If desperation has been seen like it, Fremantle coach Mark Harvey reckons that the media should do their job property and call the Dockers dangerous. Yep, that's right, the team that just broke the record for most consecutive losses after leading at 3/4 times, the team that is 1 win from 11 encounters, the very club that still plays Shaun McManus each week, is dangerous. Seriously, if ever there was a case of deja vu out of control, it's Fremantle. Up at 3/4 time, Farmer does some ridiculous celebration after kicking the winning goal, other team gets back in front, Pavlich hits the post, Dockers lose, but they're a chance next week at least. Harvs really doesn't like the honest, put your head down and play footy approach does he?
And, incredibly, in the same week that Harvey rewrote the meaning of dangerous, Collingwood coach Mick Malthouse pulled another gem out of the coaching bag of random complaints, saying that 'blockbuster fatigue' at the MCG and being the hunted team is getting too hard because he can't fire the team up like the other teams do against them. Fair dinkum, you'd hate to see the Magpies as the reigning premiers (for more reasons than one), look at how Geelong have coped with having one of the most dominant seasons of all time and now being well and truly the hunted for 13 months now, they've bowed to the pressure a whopping two times from their last 30 encounters. And this is compared with the hunted Magpies who are on the back of the best 4 game winning streak ever seen! He even finished the sentence saying they needed to find greater consistency. Seriously, if you can't convince your team to play football, I can only imagine what else he'd fail at. Still, Mark Harvey might want to read this, because if he could just remind the Dockers that their blockbusters last 4 quarters their fire up might actually work!
And how about Geelong losing to Collingwood? I know, it was a while ago, but if media reports are to be believed, it's really started a new craze in football. If I had a nickel for every special commentator who's 'mentioned' Collingwood's tackling against Geelong 'like we've never seen' I might stop pulling out my hair in frustration at hearing it. It was fantastic, Mick Malthouse is a genius, but come on, this is the 150th year of football, surely by now everyone's figured out that you're allowed to tackle and that it helps when you can get the football back. You haven't found a weakness in Geelong's gameplan, you've found a general rule about footy - if you tackle people who have the ball, it generally helps!
Showing posts with label AFL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AFL. Show all posts
Wednesday, 11 June 2008
Tuesday, 20 May 2008
Simplicity overlooked in new interchange laws
It's been a few weeks since my last post, but not much has changed. Geelong and Hawthorn are still undefeated, as are the Western Bulldogs, who I like, but not as much as the other two. Hawthorn's Mark Williams this week made a bold attempt to become less likeable than his Port Adelaide namesake, and we had another controversial draw, this time between North Melbourne and Sydney. This time it wasn't the timekeepers' fault, but instead the blame rested on the shoulders of whoever was Sydney's 19th man on the field, as Darren Jolly failed to go off when he was supposed to.
A disaster like this was bound to cause some outrage, and after fining Sydney for what could perhaps have stolen them two points from 0, the AFL came up with a Die Hard 2-esque (How did they manage to come up with that plot?) rule change. Now, instead of the traditional one off-one on rule, the coach must go through more hurdles than customs to get a new player on the field, while the 70 year old interchange steward is told he has to do something. That's right, instead of watching the players go on and off, he has to actually watch what they're doing, and organise all the paperwork before a player can even scratch his ass let alone leave the bench. Apologies for all the hyperbole, but it seems easier to get on the line on those post-midnight quiz shows where the answers are as obvious as the fact that no one is getting through until they make back the money they paid the "actors" at 55c a call.
Now as comical as it is watching 5 people sit on the bench and the Collingwood steward warding off players attempting to get back onto the ground, surely the easiest solution would simply be to get the steward to watch very carefully and give him the power, should there ever be 19 on the ground, to actually do something about it, like tell the umpires. As for the penalties too, with a goal at risk should the team offend, do we really want to throw six points at a team for something that, frankly, has very little to do with the actual game? Do we really care that much about
interchanging properly that we are willing to giveaway goals for things happening off the field? Even a headcount seems less silly!
A disaster like this was bound to cause some outrage, and after fining Sydney for what could perhaps have stolen them two points from 0, the AFL came up with a Die Hard 2-esque (How did they manage to come up with that plot?) rule change. Now, instead of the traditional one off-one on rule, the coach must go through more hurdles than customs to get a new player on the field, while the 70 year old interchange steward is told he has to do something. That's right, instead of watching the players go on and off, he has to actually watch what they're doing, and organise all the paperwork before a player can even scratch his ass let alone leave the bench. Apologies for all the hyperbole, but it seems easier to get on the line on those post-midnight quiz shows where the answers are as obvious as the fact that no one is getting through until they make back the money they paid the "actors" at 55c a call.
Now as comical as it is watching 5 people sit on the bench and the Collingwood steward warding off players attempting to get back onto the ground, surely the easiest solution would simply be to get the steward to watch very carefully and give him the power, should there ever be 19 on the ground, to actually do something about it, like tell the umpires. As for the penalties too, with a goal at risk should the team offend, do we really want to throw six points at a team for something that, frankly, has very little to do with the actual game? Do we really care that much about
interchanging properly that we are willing to giveaway goals for things happening off the field? Even a headcount seems less silly!
Monday, 28 April 2008
More rule tampering? No thanks Tadhg!
A simple solution for the recent bickering about last minute bad decisions costing Sydney 2 points and Fremantle 4 points - don't let it end up that way!
Sydney's Tadhg Kennelly became the second AFL player in as many weeks to call for an end to the draw in the AFL, the first being outspoken Bulldog Jason Akermanis. It followed a week of controversy in which Sydney and North Melbourne drew due to a last gasp disallowed goal, when the goal umpire (perhaps incorrectly) ruled that Brett Kirk's kick had been touched before the line by North defender Michael Firrito. Only two days earlier, Fremantle lost to Geelong by a solitary point, a match which was also marred by controversy when the umpire called back a kick in (after Joel Selwood kicked the ball out on the full) in the dying moments and lost several crucial seconds from the clock. This of course had Dockers fans up in arms over the result.
Now far be it for me to question the efforts of a professional AFL side, but when you've had 80 minutes to decide a match, and you can't get in front, why should you get another 10 to do so? And what if you lose? The losers would feel cheated, and rightly so. One of Kennelly's more interesting points was that North was down an injured player, and that the Swans were coming back, which underlines the very point that Sydney had 4 quarters to work its way in front, and could only start to do so when North had a player down, but could not even complete such an act. Does that sound like a team that deserves another 10 minutes to do so?
Akermanis' point was that football was a game of results, and that it was more fitting to end the game in with one team winning and the other losing. Football is also a game of four quarters however, and it's one where surely the most fitting result is the one where the game ends when the final siren rings? Draws are part of almost every sport. Only knockout matches need a result and rules are modified as such. The dejection that players feel after a draw is natural, but that's the way that both sides played the game. If you want to blame it on the umpires, fine, but just remember to magnify every single incorrect decision throughout the match, and see if you were as robbed as you thought you once were.
The same applies to the Fremantle match. The Dockers squandered a 39 point lead late in the second quarter to find themselves 2 in front at half time. They then messed up another comfortable buffer after a good third quarter, to lose by a solitary point. One might think that in an entire match they'd find something other than the timekeeper to blame. Even that ignores the fact that Harry Taylor had marked the ball when the siren rang, would have held the ball for the full allowed time, then proceeded to kick it as long as he could towards a large pack. The chances of a Fremantle player then getting clean possession, booting it not only as long as Taylor but getting it further and through the goals, in less time, are all incredibly unlikely. This all must happen in 9 seconds by the way.
The fact is, the draw is part of the game, and so are incorrect umpiring decisions (going both ways) and if Sydney, Freo and the Dogs don't like it, well how about not letting it happen or come down to that in the first place?
Sydney's Tadhg Kennelly became the second AFL player in as many weeks to call for an end to the draw in the AFL, the first being outspoken Bulldog Jason Akermanis. It followed a week of controversy in which Sydney and North Melbourne drew due to a last gasp disallowed goal, when the goal umpire (perhaps incorrectly) ruled that Brett Kirk's kick had been touched before the line by North defender Michael Firrito. Only two days earlier, Fremantle lost to Geelong by a solitary point, a match which was also marred by controversy when the umpire called back a kick in (after Joel Selwood kicked the ball out on the full) in the dying moments and lost several crucial seconds from the clock. This of course had Dockers fans up in arms over the result.
Now far be it for me to question the efforts of a professional AFL side, but when you've had 80 minutes to decide a match, and you can't get in front, why should you get another 10 to do so? And what if you lose? The losers would feel cheated, and rightly so. One of Kennelly's more interesting points was that North was down an injured player, and that the Swans were coming back, which underlines the very point that Sydney had 4 quarters to work its way in front, and could only start to do so when North had a player down, but could not even complete such an act. Does that sound like a team that deserves another 10 minutes to do so?
Akermanis' point was that football was a game of results, and that it was more fitting to end the game in with one team winning and the other losing. Football is also a game of four quarters however, and it's one where surely the most fitting result is the one where the game ends when the final siren rings? Draws are part of almost every sport. Only knockout matches need a result and rules are modified as such. The dejection that players feel after a draw is natural, but that's the way that both sides played the game. If you want to blame it on the umpires, fine, but just remember to magnify every single incorrect decision throughout the match, and see if you were as robbed as you thought you once were.
The same applies to the Fremantle match. The Dockers squandered a 39 point lead late in the second quarter to find themselves 2 in front at half time. They then messed up another comfortable buffer after a good third quarter, to lose by a solitary point. One might think that in an entire match they'd find something other than the timekeeper to blame. Even that ignores the fact that Harry Taylor had marked the ball when the siren rang, would have held the ball for the full allowed time, then proceeded to kick it as long as he could towards a large pack. The chances of a Fremantle player then getting clean possession, booting it not only as long as Taylor but getting it further and through the goals, in less time, are all incredibly unlikely. This all must happen in 9 seconds by the way.
The fact is, the draw is part of the game, and so are incorrect umpiring decisions (going both ways) and if Sydney, Freo and the Dogs don't like it, well how about not letting it happen or come down to that in the first place?
Sunday, 20 April 2008
Hawthorn are the Challengers
Experts generally want to shy away from making bold predictions after Round 5 (such as writing off Geelong twelve months ago before they won the premiership in dominant fashion), but already there seems to be two major contenders for the premiership this year. The first is obvious, the undefeated Geelong outfit that has lost 1 game since round 5 a year ago this week (in football terms). The second is another undefeated team, whose disappointing finish last year in 6th position has done nothing to douse its young guns' spirits - Hawthorn.
The Hawks are looking like a real challenger to the cats this year, as the only team not to lose to Geelong last year (they played them once in round 4 and won a thriller at Launceston) and 'Buddy mania' has swept the fan base, and indeed the football community, as their young centre half forward Lance 'Buddy' Franklin leads the goalkicking table after 7 goals against Brisbane on the weekend.
Buddy looms as a future superstar of the AFL, and Hawthorn fans will be salivating at the prospect that he may get even better - his kicking, despite 7 goals last week, can still improve, as he also kicked 4 behinds. One of the most intriguing parts of a clash that we will all have to wait until round 17 to see (when Geelong finally plays Hawthorn at the MCG on Friday Night) will be who takes Franklin, and if they can stop him. Matthew Scarlett is the Cats' number 1 stopper, and he is in form, but his lack of height may prove to be an impairment when coming up against the Hawks' 196cm goal machine, plus Scarlett spends most of his time at Full Back, so is more likely to line up on Jarryd Roughead. One thought for the cats is that All Australian centre half back Matthew Egan may return in time for the all important clash, though his fitness may not be up to standard at that stage, which could prove a major disadvantage against Franklin whose athleticism and coverage of the forward line is top notch for a man his size.
It seems as unlikely as it is likely, but the job may very well go to first year player Harry Taylor, a taller option who has been playing off half back for his first few games. Taylor appears to be readymade for the AFL, and was very unlucky to miss out against Sydney this week, a move that may very well have been motivated by Sydney full forward Barry Hall's suspension/injury forcing him out of the game.
If the cats can stop Buddy, it's likely that their midfield will be able to run over the top of the younger and more inexperienced Hawks centre men, and with Gary Ablett playing seemingly even better than his incredible 2007 season, Cameron Ling the man to stop either Luke Hodge or Sam Mitchell, it appears that if the cats can get the ball down to their forward line, their plentiful options will kick enough goals on the Hawks' less impressive (than their other players) back line.
Overall the clash will likely end up as the most anticipated of the season, with both teams firing with their free flowing and exciting game plans working wonders, and if they continue this way, we may very well see a rematch of the 1989 Grand Final in this year's edition. One thing's for sure, it would be a titanic struggle, as Victoria appears to be heading into a better era than its premiership drought between 2000 and 2007. At the very least, Buddy mania isn't going anywhere, and the star looks certain to break another drought, in the players to kick 100+ goals in a season, which some thought was gone forever.
The Hawks are looking like a real challenger to the cats this year, as the only team not to lose to Geelong last year (they played them once in round 4 and won a thriller at Launceston) and 'Buddy mania' has swept the fan base, and indeed the football community, as their young centre half forward Lance 'Buddy' Franklin leads the goalkicking table after 7 goals against Brisbane on the weekend.
Buddy looms as a future superstar of the AFL, and Hawthorn fans will be salivating at the prospect that he may get even better - his kicking, despite 7 goals last week, can still improve, as he also kicked 4 behinds. One of the most intriguing parts of a clash that we will all have to wait until round 17 to see (when Geelong finally plays Hawthorn at the MCG on Friday Night) will be who takes Franklin, and if they can stop him. Matthew Scarlett is the Cats' number 1 stopper, and he is in form, but his lack of height may prove to be an impairment when coming up against the Hawks' 196cm goal machine, plus Scarlett spends most of his time at Full Back, so is more likely to line up on Jarryd Roughead. One thought for the cats is that All Australian centre half back Matthew Egan may return in time for the all important clash, though his fitness may not be up to standard at that stage, which could prove a major disadvantage against Franklin whose athleticism and coverage of the forward line is top notch for a man his size.
It seems as unlikely as it is likely, but the job may very well go to first year player Harry Taylor, a taller option who has been playing off half back for his first few games. Taylor appears to be readymade for the AFL, and was very unlucky to miss out against Sydney this week, a move that may very well have been motivated by Sydney full forward Barry Hall's suspension/injury forcing him out of the game.
If the cats can stop Buddy, it's likely that their midfield will be able to run over the top of the younger and more inexperienced Hawks centre men, and with Gary Ablett playing seemingly even better than his incredible 2007 season, Cameron Ling the man to stop either Luke Hodge or Sam Mitchell, it appears that if the cats can get the ball down to their forward line, their plentiful options will kick enough goals on the Hawks' less impressive (than their other players) back line.
Overall the clash will likely end up as the most anticipated of the season, with both teams firing with their free flowing and exciting game plans working wonders, and if they continue this way, we may very well see a rematch of the 1989 Grand Final in this year's edition. One thing's for sure, it would be a titanic struggle, as Victoria appears to be heading into a better era than its premiership drought between 2000 and 2007. At the very least, Buddy mania isn't going anywhere, and the star looks certain to break another drought, in the players to kick 100+ goals in a season, which some thought was gone forever.
Wednesday, 2 April 2008
Why Premierships aren't won in April
There are few situations teams find themselves in April that don't change before September. Top of the ladder, for example. On a winning streak perhaps? Or just hot favourites. Geelong was awesome in defeating Essendon by 99 points on Sunday at the Telstra Dome. Every time Essendon coughed the ball up, the Cats punished them immediately. The Bombers weren't necessarily playing so badly; it's just that Geelong was that good.
Indeed, the Cats are awesome, and this week are at unprecedented odds to beat bottom of the ladder Melbourne. Geelong is almost literally unbackable, at $1.01. For those who aren't adept at maths, that means that for every $100 you put in, you get $101 back out. One hundred to make just one, doesn't sound too tantalising, does it?
Now sure, Melbourne have just lost two games by an average of around 100 points, have no leadership, a fan base that seems about as interested in the club as Sunil Gavaskar is in not looking like an idiot and keeping his job, and it is playing the reigning premiers Geelong at their home ground for the first time this year, when the cats will unveil their flag for the first time in 44 years. So on face value, it does appear that Melbourne will be given a bit of a thrashing, to understate it. However, it's the confidence that has any Geelong supporter who can remember their performances before the incredible season of 2007 starting to worry.
Geelong must treat its opponents with respect, no matter how little they deserve. Time and time again we have seen upsets of high magnitude come right in the middle of a high period for one side, and a low one for the other. The cats are already hot favourites for the premiership this year, and though they deserve to be after last year's triumph, and their early season form, it must be remembered that premierships aren't won in April. You only need to ask St. Kilda fans what happened in 2004, or Port Adelaide fans what happened in 2002 and 2003, or Essendon fans what happened in 2001.
The 2000 Bombers had been even more dominant than the 2007 cats, losing one game all season, winning the preseason, minor and major premierships and annihilating all that came near them. They then lost the Grand Final to Brisbane in a huge upset the following year, despite being favourites that year to go back to back. Port on the other hand won two minor premierships in a row, but failed to even make the final hurdle, bowing out in the preliminary finals two years in a row. As for St. Kilda, who once again seem to be overrated this year after a solid preseason that sees them second favourite for the flag despite their pathetic and frankly boring game plan of slugging it out and ignoring their great forward line and midfield and the fact that they've only beaten Carlton and Sydney so far for premiership points, they won the first 10 games of 2004, released a victory pack of every single win and announced the ushering in of a new era in the club's long, proud history (which in reality is made up of a lot of wooden spoons and a single premiership by a solitary point). In less important matters, they finished 3rd that year.
A few weeks ago, Paul Roos suggested that we ban betting during the NAB Cup so he could continue to joke to his players about dropping the games. What would really help football is if we banned the whole thing until at least round 8, so that we can stop hearing the favourite tag until it is somewhat warranted.
Indeed, the Cats are awesome, and this week are at unprecedented odds to beat bottom of the ladder Melbourne. Geelong is almost literally unbackable, at $1.01. For those who aren't adept at maths, that means that for every $100 you put in, you get $101 back out. One hundred to make just one, doesn't sound too tantalising, does it?
Now sure, Melbourne have just lost two games by an average of around 100 points, have no leadership, a fan base that seems about as interested in the club as Sunil Gavaskar is in not looking like an idiot and keeping his job, and it is playing the reigning premiers Geelong at their home ground for the first time this year, when the cats will unveil their flag for the first time in 44 years. So on face value, it does appear that Melbourne will be given a bit of a thrashing, to understate it. However, it's the confidence that has any Geelong supporter who can remember their performances before the incredible season of 2007 starting to worry.
Geelong must treat its opponents with respect, no matter how little they deserve. Time and time again we have seen upsets of high magnitude come right in the middle of a high period for one side, and a low one for the other. The cats are already hot favourites for the premiership this year, and though they deserve to be after last year's triumph, and their early season form, it must be remembered that premierships aren't won in April. You only need to ask St. Kilda fans what happened in 2004, or Port Adelaide fans what happened in 2002 and 2003, or Essendon fans what happened in 2001.
The 2000 Bombers had been even more dominant than the 2007 cats, losing one game all season, winning the preseason, minor and major premierships and annihilating all that came near them. They then lost the Grand Final to Brisbane in a huge upset the following year, despite being favourites that year to go back to back. Port on the other hand won two minor premierships in a row, but failed to even make the final hurdle, bowing out in the preliminary finals two years in a row. As for St. Kilda, who once again seem to be overrated this year after a solid preseason that sees them second favourite for the flag despite their pathetic and frankly boring game plan of slugging it out and ignoring their great forward line and midfield and the fact that they've only beaten Carlton and Sydney so far for premiership points, they won the first 10 games of 2004, released a victory pack of every single win and announced the ushering in of a new era in the club's long, proud history (which in reality is made up of a lot of wooden spoons and a single premiership by a solitary point). In less important matters, they finished 3rd that year.
A few weeks ago, Paul Roos suggested that we ban betting during the NAB Cup so he could continue to joke to his players about dropping the games. What would really help football is if we banned the whole thing until at least round 8, so that we can stop hearing the favourite tag until it is somewhat warranted.
Wednesday, 26 March 2008
Poor behaviour setting standards for youngsters
The following is a more formal article written as school work, hence the extra information rather than my usual linking:
Footballers, let’s face facts, are lousy role models. This week they proved that further, as bad boy Brendan Fevola added another rap to his already long list of misdemeanours, when he ‘opened fire’ in a different way, urinating on a nightclub window, on his way home.
Fevola was hit with a slap on the wrist, with a bunch of threats and a fine being sent his way, which looked even poorer compared with Geelong bad boy Steve Johnson’s behaviour last year, when he was suspended for 5 weeks, told to train with the reserves and banned from drinking alcohol for an entire year after being arrested for public drunkenness in Johnson’s third alcohol related incident. In Johnson’s case, the message got across, as he was named in the All Australian team, and won himself a Norm Smith medal for best on ground in the Grand Final, and a premiership medallion with his fellow
Just 6 days later,
The mere fact that players, who happen to be heroes for many children and adolescents, are walking around urinating in public places is bad enough. Then consider the fact that some of them see fit to do so around the corner from their own houses instead of returning home. Then add to that the location on Johnson’s ‘accident’ being a police station. And finally, you have the fact that two of them did so within a single week. What does this all come to? Bad examples.
Fevola’s history, along with several others, is less than squeaky clean. Household names such as Johnson (both Steve and Kane), Fevola, Farmer (former Melbourne forward Jeff, now with Fremantle, who has been arrested three times for assault, and once for smashing a car window), Whitnall (ex-Carlton skipper Lance, who was involved in a highly publicised family feud), Gehrig (St. Kilda veteran Fraser who once allegedly urinated, of all places, on a woman), and several members of the West Coast team; former star Ben Cousins who has been arrested for drunk driving and running from a booze bus, and found himself in heat for fighting with team-mate Daniel Kerr, for alleged involvement with underworld figures (along with fellow Eagles player Michael Gardiner) and for taking illicit drugs; Daniel Kerr, who has been arrested 3 times for assault twice and for forging a prescription, and he was also found to be having a conversation with a convicted drug dealer regarding a ‘big bag of horse chaff’ (recorded words), have all been in trouble with the law. Additionally, Michael Gardiner (mentioned above for involvement with underworld figures), and was later involved in a car crash and also implicated in the Cousins booze bus incident. In fact, there were more than 25 controversial incidents in AFL during 2007. More recently, former North Melbourne legend Wayne Carey was arrested in Los Angeles for assaulting police officers, and Collingwood forward Alan Didak was questioned over involvement with the arrested Christopher Wayne Hudson, accused of being the ‘Melbourne CBD shootings’ gunman in late 2007.
The list goes on forever, and several sexual assault charges have popped up recently. The truth is, no one expects footballers to be perfect. Why should we? They are just human beings after all! The point, however, is that they are too far from it. As much as teenagers try to deny it, they are very impressionable. Many point to parents as major influences, but most of them are doing their best and failing because kids are more likely to listen to those in positions that they wish to one day be a part of. Kids see adults as trying to shoot them down, to control them and to hold on to them, whilst 20-something year olds are the sum of most of the party teens’ short term aspirations, and many teenagers look at inconsequential punishments for things such as taking illicit drugs to mean that it’s possible to drink, sniff and kick (footballs) all in one career. If Ben Cousins can do it, why can’t I? The fact that Cousins was later sacked was a win for football’s reputation.
In a time when the government is trying desperately to curb the drinking binges that youngsters have been going on frequently, the rolling door of alcohol(and drug)-related incidents is a backwards. Footballers need to start taking accountability. It’s one thing to say that footballers are just humans and can’t be role models but it’s another to allow them to break the law. No one is asking them to stop having fun, but allowing them to make asses of themselves in violation of state and capital law is not exactly reasonable.
Footballers need more education, and harsher penalties. A mandatory ‘strikes’ policy must be implemented: whenever a player is found guilty of an illegal offence, he must be penalised. Otherwise, the sport’s integrity will be lost further, and kids will continue to get the wrong idea. Punishment is not just about inconvenience for offenders; it’s also about setting an example. Why should teenagers, at a tender age of innocence and misunderstanding, be expected to take accountability for themselves, if the mature adults can’t be accountable for themselves?
Footballers need to stop acting immature and start acting like what they are: adults. Forget being a role model for kids for a minute, and just act like a lawful human being. Do it for yourselves, if not for the others who are following your lead. Then maybe we can get some responsibility coming from us misguided teens.
Sunday, 16 March 2008
Meanwhile in the West...
For a blog that is barely being read, it seems a bit strange for me to write three posts in a single week, but these wayward kicks (hence the blog name) keep presenting themselves!
Yesterday the West Indies cricket board announced that it would avoid being so overbearing as to block its three best players from staying in India rather than returning home to help the national side fend off Australia. Congratulations Donald Peters (CEO of the West Indies Cricket Board), you have won my bozo of the week. In fact, you have won yourself a nomination for a more significant all time bozo award. In a week that Jeff Fenech announced he was going to come out of retirement, Anthony Mundine scheduled yet another fight against Sam Soliman, and Wayne Carey put himself on the front cover of a tabloid magazine to admit a drug problem and to apologise to the public, in an attempt to slow down his incredible knack of losing all the respect he had about about a month or two ago, Dr. Peters (which has me thinking about entering one of those free instant diploma scams since it clearly does help) wins the cake.
Now that we've got that incredibly irrelevant rant/newsreel out of the way, let's just recap. The Indian Premier League is a franchised competition where independent business buy teams and players for millions of USD, all to play in a month-long Twenty20 carnival. Now of course, you may be thinking to yourself, 'but that's not cricket, I thought that cricket was the only world sport to actually care about its international game rather than just cash!" Stop right there, because the IPL (Indian Premier League) organisers had it all worked out! The IPL will NOT take over international cricket, because all the cricket boards would have to sign a no objection form to clear players to participate, especially during international games! So Dr. Peters, congratulations on making this agreement obsolete, and for being a complete idiot while you're at it. Let's review why he cleared them to play:
Let's sum it up for you Dr. Peters since you've failed to get the message: Tournament rules dictate that no players can play without permission from their board. You don't want your players to play, but you're clearing them anyway because they'll go anyway. Dr. Peters, did you get your business degree at the same place that Wayne Carey got his latest stash?
As for the long term implications, I'm glad to read that Dr. Peters has expressed a desire to rectify this problem, and is aware of it. He must have been partying with Collingwood staff recently, because the Pies know all about complaining about problems that they created themselves. Had the Windies blocked Gayle, Chanderpaul and Sarwan from playing in the middle of the Aussie tour, and the three players decided to go anyway, the IPL would have been forced to either boycott its own rules, or to turn away the players. In the case that they had chosen the former, it would have caused a split of the boards, which would have looked something like India v Every other test nation, because we all know how much international sides of all sports love it when their players threaten to boycott international games for domestic commitments, in which case the ICC would have been forced to take action against the league or players, and the entire problem would have been avoided permanently, because no matter how far the ICC is willing to bend over backwards for India, it's unlikely that they would have opposed a motion where 9 members vote for it and 1 votes against.
Instead, Dr. Peters has opened a Pandora's Box and has sat on his hands while it threatens the very fabrics of international cricket. Oh well, at least when we look back in 20 years' time at the death of test and 50 over cricket, and of international cricket, as an even shorter 10 over match makes Twenty20 look boring and as the Indian Premier League is as even as the English Premier League in soccer where the poorest sides always lose and the 'big 4' win everything, we can at least comfort ourselves with the fact that our cricketers are now making more money than they ever possibly needed. Maybe they'll even donate it to charity. One only wishes that it wasn't up to the players to do that, and instead up to the multi-billionaires living in the middle of overpopulated countries with high poverty and disease, instead of going to a bunch of guys who hit leather balls with willow bats for a living.
Bring on the new world order!
Yesterday the West Indies cricket board announced that it would avoid being so overbearing as to block its three best players from staying in India rather than returning home to help the national side fend off Australia. Congratulations Donald Peters (CEO of the West Indies Cricket Board), you have won my bozo of the week. In fact, you have won yourself a nomination for a more significant all time bozo award. In a week that Jeff Fenech announced he was going to come out of retirement, Anthony Mundine scheduled yet another fight against Sam Soliman, and Wayne Carey put himself on the front cover of a tabloid magazine to admit a drug problem and to apologise to the public, in an attempt to slow down his incredible knack of losing all the respect he had about about a month or two ago, Dr. Peters (which has me thinking about entering one of those free instant diploma scams since it clearly does help) wins the cake.
Now that we've got that incredibly irrelevant rant/newsreel out of the way, let's just recap. The Indian Premier League is a franchised competition where independent business buy teams and players for millions of USD, all to play in a month-long Twenty20 carnival. Now of course, you may be thinking to yourself, 'but that's not cricket, I thought that cricket was the only world sport to actually care about its international game rather than just cash!" Stop right there, because the IPL (Indian Premier League) organisers had it all worked out! The IPL will NOT take over international cricket, because all the cricket boards would have to sign a no objection form to clear players to participate, especially during international games! So Dr. Peters, congratulations on making this agreement obsolete, and for being a complete idiot while you're at it. Let's review why he cleared them to play:
One option available to the WICB is to refuse to allow the players to go - they need No Objection Certificates from the board before being allowed to play abroad - but that is a route he does not want to go down. "I have the NOCs for the players, and I have to release the players, but I am not going to not release the players because they would go anyway," he told The Gleaner. "Given the amount of money involved, it certainly destabilises the infrastructure of cricket. It's not fair to the players, and it's not fair to the national teams. But this is capitalism at its best, free market enterprise at its best, and we now instead of crying have to find a way to make it work, so that we win, and they win. But right now we are losing."
Let's sum it up for you Dr. Peters since you've failed to get the message: Tournament rules dictate that no players can play without permission from their board. You don't want your players to play, but you're clearing them anyway because they'll go anyway. Dr. Peters, did you get your business degree at the same place that Wayne Carey got his latest stash?
As for the long term implications, I'm glad to read that Dr. Peters has expressed a desire to rectify this problem, and is aware of it. He must have been partying with Collingwood staff recently, because the Pies know all about complaining about problems that they created themselves. Had the Windies blocked Gayle, Chanderpaul and Sarwan from playing in the middle of the Aussie tour, and the three players decided to go anyway, the IPL would have been forced to either boycott its own rules, or to turn away the players. In the case that they had chosen the former, it would have caused a split of the boards, which would have looked something like India v Every other test nation, because we all know how much international sides of all sports love it when their players threaten to boycott international games for domestic commitments, in which case the ICC would have been forced to take action against the league or players, and the entire problem would have been avoided permanently, because no matter how far the ICC is willing to bend over backwards for India, it's unlikely that they would have opposed a motion where 9 members vote for it and 1 votes against.
Instead, Dr. Peters has opened a Pandora's Box and has sat on his hands while it threatens the very fabrics of international cricket. Oh well, at least when we look back in 20 years' time at the death of test and 50 over cricket, and of international cricket, as an even shorter 10 over match makes Twenty20 look boring and as the Indian Premier League is as even as the English Premier League in soccer where the poorest sides always lose and the 'big 4' win everything, we can at least comfort ourselves with the fact that our cricketers are now making more money than they ever possibly needed. Maybe they'll even donate it to charity. One only wishes that it wasn't up to the players to do that, and instead up to the multi-billionaires living in the middle of overpopulated countries with high poverty and disease, instead of going to a bunch of guys who hit leather balls with willow bats for a living.
Bring on the new world order!
Monday, 10 March 2008
From one silly season to another
Summer is a time for sunshine, picnics, parties and holidays. Sport is an important part too, but cricket is generally the break for Aussies from the rigours of football (whether it be AFL or Rugby) season, a chance to sit back, relax and enjoy some relaxing entertainment; can of beer in one hand, and an outstretched finger in the other, to soak in the sun and catch some runs.
So why is this night different from all other nights, ask those who have heard a lot of noise and a little of cricket. The simple answer is, this time, someone fought back. Not just in the cricket either, it would be one thing if Australia had just been outplayed on the field for the first time in 3 years, but the fightback also came off the field. For once, the foul mouthed Aussies had someone spitting in the other direction. It wasn't just whitewash predictions from the fast bowlers and stick it up their ass calls from the batsmen, because this time the opposition were not to be outdone, in fact quite the contrary!
Had it come out to just play cricket, India would have been respected greatly. Australia had not lost or drawn a test since 2005, but India forced them to suffer one of each in the space of 2 games, and then made the World Champions look like amateurs by winning the Tri Series finals 2-0 for the second year in a row. But it was one veteran spinner's war of words that dominated the tour, from the phantom 'monkey' taunt, to the constant 'I don't like them either' responses and cheap Indian pride stunts performed by the 12th Man (yes we're talking about Harbhajan again), not to mention the increasing amounts of spectators getting ejected. On face value, it sounds a lot like scenes from federal Parliament but this is cricket, the way the Aussies like to play it: aggressively. Their other favourite component is success, but we all know what happened to that one. However, India managed to drag themselves down to the Australian level, and lost a lot of respect as a result. Even youngster Ishant Sharma was seen puffing his chest and acting like a much more experienced bowler than he really is. All this isn't to say that the Australians are any better, they aren't, but that doesn't mean that India must try its hardest to be liked even less.
Despite the poor sportsmanship all round, some pretty good cricket was seen all round, but it wasn't enough to stop the sighs of relief erupting all around as cricket season finally came to a close, and football season made its way back in.
Though AFL's preseason is already completed, domestic cricket reaches its pinnacle this week when Victoria takes on New South Wales at the SCG in the final of the Pura Cup. New South Wales will celebrate the achievement of coming first by dropping its entire pace attack for three international players, including one who has played two matches all season for them, and taken one wicket all up (including a wicketless Pura Cup match). Now don't get me wrong, Brett Lee, Stuart Clark and Nathan Bracken (Michael Clarke is also coming back from international duty) are all fantastic players, but to drop the players who got them there in the first place is a big slap in the face for their hard working youngsters. "Get out there and play your best cricket, but no matter how well you play, you'll still be dropped if our Aussie internationals are available," seems to be the message. Mark Cameron was last year dropped for the Pura Cup final when Matthew Nicholson returned from injury, despite taking 5 wickets against Tasmania a fortnight earlier, and he will now be dropped for Lee and co. despite having taken 27 wickets this season at 17.51. Two years in a row the promising 27 year old has had his confidence shattered, which reminds me of the time Victorian skipper Paul Reiffel declared with Michael Klinger on 99 a few years back. It promises to be an exciting clash though, with the star studded New South Wales team taking on a more settled but less spectacular Victorian side.
Of course, no AFL pre season competition is complete without cries of not trying/caring, and a fair bit of controversy to back it up, but this year's reached new heights when Swans coach Paul Roos was accused by the AFL of deliberately throwing a match. Perish the thought! A team not trying their hardest? Now that's a new issue in football! Of course this is a bit more serious than a team not trying their hardest, but is less serious than a team tanking most of the latter half of the season.
Sanity prevailed of course, and Roos was found not guilty, but it didn't stop the conspiracy theories from Roos, who claimed that the AFL hates him, ever since they called the swans 'ugly ducklings' several weeks before they ended up winning the premiership. Apparently Andrew Demetriou and co are out to get him. Get a ticket and wait in line please Paul.
So why is this night different from all other nights, ask those who have heard a lot of noise and a little of cricket. The simple answer is, this time, someone fought back. Not just in the cricket either, it would be one thing if Australia had just been outplayed on the field for the first time in 3 years, but the fightback also came off the field. For once, the foul mouthed Aussies had someone spitting in the other direction. It wasn't just whitewash predictions from the fast bowlers and stick it up their ass calls from the batsmen, because this time the opposition were not to be outdone, in fact quite the contrary!
Had it come out to just play cricket, India would have been respected greatly. Australia had not lost or drawn a test since 2005, but India forced them to suffer one of each in the space of 2 games, and then made the World Champions look like amateurs by winning the Tri Series finals 2-0 for the second year in a row. But it was one veteran spinner's war of words that dominated the tour, from the phantom 'monkey' taunt, to the constant 'I don't like them either' responses and cheap Indian pride stunts performed by the 12th Man (yes we're talking about Harbhajan again), not to mention the increasing amounts of spectators getting ejected. On face value, it sounds a lot like scenes from federal Parliament but this is cricket, the way the Aussies like to play it: aggressively. Their other favourite component is success, but we all know what happened to that one. However, India managed to drag themselves down to the Australian level, and lost a lot of respect as a result. Even youngster Ishant Sharma was seen puffing his chest and acting like a much more experienced bowler than he really is. All this isn't to say that the Australians are any better, they aren't, but that doesn't mean that India must try its hardest to be liked even less.
Despite the poor sportsmanship all round, some pretty good cricket was seen all round, but it wasn't enough to stop the sighs of relief erupting all around as cricket season finally came to a close, and football season made its way back in.
Though AFL's preseason is already completed, domestic cricket reaches its pinnacle this week when Victoria takes on New South Wales at the SCG in the final of the Pura Cup. New South Wales will celebrate the achievement of coming first by dropping its entire pace attack for three international players, including one who has played two matches all season for them, and taken one wicket all up (including a wicketless Pura Cup match). Now don't get me wrong, Brett Lee, Stuart Clark and Nathan Bracken (Michael Clarke is also coming back from international duty) are all fantastic players, but to drop the players who got them there in the first place is a big slap in the face for their hard working youngsters. "Get out there and play your best cricket, but no matter how well you play, you'll still be dropped if our Aussie internationals are available," seems to be the message. Mark Cameron was last year dropped for the Pura Cup final when Matthew Nicholson returned from injury, despite taking 5 wickets against Tasmania a fortnight earlier, and he will now be dropped for Lee and co. despite having taken 27 wickets this season at 17.51. Two years in a row the promising 27 year old has had his confidence shattered, which reminds me of the time Victorian skipper Paul Reiffel declared with Michael Klinger on 99 a few years back. It promises to be an exciting clash though, with the star studded New South Wales team taking on a more settled but less spectacular Victorian side.
Of course, no AFL pre season competition is complete without cries of not trying/caring, and a fair bit of controversy to back it up, but this year's reached new heights when Swans coach Paul Roos was accused by the AFL of deliberately throwing a match. Perish the thought! A team not trying their hardest? Now that's a new issue in football! Of course this is a bit more serious than a team not trying their hardest, but is less serious than a team tanking most of the latter half of the season.
Sanity prevailed of course, and Roos was found not guilty, but it didn't stop the conspiracy theories from Roos, who claimed that the AFL hates him, ever since they called the swans 'ugly ducklings' several weeks before they ended up winning the premiership. Apparently Andrew Demetriou and co are out to get him. Get a ticket and wait in line please Paul.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)