Welcome to Hawthorn - Tom Mitchell - 2018 Brownlow medalist

[Ned Ryerson]

Are we really that precious a bunch at Hawthorn?
Should players have to hold onto any criticism until after they retire? Or posthumously?

Most players don’t go sniping at their former clubs while still playing - they certainly don’t do it after just winning a flag. It was poor form and just heaped more negative press onto us. Personally I’m not impressed with it. You’re free to feel otherwise.

 

[Dewyyyyy]

There’s a lot of backlash here and I guess here’s my two cents.

He has a podcast where he’s vulnerable and it’s very clearly a talking point. It comes up as it’s a big part of what got him to his premiership. If people watched the whole podcast you’d probably realise it’s less of him complaining and more narrating what had taken place and how he felt.

And I guess some people can have the opinion he hasn’t been good at taking criticism or in a specific way. But players and people respond differently to different feedback. He’s someone who might prefer a plan and nurturing.

I like to be told flat out, whether it comes across rude, humiliating or abusive. To get the point across effectively but also channel the negative emotion and driving that for positivity. Ala Day.

Don’t have an issue with him talking about it, don’t have an issue with him at all as a person or player. A gun, was a superstar and did the Hawthorn jumper proud.

People are definitely going too far to bash either Tom, or the club. Both Hawthorn fans, Collingwood and others.

 

[bigmaxi]

Most players don’t go sniping at their former clubs while still playing - they certainly don’t do it after just winning a flag. It was poor form and just heaped more negative press onto us. Personally I’m not impressed with it. You’re free to feel otherwise.

I'm with Ned, poor form. That's it, no bashing just plain and simple. Moving on now.

 

[manB]

If club was expecting Tom to be receptive of the feedback (which some claiming he was not), we are also not receptive of feedback by Tom, so why just blame him?

 

[Ned Ryerson]

If club was expecting Tom to be receptive of the feedback (which some claiming he was not), we are also not receptive of feedback by Tom, so why just blame him?

Because one was done internally at a footy club the other in a podcast - is it really that hard to comprehend the difference?

 

[arupist]

People are definitely going too far to bash either Tom, or the club. Both Hawthorn fans, Collingwood and others.

I think Hawthorn has more than two fans. Just sayin'.

 

[naysayer]

I think Hawthorn has more than two fans. Just sayin'.

Nope, just you and me. The rest are my burner accounts.

 

[play2win]

Tom also said he loved the hawks and still has plenty of mates there, and on the topic of his trade he understood the strategy and suggested it will work out for the hawks in the long run. Taking a single line out of context is typical media BS to create a headline and clicks.

 

[Dewyyyyy]

I think Hawthorn has more than two fans. Just sayin'.

 

[Yardie]

Nope, just you and me. The rest are my burner accounts.

Can confirm. I'm just a voice in their head......

 

[natio]

I posted the video clip and i don't think Tom was being that bad. I think, given HIS perception, he feels a bit hard done by by the hawks. But i actually think, he was pretty fair and didn't really bag the club. He was on a podcast, he's supposed to talk about this stuff.

As for my personal opinion, i think he's a great footballer, obviously an elite hard worker. But i never really warmed to him. To me, he seem very concerned with his stats etc. So I'm guessing, him not being the top dog, coaches restricting his CBA is going to be a bit of a sting and affect his perception. I'd guess he was probably a bit sensitive to it. But again that's just my uninformed analysis.

But i really liked how he talked about it. We always complain about pr robotic footballers. Maybe we shouldn't get too grumpy or defensive when they give their opinions and feelings. I enjoy hearing peoples opinions and perceptions of the inner sanctum of clubs, especially the hawks.

 

[HairyO]

Horrible to see people supporting treatment, even though other side of the story is not known.

I hope you are not treated in same way at workplace or you are not treating your colleagues like this.

So many so quick to sink the boot into Clarko but Sam gets some negative feedback and its circle the wagons time and go after the messenger.

Also interesting that Hawthorn didnt come out saying it wasnt true. Instead said he deserved it.

I guess Sam turned him into a Premiership player.

 

[Bedi]

Tom also said he loved the hawks and still has plenty of mates there, and on the topic of his trade he understood the strategy and suggested it will work out for the hawks in the long run. Taking a single line out of context is typical media BS to create a headline and clicks.

'Mitchell hopes it works out for the Hawks' is a headline that sells less papers, of course.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

So many so quick to sink the boot into Clarko but Sam gets some negative feedback and its circle the wagons time and go after the messenger.

Also interesting that Hawthorn didnt come out saying it wasnt true. Instead said he deserved it.

I guess Sam turned him into a Premiership player.

Has nothing to do with Sam when his gripe was with Harvey.

 

[HairyO]

Has nothing to do with Sam when his gripe was with Harvey.

You reckon Sam had no idea that an entire team meeting was dedicated to criticising just one player?

Harvey went rogue and noone talked about it at all ?

Poor Sam is totally innocent ?

 

[theiaofseed]

You reckon Sam had no idea that an entire team meeting was dedicated to criticising just one player?

Harvey went rogue and noone talked about it at all ?

Poor Sam is totally innocent ?

Are you really comparing harsh feedback with telling a player to get an abortion?

**** me give it up, Clarkson is gone.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

You reckon Sam had no idea that an entire team meeting was dedicated to criticising just one player?

Harvey went rogue and noone talked about it at all ?

Poor Sam is totally innocent ?

Not what I said at all but cheers for reading into it so much for me.

The conduct referred to by Tom in the podcast was said to be in a line coaching session so Sam wouldn't have been the one singling him out.

I have never leapt to the individual defences of Sam Mitchell in this thread - but funnily enough you have seen fit to leap to the defences of Clarko when nobody was mentioning him. But yeah, I am the one blindly defending someone here.

 

[HairyO]

Are you really comparing harsh feedback with telling a player get to get abortion?

* me give it up, Clarkson is gone.

No. Not at all. Because we know for sure it happened with Mitchell because the club has admitted it.

But to get back to the topic, is this how you think players should be treated?

 

[DogDaySonny]

Heh. I love the internet. Everyone takes sides assuming that what we have heard is 100% of the relevant information.

• Had Tom had the feedback before this session and failed to address it? Perhaps this was the culmination of an ongoing discussion.
• In a room full of midfielders with less than 15 games experience at that point, who is in a position to receive and adjust to feedback?
• Was the feedback harsh in tone? Or was it harsh in content? Ie, a hard message (your game is not what we need) delivered well. If Tom was being told that his roll of grabbing the ball inside and dumping out with a handball was no longer the one he had to play… maybe he didn’t like that message.

I’m not attacking Tom or defending Sam. I’m merely pointing out that we have only one side of this message and it’s inevitably been presented in a light that justifies that side’s following decisions. Hardly the wealth of data needed to draw battle lines. Unless you’re on the internet of course, in which case fire away!

 

[flinchfree]

No. Not at all. Because we know for sure it happened with Mitchell because the club has admitted it.

But to get back to the topic, is this how you think players should be treated?

You've got a hard on for Clarko that just won't abate, and has you leveling cynicism at everyone else at the Club - especially Sam Mitchell.
You're a tough read these days.

 

[HedgeFund]

If you actually listen to the whole podcast, it was pretty measured, mild - no real criticism of the Hawks feedback mechanisms in general, just a suggestion the club wanted him out (which we all know is true) and treated him differently/weirdly to get him to voluntarily leave (which may or may not be true).

So he was basically performance managed out of the club, which is quite common in many employment sectors.

I doubt he or his manager ever thought of chatting to a law firm about unfair dismissal - do you?

 

[dermott]

We do have freedom of speech fortunately, and if Tom or anyone else chooses to exercise that right I support them fully whether or not I agree with their view or not.
For the life of me I cannot comprehend how anyone would bother getting upset about his comments. He has moved on and so have we.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

He has moved on and so have we.

He clearly hasn’t.

 

[dermott]

He clearly hasn’t.

That is his problem. We should move on.

 

[DogDaySonny]

We do have freedom of speech fortunately, and if Tom or anyone else chooses to exercise that right I support them fully whether or not I agree with their view or not.
For the life of me I cannot comprehend how anyone would bother getting upset about his comments. He has moved on and so have we.

Who has said he doesn’t have a right to speak? A number of people have disagreed with his opinion. No one has said he’s not allowed to have it.

And as to moving on, he caused the situation, not the people responding to his comments. You may not realise it but you’re arguing he has the right to speak but the people who disagree with him do not. That’s hardly the highly principled position you seem to think it is.