Workers heard coach call jogger derogatory remarks, and tell him to 'piss off' and 'fucking leave' during the confrontation
An umpire coach with four decades of service to Australian football was dismissed after CCTV footage captured him in a physical confrontation with a member of the public on a training oval.
The coach approached a jogger on 8 April 2025, asking him to leave as the venue was booked for umpire training, but when the jogger refused, the situation escalated into a physical altercation lasting several minutes.
The incident was reported through an integrity portal by the jogger, triggering an internal investigation that led to the coach being stood down on 15 April 2025 and ultimately dismissed on 8 May 2025 for breaching the code of conduct through threatening, intimidating and aggressive behaviour.
Background of the case
The coach's role was elite umpires coach and administrator under a fixed-term contract due to end on 30 September 2025. The contract permitted termination for serious misconduct or for conduct causing a serious risk to health and safety.
The coach had been employed for 40 years beginning in 1986, serving as an umpire from 1986-2015 and as a coach from 2016-2025.
On 8 April 2025 just prior to 5pm, the coach arrived at the oval to open it for umpires to use. At 6:10pm, the coach noticed a man running laps of the oval who he did not recognise.
The man was not wearing the usual attire which would have identified him as an official and instead was dressed in runner's attire. The man appeared to be a member of the public not belonging to any of the groups that were supposed to be on the oval.
Verbal exchange escalated
The coach approached and asked if the man was with the community umpiring group and the man replied no. The coach explained this was a closed training venue and the organisation books the ground every Tuesday and Thursday night from 5pm to 8.30pm.
The man said it was a public venue and he had been running for past half an hour. The man refused to leave, saying he only had a few more laps to complete.
CCTV footage shows the man attempting to recommence running, but the coach continually stood in his path, blocking him. The coach would move from side to side to block the path in response to the man's attempts to run around him.
These actions continued for approximately two and a half minutes with increasing levels of frustration for both parties.
Physical contact occurred between coach and jogger
The coach claimed the man then grabbed him with his left hand on his right shoulder. The CCTV shows a point of escalation arose from apparent contact by the man on the coach. What followed involved the coach wrestling, manhandling and frog-marching the man towards a gate on the oval.
The coach grabbed the man's shirt and appeared to shake and drag him towards the gate. At one stage the coach let go of the man's shirt, pushed the man backwards, and "shaped up" with his fists partially raised. The overall distance covered was approximately 40 metres over approximately one minute.
Two fulltime workers say they attended because they saw the coach grabbing the man's shirt and shoving him. One worker's evidence was that the man said the coach "physically and verbally abused me". The worker heard the coach call the man "retarded" and tell him to "piss off out of the ground" and "I told you to fucking leave".
The worker felt the coach was towering over the man and trying to intimidate him with his height, standing very close foot to foot almost. The two workers then escorted the man off the field and apologised for the coach's behaviour.
Organisation's internal investigation
The man filled in details of the incident on an integrity portal and asked the workers for their names and emails. The coach continued his duties for the rest of the night and did not immediately report any inappropriate behaviour.
Following the complaint, an internal investigation commenced and the coach was stood down on 15 April 2025 pending investigation. On 16 April a letter detailed specific allegations including that the coach engaged in offensive, intimidating and abusive verbal language, and threatening, intimidating and aggressive physical behaviour including stepping into the individual's personal space, standing over the individual in an intimidating manner, purposefully blocking the individual from their path, and making physical contact by grabbing the individual's shirt and pushing them backwards.
On 22 April 2025, an allegations meeting was held. The coach was asked to give his side of the story, then was shown the CCTV footage once. The coach stated he was shocked he was not informed earlier about the footage and felt this was only produced after he gave his version to catch him off guard.
In the hearing, the coach conceded that at no point during the meeting did he complain about when he was shown the footage or the quality or size of the screen.
Is there misconduct?
On 29 April 2025, a show cause letter stated that allegation 1 was partially substantiated—the coach acknowledged he used offensive, intimidating and abusive verbal language including "Piss off" and "Fuck off". Allegation 2 was substantiated—the coach engaged in threatening, intimidating and aggressive physical behaviour. The letter stated the substantiated conduct amounted to misconduct in breach of policies, including the people code of conduct.
On 6 May 2025, the coach responded stating he wished to express genuine regret for the incident. He stated that while he did not agree with every finding, he respected the process though he must reserve all his rights.
He acknowledged he overreacted to provocation and accepted his actions, though made with best intentions, were not appropriate.
On 8 May 2025, the coach was informed his employment was terminated. The termination letter stated his actions fell well below expected standards and the organisation believed he had other options to de-escalate the situation but chose to act in an intimidating and aggressive manner showing considerable lack of judgement.
The organisation had lost the trust and confidence required for the employment relationship to continue.
Did the coach's conduct justify dismissal?
The commission found the coach exhibited a tendency to incorrectly characterise his actions shown on CCTV footage. When asked if he "shoved" the man, the coach said "I'm moving him in the right direction" and "I wouldn't use the word shoving".
When asked if he accepted shoving occurred, the coach said no. When asked whether he did more than walk the man off as he suggested, the coach said "I don't agree".
The commission found the CCTV provided clear evidence of the incident. The coach's conduct involved violent and abusive behaviour both physical and verbal which presented risk including exposing the organisation to potential claims. The commission found the coach's conduct provided a valid reason for dismissal and that dismissal was a proportionate response.
The commission found the coach was notified of reasons for dismissal and given real opportunity to respond. He was sent the detailed show cause letter on 29 April 2025 and was able to respond in the meeting of 6 May 2025.
The commission did not consider the sequence of the 22 April meeting could be basis of criticism as events occurred only 14 days prior and the coach could reasonably be expected to recall them.
The coach submitted the organisation's actions were harsh when comparing his discipline to a player who violently punched a man multiple times in a car park. However, the commission found that comparison inappropriate as the player was not an organisation employee and his incident occurred outside employment.
The commission found the coach had 40 years of service, however it would be a misstatement to say such service was without history of warnings or counselling. The coach himself identified two incidents of counselling.
The commission found the coach had not fully recognised his errors and his written response predominantly highlighted historical achievements with only guarded conditional remorse expressed.
The commission found that while it would accord weight to the coach's employment history, record and loyalty, it was not persuaded those factors alone could weigh in favour of the dismissal being harsh, unjust or unreasonable, particularly where the coach showed limited genuine remorse and failed to accept the seriousness of his actions. The application was dismissed.
