s such a powerful message that was ignored. So aggrieved was the victim, so ashamed was his assailant that they agreed a month out of the game was the appropriate course of action.
The stand of the Suns debutant to enforce such a penalty should be hailed. It was startling when it was first revealed. Combined with the burden Sherman lumps for the remainder of his career the punishment has served to show how seriously such an offence will be treated.
We are reminded regularly that football doesn’t exist in isolation. The problems it experiences are the problems that afflict the broader community.
It isn’t rare to encounter casual racism in a pub or an office. It shouldn’t be shocking that from time to time the scourge will darken the football landscape.
The measure of our enlightenment is in the reaction. On this count the week has been a disappointment.
Gerard Whateley leads the Grandstand AFL team call on ABC Radio
