Nobody happy - South Melbourne 5 Eastern Lions 2

Come on, Pierce, give us a smile! You're playing for South Melbourne!
Photo: Luke Radziminski. 

It was said a few times after this game, but when was the last time we put five goals past an opponent and yet felt this bad? The playing squad's morale might be the best it's been in years, but the fans I'm blessed(?) to interact with are pretty much all doom and gloom. I mean how else to explain being two rounds in and this already being a must win game? How dreadful, how vile, how... sickening. And I mean literally sickening - when we were 2-1 up, and Lions' had a free kick saved by our goalkeeper Pierce Clark, I felt like I was going to have a massive spew. A good thing that soon afterward Harrison (Harry?) Sawyer completed his hat-trick, and the game was pretty much put away.

Before that there was plenty of entertainment for those who'd made the trip to the club's lone Sunday home game for this season. Chris Irwin scuffed an early chance which by his own admission he should've buried, but we got the opener soon enough anyway thanks to what looked liked a mysterious penalty at the time. On replay, you can see the shirt tug on the player attempting to make the run into the box during a corner, and more importantly, you can see the referee looking right at that shirt tug.

You can argue that it was charity, you can argue that it was soft, and you can argue that those sorts of things happen all the time. And if you argued that, you'd be right, but why should it happen at all? My argument has long been that if officials were stricter with punishing that kind of shirt pulling that it'd get rid of it pretty quickly. Now having seen yellow flag after yellow flag thrown in the NFL for holding, and no obvious reduction in players trying to get away with illegal manoeuvres of that sort, my thinking may be more wish/desire oriented than anything based in reality. But even if punishment doesn't act as a deterrent, it at least acts as punishment, which within the context we're dealing with, is a good enough starting point.

Irresponsible treatment of beer. Photo: Luke Radziminski.

Having taken the lead, we were rocked out of our very temporary complacency by Lions equalising with a free kick that didn't look all that convincingly taken at the time. Even looking at it afterwards, I don't know what happened, and why goalkeeper Pierce Clark seemed to latch on to it so late. We retook the lead very soon after, which only settled the nerves ever so much because, as noted above, Lions took another dangerous free kick, this time well dealt with by Clark. After a false dawn and a premature beer shower for a goal called offside, we eventually pretty much finished this game off with Sawyer's third, like his second goal a header from a corner. And the beer shower for that goal was at least legit.

Responsible treatment of beer.
Photo: Luke Radziminski.

Three first half goals essentially from corners then - one indirectly thanks to the penalty, and two direct, which is the kind of thing we didn't see enough of last year. Sawyer probably has a knack for this kind of thing, but by the Lions' assistant coach's own admission on soccer-forum after the game, the away side put in some terrible efforts at defending set pieces. Good delivery aside, and keeping in mind that scoring from corners is pretty much a lottery at the best of times, I just can't see us being marked that slackly for the entire rest of the season. Still, if any future opponents wish to be that generous, I'm happy to let them oblige.

The second half was pretty much a stroll - except for late substitution Matthew Loutrakis, who got a kick in the face from a Lions opponent - just waiting for that fourth goal to really make sure of it. After that came the fifth courtesy of a showboating team manoeuvre, which highlighted how poor Lions were on the day defensively. To their credit, the away team fought it out, but their lack of quality across the park was obvious for all to see. Not to disparage a club which has done exceptionally well to reach this level - nor to write them off after two games - but who were most of their players? A lot of clubs who make the step up end up recycling at least a few blokes who've been around the Victorian top-flight merry-go-round before; but the only names of theirs I immediately recognised were short-term ex-South keeper Keegan Coulter, and former South trialist and firebrand striker Amir Osmancevic.

As for us, it's been only two games, and yet I think we have a pretty good handle on what this South team will be able to do. Certainly not a front-runner, and probably lucky to make finals. Even though you never know what might happen, it's a squad with too much depth to be in serious relegation danger, especially when you have teams like Lions and Altona Magic whose budgets restrict them in what they'll produce. Goodness knows if well be able to produce anything in the middle channel, especially on smaller and narrower grounds - and this is what frightens me - especially if we fall behind. If we manage to go up, and force to teams to open up as they chase the game, we'll probably be the game

Next game
Oakleigh at Jack Edwards on Friday night, beginning our customary run of early season away games. No one's expecting us to win this game, and no one's expecting us to draw, and pretty much everyone's expecting us to get spanked; the idea behind that being, apart from Oakleigh looking good, that we couldn't beat them there even when we were good, so six losses there on the trot will become seven. I'd like to be more optimistic than that, but I'm struggling.


Alternative reality
Why was the live stream initially displaying a backdrop of Central Coast Stadium? For those watching at home, it must've been a confusing affair. I know we did try and take over the Mariners a few years ago, including the farcical proposal to split games between Melbourne and Gosford, but callbacks to gags seven years ago seems a bit of a stretch. What's more, once the stream was sorted out, home viewers had to deal with the commentary stylings of Greg Blake, Australian soccer's one time sort of answer to Aussie Rules' Sam Newman - in the entertainment sense, not the try-hard non-PC gimmick sense.

Mispronunciations of player names aside - and the one person who was upset that Blake referred to South on several occasions as "Hellas" - the audience feedback on Blake's style seemed to be fairly split down the middle. People either loved it, or hated it. While I can see the appeal for some in Blake's schtick, I'm more in the latter mode. But I guess part of the appeal of the NPL live streams for those not of a gambling mindset is the variety of commentary styles - I like Dan Lonergan's energetic style for example, which a few people find too much like listening to footy or horse racing. Still, I wish Blake was quarantined to Heidelberg games.

Claim and counter-claim
I suppose the one good thing about last week's continuing coverage of our alleged wage theft was, if you can frame it that way, that it became so bogged down by claim and counter-claim that even the niche audience that was nominally interested in the story has mostly moved on. And in Australian soccer, there's always something new to latch on to and gawk at.

On an unrelated note, thank you Tony Sage.

But for us remaining South fans, our focus remains resolutely on South. Following on from last week's match report post on the blog, the club released a statement that in the famous words of David Byrne, had both "good points, some bad points". The good points? I guess for me that's mostly in noting that the players are on professional contracts, as opposed to the (implied) pseudo-amateur contracts that other clubs up and down the lower tiers have their players on. There's also the club's support for a more formal process for wage issues between clubs and players.

If you were in a more generous mood than I, you may also say that the club managed to pick up on the vagueness of the allegations made in Tom Smithies' article. An annoying aspect of that vagueness is that it was picked up on by some of our fans, who have pursued the I suppose logical extension of "why don't the players pursue the matters via legal channels"; an idea easily refuted by the fact that lawyers cost money, and for young players especially that's money they don't necessarily have at hand. And considering the relatively small amounts being alleged (admittedly not small to the players themselves), likely to be swallowed up by any legal action.

The bad points? The digressions into the allegations of conspiracy, which plays well to parts of our membership, but makes us look deranged to outsiders. The demand for a journalist to reveal his sources, which I guess someone drafting this press release must have thought was a good idea. The not coming out outright and saying that the club do not owe former players any monies, leaving that as an assumption rather than as a definite statement of fact. The club instead noted that it was "very comfortable with its position regarding all past and current players", whatever that means. I'm not good at reading between the lines.

Anyway, Smithies followed up his first article with another one, which notes that:

... it [Professional Footballers Association] is involved in "a number of disputes with South Melbourne" and that it is seeking the involvement of both FFV and Football Federation Australia after previous attempts "to resolve the matters amicably" had not worked.

Who knows how true this all is, nor who the relevant players are. As much as some of us would like to heap scorn on the committee, it is possible that everything is actually legit. Like the claims by former player Liam McCormick from a couple years ago that he was owed wages - this could all be a result of the current relevant players signing what they thought was simply a standard form with some boilerplate clauses, not realising what they were signing - even though the forms are pretty clear as far as I can tell. Because McCormack decided to put his name to his claim when this issue flared up in 2018, the club - apart from knowing it had the law (technical or otherwise) on its side - clearly felt comfortable in leaking McCormack's player release forms, damaging the credibility of both McCormack and Clement Tito, the journalist who wrote the article at the time.

This time none of these players has come forward, and thus it makes it harder for the club to just come out and use the same tactic, assuming that the relevant players have in fact McCormacked themselves, and assuming that the club is even sure who the relevant three players are. And surely a journalist with the seniority and experience of Smithies wouldn't make such a rookie error as Tito did, by trusting the word of the players without corroborating evidence.

What's strange and slightly counter-intuitive about this situation is that the real, original, and genuinely noteworthy story - Chris Taylor's win at FIFA, pending an appeal from us - has receded into the background. Taylor's successful (so far) litigation is, without knowing what's owed to anyone else that may be owed any sum of money, by any stretch of the imagination a much more tangible and newsworthy event than the (so far) small sums allegedly owed. Like the Avondale senior team wage spreadsheet leak from last year, this story offers a peek into the kinds of money being paid to run a senior team at this level, the kind of detail that mug punters almost never get to see. In that sense Smithies' article, which on some level appears to be an (understandable) opportunistic follow up story pushed by representatives of the ex-South players who allege they are owed money, is a much messier and "he said-she said" kind of situation.

As for fan responses, they seem to have generally fallen into three categories. Those who've used the story as an opportunity to bash South, and occasionally by extension the proposed national second division and/or ethnic clubs; those who have sought to defend the club, mostly South people but not always, seeing a witch-hunt and conspiracy against South, and occasionally by extension any notion of a national second division and/or ethnic clubs; but there's also a third faction, made up only of South fans - and most of whom seem to be on smfcfans.net - which while not completely trusting media reports on these matters, also do not trust the board and are unwilling to give the board and its version of events the benefit of the doubt. For them, having lost most of their faith in the trustworthiness of committees, it's going to be a long way back before they believe anything that comes of a South committee person's mouth.

If You Know Your History is back
Mine and Ian Syson's little radio show on Football Nation Radio has resumed for 2020. This year we're on Tuesdays at 8:00pm, but you can always catch up with whatever is we've been doing by checking out our blog.

Final thought
Wild scenes when one of Ian Syson's sons has been to a South game more recently than the old man.

Lakeside Stadium artefact Wednesday - Middle Park plaque

Like its Lakeside counterpart, which we looked at last week, this is located on the front of our grandstand, though on the right hand side of the players race as you face the stand.

It's a reminder that while it was typically associated as being the South Melbourne Hellas ground, Middle Park was in fact a venue that we shared with Hakoah, and later several other clubs, and that both Hakoah and Hellas contributed to the building of the grandstand.

Prior to the building of the stand, South Melbourne Hellas had barely existed. Of course it was the merger of 'Hellas' - itself a merger of Yarra Park and Hellenic - with South Melbourne United, the longer term tenant of the ground, which saw South Melbourne Hellas play out of Middle Park (it was of course a massive part of the reason for the merger occurring). In contrast, Hakoah had a history dating back to 1927, with a history of playing out of several venues before eventually settling down at Middle Park by about 1957.

While Middle Park and neighbouring suburbs such as South Yarra, St Kilda and Prahran (but not, curiously, Port Melbourne) all had a longstanding soccer culture and presence, Middle Park appears to have been the original heart of that culture dating back to the 1880s. Why this is so is still to be fully teased out, but one of the core reasons was the Albert Park precinct itself.

If you can think of a sport or hobby that could be pursued outdoors, Albert Park probably hosted it. According to the Gillard Report, a government report from 1961 on the management and usage of Albert Park, the following activities were all taking place at the time:

...on the lake, there is rowing, yachting, boating, speed boating and canoeing. Fishing and sailing of model boats is allowed. On land, the park is regularly used for golf, cricket, lacrosse, hockey, baseball, soft ball, girls’ basketball, Australian Rules Football, Soccer, Rugby, Irish football, Hurling, Archery, Tennis, competitive walking, athletics and the flying of model aeroplanes. In addition, the Park has at times been used for cycling, and on several occasions in the past has been used for motor car racing. In renovated buildings, provision has been made for indoor sports of basket ball, badminton and table tennis. 

So rather than being a special case in and of itself, it appears as if soccer was part of the great many activities that were played there, perhaps chiefly because it was the largest and most easily accessible space to use for a fledgling sport, and because of its reputation as being the 'lungs of Melbourne'. This intense sporting usage was at the heart of the conflict between some locals, who wanted to use what was one of the few public parks available to them for walking and passive recreation, and those sporting persons who often came from outside the local area, who saw it as just the right spot for their sporting interests.

The Middle Park field (oval no. 18) used by South Melbourne United by the early 1950s (in the south-west corner of the boundary between the South Melbourne and St Kilda councils, on a reclaimed landfill site) also saw conflict between different sports. For example, the venue at the time also had a cycling track around it, built at the expense of the Albert Park Management Committee in the early 1950s (and hence the odd curve behind the goals at Middle Park). The cyclists never paid that money back, but were also incensed at the damage caused to the track by both footballers' boots as well as the spectators who were coming in increasing numbers to watch the games. They soon abandoned it.

Postcard with a photo of what is probably a Hakoah game (opponent unidentified) at Middle Park, circa early 1960s. This is just one of a series of postcards depicting sporting life in Albert Park during this era. The postcard series can be viewed on site at the State Library of Victoria, though you need to book this in advance (hence the white gloves I'm wearing).

The Middle Park ground just prior to the release of the Gillard Report was an unenclosed venue. This was at the heart of how and why Middle Park eventually became enclosed. There were only three enclosed venues in the precinct - these were the South Melbourne Cricket Ground (Lake Oval), the St Kilda Cricket Ground (Junction Oval) and a bowls club. These weren't officially enclosed - the public was supposed to be able to gain access to those fields outside of match days - but the reality of course was quite different. There was also the concern of accommodating spectators as opposed to participants. Oliver Gillard's preference was for the latter, but the existence of the Lake and Junction Ovals with their grandstands and brick walls complicated matters.

Gradually, and not exactly legally, a fence started going up around the ground, with the public only left with access from the northern side of Oval No. 18, followed by introduction of turnstiles. In the Gillard Report, the exact way this enclosure had happened was never quite explained, and there remained rather a lot of doubt and confusion on this matter, as politics and non-minuted details combined to see the area enclosed almost by default. Labor senator Pat Kennelly, also a member of the management committee, had almost had his endorsement for the senate blocked by the union movement for denying access to public land during the early 1950s.

Kennelly himself was a supporter of the need of newly arrived migrants for a proper soccer venue and the ability of clubs to collect gate money. This was a view that went against some on the management committee, who thought of soccer as just one of many passing fads that had been seen in Albert Park (ignoring soccer's long history in the area), and not one with any chance of longevity once all the migrants assimilated. The example of the cyclists, too, was also fresh in the memory.

The Middle Park grandstand plaque, photo uploaded to Twitter on December 12 2013. Contrary to some scaremongering on smfcboard, the plaque was still there during the 2013 pre-season, even while the concourse in front of it was being being re-concreted. Photo: Paul Mavroudis. 

However it came about, the fact that the Committee loaned money to Hellas and Hakoah to build the grandstand necessitated or at the very least encouraged the quiet enclosure of the ground, to allow for more money to be raised at the gate, and therefore allow the grandstand debt to be paid off; in addition, the enclosure saw soccer quickly become one of the management committee's biggest earners.

Later attempts to improve upon the venue were frustrated by both the management committee, but especially local residents, but that's a story for another time. For those interested in reading further on the history of the Albert Park from the 1850s up to about the mid 1990s, I highly recommend seeking out Jill Barnard's People's playground: a history of the Albert Park. It was exceedingly helpful in providing the background for much of this article, as well as for referring me onto the Gillard Report.

As for the plaque itself, while many items supposedly went missing during the shift from Middle Park to Lakeside, this was not one of them. It famously appeared in this video with Greg Blake and Kyle Patterson during the demolition of Middle Park. And while Middle Park may be gone, 53 years on a piece of it remains with us, and long may it do so.

Dean Anastasiadis wearing a TISM shirt

Is his choice of clothing more interesting than anything he has to say, in this interview post our 1995 Dockerty Cup win? I suppose you'd have to check it out for yourselves. With thanks to Boo for the clip.

1995 Dockery Cup Final

The 1995 Dockerty Cup Final, with thanks to our friend Boo once more. Tansel Baser has a great game, Curcija's name gets pronounced differently to what is these days, Frank Arok looks more grizzled than usual. Deano has his surname on his shirt, but no one else does. And what a nice trophy it is. Perhaps one day we can not only play in this competition again, but maybe even win it, too.

First half



Second half and presentation ceremony

Dockerty Cup Quarter Final 1995 vs Preston

Here's a treat folks. For a little while now there's been discontent that the Dockerty Cup has been discontinued for so many years. I agree with that sentiment, and the recent and seemingly credible talk that it may be brought back has gladdened my heart somewhat.

However, that enthusiasm includes a couple of caveats. Firstly, I would not include the Victory or the Heart, as I don't think they have a place in this competition - apart from the disproportionate strength of the sides, they are meant to sit above everything below them - that is, they've been set up as 'representative' teams inclusive of 'everyone', which doesn't suit the divided and diverse environment that the rest of the Victorian system entails. It's not perfect logic, but it's the best I could come up with at short notice.

The other concern that I have is that people who want this competition back will think that it will be some kind of boon to crowd numbers. It may do so initially, but I doubt it will last. As evidence of that fact, look no further than the near permanent discontinuation of the competition since 1996. And look at the crowd in this clip of what used to be a heated rivalry between South and Preston. It's 1995, and the crowd is worse than a 2010 VPL crowd.

Still, enjoy the trip down memory lane, courtesy of our friend Boo. Amongst the the other things one may notice are.

• The error made in the intro that the quarter final stage was when the NSL teams entered the competition. They actually entered in the previous round (round 3). We beat Port Melbourne 2-0 in that round.
• The young players like Con Blatsis and Tansel Baser making their first steps in senior football.
• The dreadful offside trap set up being used by South.
• Vaughan Coveny scoring a goal in the manner he almost always did. If you can find his highlights/tribute package out there, it is without doubt the most dull and pedestrian highlight reel of all time. Which is not to say they should count for less than spectacular goals, just that it paints a certain picture of the kind of striker he was.

First half



Second half