I am aware of the concept of objective morality. I am also aware of the complex and often contradictory nature of the AFL, You were saying, relatively recently, that it was part of the entertainment industry. Is it a business when it suits you and a community development organisation when it suits you?
Is it an exemplar of all that is right and true in the world or a game?
I am saying there's actually nothing unethical about appointing your mates if your mates know what they're doing. I am also saying that teaching effectively is best done with an awareness of the needs and requirements of those being taught.
When Chris Connolly appointed his mate, Dr Kevin Ball, (after being appointed by his mate, Cameron Schwab), there was no real question as to his credentials. It was more to do with his authority.
The AFL is, like many places, a closed shop. There tend to only be 18 (or small multiples of 18) of any one thing at any given time and a self-selecting pool to draw from. It's not very fair.
And that's a shame but the essential nature of a geographical/tribal-based sporting competition is at odds with general concepts of "fairness".
I knew you'd be opposed to father-son. Are you against zones?
Because if you remove all of the "tribal" elements as you chase some giddy unicorn called "fairness," I don't really know what you will have left. Franchise A vs Franchise B.
Not something I want.