On the Question of Sumich

‘Desperate and Dateless’ of Northern Tasmania writes:

“Talk us through the Sumich defection. I would expect that would be the biggest thing to happen in WA since Bondy fell from grace. The rest of the football world’s equivalent of Barass going toCarlton.  Surely you are able to enlighten us eastern infidels.”


Well DD, we here at the Indian Ocean Institute of Theosophy are always happy to enlighten those who are lost and searching for meaning in their lives.  You may have heard from Brother Harms that there were hopes a Gosch’s Paddock branch of the Institute would be opening shortly.  I am saddened to inform you that we are philosophers and not miracle workers here at the Institute.  You know what they say about pearls and porkers.

From your belligerence DD I sense that you may be going through one of your enthusiastic periods perhaps.  Intense euphoria; feeling that you can conquer everything; staying up late with endless rounds of partying perhaps?  Blue and white circles under your eyes?  Enjoy the feelings, but you know they cannot last forever.  That is why we at the Institute find more balanced and lasting pleasures from our more meditative approach to life.  The relationship between club and coach should be like that of a healthy marriage or relationship.

As our founder said “Nothing in life is ever wasted, it can always serve as a terrible example”.

Take Fremantle and Collingwood for example.  The Dockers remind me of a friend who is always in search of the perfect man.  Lovely woman, but I remind her that our saviour passed on several thousand years ago and there has not been another sighting since.

One lover is wealthy and stable but boring.  The next wealthy and exciting but untrustworthy.  Then pure but poor and ultimately boring.  The cycle is stuck on endless loops of variations on multiple themes – always searching for “The One”.  My criticism of the Dockers was that (like our friend) she never gave some of the more promising ones the time to prove if they were or weren’t “The One”.  The ‘new one’ – the lure of the unknown – was always too tempting.

My case is that on looks, performance and pedigree – Mark Harvey gave every indication that he could be as close to “the one” for Fremantle as any mortal is likely to be.  I never criticized Mr Lyon for getting out while the going was still good at his previous abode.  The missus was starting to look pretty blousy and it could be a long wait for the botox to start to show results.  And anyway she had started to work out that he was a ‘one trick pony’ – so all the more reason to depart in the night before you get chucked out.

As for the Malthouses and Maguires you may be familiar with the Forresters and the Logans of ‘The Bold and the Beautiful’ fame.  We at the Institute study this educational program on a regular basis to gain insight into the human condition and the nature of relationships.  Brook Logan is the blond goddess who has seduced and married all of the Forrester men and now owns half the Forrester fashion empire.  She has been married to Dad, all 3 sons (some several times and including the one who didn’t know he was a son until the blood tests came in after the car accident).  Recently she seduced the grandson, who is also her step-son after they ate the hallucinogenic berries on the island after the plane crashed in the Pacific.

I rest my case – Eddie Maguire meet Brook Logan.  Oh, you two already know each other.  Eddie and Bucks – a marriage made in heaven?  Probably not, these things are always more a marriage of convenience and as Dame Edna says “there will probably be tears before bedtime.”

On to your current question then DD, I merely cite those relationships to demonstrate the contrast.  Is there tears, shouting or resentment over here at the Indian Ocean Institute?

Not a bit of it.  Impermanence is at the heart of our beliefs.  You may be familiar with the words of one of our prophets, Mr Ecclesiastes, as transformed into popular song in recent years:

“A time to be born, a time to die
A time to plant, a time to reap
A time to kill, a time to heal
A time to laugh, a time to weep

To Everything (Turn, Turn, Turn)
There is a season (Turn, Turn, Turn)
And a time to every purpose, under Heaven”

Besides you of all people DD – if you weren’t so intoxicated from your recent endeavours – should remember that only 12 months ago your beloved skulked out the back door, while you were out in the paddock hoping that your Prodigal Son would return.  Did you weep and gnash your teeth?  Not for long.  You decided that it had been a good relationship for a lot of years.  You had both given and shared a lot.  You confessed that privately you were both getting a little tired of each other’s ‘funny ways’.  And it was best to move on while you both still had your looks.

The ‘leaver’ seems satisfied with his lot (its better waking up next to James than Lingy), and the ‘left’ has doubled her resolved and achieved greatness.

“As the sun rises in the East, so shall it set in the West, with similar rewards for the faithful and the righteous” (St Woosha’s Epistle to the Swan Valley community – Chapter 2011, Final Verse).

So endeth the lesson.




  1. Fair enough Pete.

    But why did he leave? And are the Weagles starting to wobble?

    Got to go now. Must get back to my favourite new DVD. Such a happy ending.

  2. Brad Carr says:

    I don’t claim to have any credible inside knowledge here, but the snippets I’ve had from mates in Perth are that Suma was “Woosha’s yes-man.” Have been getting that claim pretty steadily over some years, and it was also previously reported in the media that Tony Micale had been moved on because he challenged Woosha too much.

    Taking a bit of that on board, I don’t see Suma’s move as a bad thing at all. I loved him as a player (and thought he was unfairly maligned by many at the time), but I never had the sense that he was a strategic genius.

    If we can have Woosha’s leadership coupled with others in the box throwing up fresh ideas and bringing a different kind of tactical nous, I reckon that’s exactly what we want.

  3. Alovesupreme says:

    Does it count for anything that Sumich was originally from Freo (red & white variety)?
    I’ve never been quite clear on the basis of the division between West Coast and Fremantle, as I had assumed that it was partly explained by geography, and I’ve also heard the suggestion that there is an establishment v. workers basis for the supporters leaning in one direction rather than the other. I’ve also assumed that Fremantle were disadvantaged in establishing and developing a supporter base by the eight year gap until their arrival, which gave ample time for West Coast to cement the loyalty of all in the West (where the chip on the shoulder about the eastern States is so strongly developed). The success of the Eagles during those Freo-free years would surely have strengthened this commitment.
    I’d welcome illumination from Peter B, Les Everett or any other well-informed sandgroper.

  4. Eagles are d…heads. I’m sick of having to explain this.

    Suma’s good but.


  5. Is that ‘Dick Smith’ matches Les?

Leave a Comment