The only club whose players did not raise lack of enjoyment in the job and with the game was Hawthorn. The AFLPA reported the fact back to club chief Stuart Fox and his football lieutenant Chris Fagan and is continuing to work with the Hawks with a view to identifying why, as they say in the song, Hawthorn is such a happy team. Which raises the question: Are the Hawthorn players happy because they have won the past two premierships or is Hawthorn winning more because their players are happy? Or, as the Hawks themselves suspect, perhaps the answer lies between. Not only does that club feel validated in their work practices, which this season have included an unscheduled day off after their first Launceston game, but it could also use its position at the top of the off-field ladder as it works behind the scenes to mount a case against the AFL's move in taxing clubs' football department spending. That new tax will be reviewed before the end of next season and Hawthorn are looking to lobby for the exclusion of such welfare initiatives such as the regular monitoring of every player's mental health by its sport psychologist from the new tax. Another area the Hawks believe should be exempt is the sponsoring of international educational trips for its staff. Hawthorn is not the only team that claims to be focusing on better work-life balance for their players but they have worked more diligently to identify red flags among their team since Travis Tuck and his mental-health issues became front-page news by way of a third positive drug strike.

While the players' union continues to investigate the reasons behind the grievances of so many of its members, it appears beyond doubt that the demands of pre-season training have taken a disproportionate toll. This, along with the pressure most footballers feel, even during the bulk of their holiday periods, to report back for work in perfect condition. The inescapable conclusion drawn by Marsh and his team is that the expectations placed upon players over their recently increased leave period have created a pre-season before the official pre-season. According to the AFLPA and the increasingly shared belief of their leading players, the game as a spectacle would not be adversely affected by a less-intensive spring-summer. Australian football, after all, is a domestic sport. And the union are also monitoring, as reported by Fairfax Media, the link with the growing injury toll. Marsh was reluctant to detail individual club player complaints but, according to his key executive Ian Prendergast, the overall picture of dissatisfaction with their sport by the players "hit him right between the eyes". Marsh came to the AFL from cricket and lack of enjoyment with the game they took on through love and fun and enjoyment as children was relatively non-existent among Australian cricketers.

"Maybe I'm being romantic about sport, but I do think it should be fun," was all Marsh would say on the subject. "It's a question which needs to be addressed by everyone in the industry." The AFL is not unique in that they seems paralysed to act against the increasing pressure and negative impact of social media and the uglier side of the expanded modern "selfie" syndrome so hauntingly articulated by Chris Judd in these pages. But the AFLPA have identified player grievances it can address in their next wages-and-conditions deal. Heading those grievances are the plethora of meetings the players believe over-punctuate their working week and many believe have grown as assistant coaches over-zealously justify their jobs. Another is the growing demand of player appearances by clubs working to service members and sponsors. The concerns of the players' representative body were compounded by their pre-season round of visits but were already being addressed after the second annual players' survey last August. Players responded to questions across three areas: their club's culture; resources and its structure, which included leave periods, time off and the performance of player development managers. The AFLPA reported back to the clubs, telling them where they were ranked in relation to the rest of the competition. Some clubs have responded by working to address their players' workplace complaints while others did not respond well to the news they were falling behind their opponents in terms of player welfare.

Some told Fairfax Media the questions put to the players were simplistic and even leading while others took issue with the August timing of the survey, falling as it inevitably did towards the end of a long, arduous season. The reality is that many football bosses have struggled to sympathise with the wealthiest group of athletes in Australian sport complaining about the demands of a high-performance, highly competitive game. Athletes granted eight weeks leave each year and one-and-a-half sponsored days off each week to focus on study or a secondary pursuit. That lack of sympathy would be shared by football supporters. Which doesn't change the alarming reality that somewhere along the way — as the game of Australian rules grew from a series of passionately supported domestic competitions into the AFL juggernaut it has become — the majority of its sportsmen could no long say they loved the sport despite its remarkable adornments. Or perhaps because of them.