Glen Roland and the Fight Clubs Shouldn’t Have to Have

I have been thinking about Glen.

Not just about the shock of his death, but about the conversations.

The football conversations.

Because Glen didn’t talk football like small talk.

He talked football like someone trying to build something that would last.

And in the last couple of years, that meant one thing in particular.

Glen was trying to get South East United into the State League, the NPL, the highest level of club football in Tasmania.

He wanted his club to be stronger

Glen and I talked about football, clubs, ambition and growth.

He wanted South East United to be stronger.

Not just for the current players.

But to build something with real pathways, something that made sense, something that gave kids a chance to climb.

He loved talking football with Ken

One thing I always noticed.

Glen loved talking football with Ken.

Not politics.

Not drama.

Not the noise.

Football.

He wanted to learn.

He wanted to compare ideas.

He wanted to understand what “good” looked like.

And he wasn’t offended by standards.

He wanted standards and he wanted to meet them.

He rang me for advice

During the State League application process, Glen rang me for advice a couple of times.

He didn’t call to complain.

He called to understand.

To check what he might be missing.

To make sure he wasn’t walking into a dead end.

I told him what I knew and I said it plainly.

Because Glen could handle plain.

He wanted clarity, not comfort.

He didn’t even know he could appeal

And I still remember this part clearly.

Glen didn’t even know he could appeal.

It was me who told him to.

That fact alone says a lot.

Not about Glen.

About the system.

If the pathway is clear, people don’t need to be told the rules by someone else who has been around long enough to learn them the hard way.

What is CLAS, and why it matters

For readers who aren’t immersed in football governance, CLAS is worth explaining.

CLAS stands for Club Licensing and Accreditation Scheme.

It is the framework clubs must meet to participate at higher levels.

In simple terms, it is a set of standards and compliance requirements that clubs must satisfy in areas such as:

• governance and administration

• finance and reporting

• child safety and member protection

• coaching and technical programs

• facilities and match day requirements

• strategic planning and club operations

In theory, this is a good thing.

Standards should exist.

Licensing should exist.

No one wants chaos, poor governance or unsafe environments.

The issue is not that standards exist.

The issue is what happens when the system becomes unclear, inconsistent, or subject to shifting interpretation.

He did what clubs are told to do

Glen worked out what the requirements were.

He worked out what the boxes were.

And then he set about ticking them.

He looked at the CLAS categories, what was needed, what evidence was required, what the pathway looked like.

He worked hard.

It wasn’t a casual ambition.

It was proper.

He didn’t just say his club wanted to go up.

He tried to do it the right way.

He thought he had met the standard

Glen genuinely believed they had done what was asked.

That they had met the requirements.

That if you do the work and you meet the standard, you get the opportunity.

That is how sport is supposed to work.

Then Football Tasmania said no

Football Tasmania said no.

So Glen appealed.

Because he was determined and because he believed he had met the standard.

And when it went beyond Tasmania, Football Australia ultimately found in his favour.

They were in.

That should not be how clubs find certainty.

Not in a system that claims to be transparent.

Not in a system clubs are expected to trust.

Competition structures should not be this hard

This is the part I keep coming back to.

Competition structures should not be this hard.

Clubs should not have to fight for clarity.

Clubs should not have to fight for certainty.

Clubs should not have to feel like they are on shifting sand every season.

And it is not just the big licensing decisions.

It is the constant churn.

The constant changes.

The constant re-explaining.

Explaining change is exhausting.

It drains volunteers.

It burns clubs out.

And it makes the game feel unstable.

We still don’t know next year’s structure

And here we are again.

We still don’t know next year’s competition structure.

Clubs are expected to plan budgets, recruit coaches, recruit players, support juniors, build pathways, schedule training and match days and retain volunteers.

Yet we are not given the certainty that any well run system would provide.

Did clubs get a say?

Were clubs consulted?

Or do we find out when we are told?

Football Tasmania must work for its members. Us.

Competitions should be Football Tasmania’s number one priority

I have harped on about this before and I will keep saying it.

Competitions should be the number one priority of Football Tasmania.

Not branding.

Not performance.

Not endless frameworks.

Competitions.

Because when competitions are clear, predictable and stable, clubs can breathe.

And when clubs can breathe, they can build.

And above all, supporting clubs and volunteers with clarity and consultation, instead of constant change and confusion.

Glen deserved better than a fight

Glen did what clubs are told to do.

He worked hard.

He was ambitious.

He wanted to build something good.

He should not have had to fight for certainty.

He should not have had to navigate a maze.

His story should be a warning.

Not about ambition.

About governance.

What I want to say, simply

Glen cared.

He cared about his club.

He cared about pathways.

He cared about standards.

And he cared enough to do the work.

That matters.

That is leadership.

And that is why his absence will be felt deeply across Tasmanian football.

Vale Glen Roland.

I’m glad we spoke about football. I’m glad Ken spoke with him. I’m glad he kept pushing.