Recent Posts
“In related news, AFL Football Operations Manager Adrian Anderson announced the AFL had imposed a $5000 financial sanction on the Essendon Football Club after an approach to the umpires by captain Matthew Lloyd during the quarter-time break of the round seven match against Port Adelaide at Telstra Dome.
Under AFL Regulation 16.3, players are not permitted to approach the umpires at any quarter break, or when the umpires are entering or leaving the ground.”
Talk about precious...
The AFL’s attitude towards what the umpire’s role in the game should be is getting out of hand.
These are just a few adjectives I would use to describe AFL boss Andrew Dimitriou: stubborn, egotistical, unapproachable, difficult, and is ALWAYS right. Even when he’s wrong. It seems to me as though today’s umpires have been spending too much time with Demitriou and his pack, as you could easily use any of those words to describe most of them and how they behave on the field.
To a certain extent we can put up with bad umpiring decisions, while this is a topic of concern on its own, it is also something which we have had to put up with for a long time, and therefore have become somewhat accustomed to. But when the captain of a football club can’t even approach an umpire to talk about a certain aspect of the game without being fined, surely things are getting ridiculous. What makes this whole matter the more frustrating is the utter contempt and complete dismissive attitude the umpires show towards the players in such instances. Very much like the attitude Andrew Dimitriou often has when confronted about an aspect of the game which clubs or supporters don’t agree with, yet he remains uncompromising as always, unwilling to even discuss certain topics after he has had his say.
Is it just me or is the AFL becoming more and more of a dictatorship?
The Richmond Football Club sent an official complaint to the AFL on the weekend in regards to a timekeeping incident which they claim cost their side roughly 15 seconds of play in the final quarter against St. Kilda on Sunday. A similar incident occurred just last week, where timekeepers failed to stop the clock in the dying moments of the Fremantle versus Geelong clash, also costing the Fremantle side precious seconds. Both Fremantle and Richmond lost these games by 1 and 3 points respectively, and were both games allowed to be played to their full correct time, it may have been the difference between victory and defeat at the end of the day.
But how relevant is the time clock in our modern game? After every stoppage we hear the umpires whistle blow, indicating that ‘time-on’ has been called. This is a signal to the timekeepers to stop the clock so that the game consists of 20 minutes of actual playing time per quarter, hence why quarters with more stoppages go for longer. Yet for those who watch the footy at home and keep an eye on the finer details of the game, such as time-keeping, is it not uncommon to see the clock stop a second or two after the umpire has blown time-on? When Adam Cooney sends through a goal on the run from 50, why do we see the clock keep ticking a second or two over even after the goal umpire has raised his two fingers?
And when five players decide to play ‘stacks on’ on top of Peter Bell who’s holding the ball at the bottom of the pack, why does the clock keep ticking a second or two after the whistle is blown? Terry Wallace has every right to complain about the mistake which has been made in those dying moments of the weekends game, but how many other mistakes were made in the same game? I’m not saying every contest is miscalculated by the time keepers, but next time you are sitting at home watching the game, keep an eye on just how much time passes in between time-on officially being called, and when the clock stops ticking. They may be spot-on, or they may only be a single second off, but with hundreds of stoppages every game, that is a lot of opportunities for those single seconds to add up
Now all this begs the question, do we really need to see how much time is left on the clock? When you go to a game in person, there are no countdown clocks available at the ground, and apart from the information which might filter in through the bloke three seats down who is tuned in to Triple M about how many seconds there are left, we are left to our own judgements and estimates as to when the siren will sound. Sure you may be dying to know when there’s 29 minutes gone in the final quarter and your sides up by a single point, but when you have no idea exactly when that siren is going to sound, there’s no sweeter sound on earth. But watch a game at home with the assistance of the countdown clock, and in the same situation, you may already know with 12 seconds to go and the ball locked in at the opposite end of the ground that the game is already over. It does act as a bit of a killjoy.
In world football (soccer) there is no count down clock, yet if you were to add up all the time wasted as we do in our game, they would be playing 60 minute halves as opposed to 45. So why are we so obsessed with time? If football broadcasters are going to persist in showing the time clock for all to see, then simply GET IT RIGHT. And if the AFL for whatever reason cannot do this, then don’t show the clock at all, then at least everyone is happy, mistakes or no mistakes. For as they say, ignorance is bliss.
John ‘Sam’ Newman could be just about the most despised man in AFL footy. But then again he could be the most loved too. There are few figures in the game which create such division, cause such controversy, or offend so many.
Sam Newman is called a ‘bigot’, a ‘racist’, and a ‘chauvinist’, he’s a man from another generation who doesn’t understand how the world works today. Sam doesn’t understand that women can do all the things that men can do, and do them just as well. He’s archaic, old-fashioned, and out of touch.
Or so they say.
But what has he done now that still has the footy world talking 3 weeks after this ‘incident’ occurred? I’ll tell you what Sam Newman did.
He did nothing.
He did nothing but exactly what he has been doing for the last 15 years that The Footy Show has been running, and that is, as Sam himself puts it, ‘taking the piss out of people’. While this may sound like a ridiculous comment, please, bare with me. In my opinion, Sam Newman is the least discriminatory man in football.
Discrimination indicates the unfair treatment of certain types of people through prejudice. Had Sam spent the last 15 years of his life on The Footy Show picking solely on say, Indigenous players and players from ethnic backgrounds, then you may well say he is prejudiced. Yet Sam will vent his anger, his sarcasm, and his ‘piss taking’ abilities at anybody who he thinks deserves it. If you find yourself in Sam’s line of fire - woman, man, or child – the chances are you will get stung. Hey, I never said he wasn’t offensive, just that he doesn’t discriminate in being offensive.
If anything, Sam’s attitude to this world is before his time. We still live in a society where the injustices and inequalities of people based on gender, race, and religion are fresh in our minds. It wasn’t so long ago that women were second class citizens, and being a ‘European’ consigned you to a life with reduced rights. And whilst some of this intolerance still exists today, as a society we have made great advances in bringing equilibrium to all people within it. In theory, we are all equal, yet in reality, the oppression that some sections of society have felt in the past has made for some sensitive topics.
Sam Newman can go on the Footy Show on a weekly basis and spend ten minutes making fun of Jason Dunstall with varying skits and images, calling him a big ‘Silverback Gorilla’ and generally insulting the ex-Hawk star. Yet Sam spends a single minute awkwardly handling a scantily clad mannequin with a cutout of Caroline Wilsons face on it, and all of a sudden he is a sexist. Why then, in a world where everybody is perceived to be equal, do we have such obvious double standards?
Samantha Lane can sit on a panel with four other men on Channel 10’s Before the Game and laugh at fat jokes directed at Carlton’s Nick Stevens, yet she sees no hypocrisy in writing an article for The Age condemning Sam’s antics as sexist and offensive. As a society we strive for the equal treatment of everybody within that society, yet the truth is, we are not quite ready for that equal treatment. Caroline Wilson had every right to feel embarrassed and insulted following what occurred on The Footy Show, but why should anyone else? The fun made at Jason Dunstall does not insult me as a male, and women should not feel insulted by Sam’s behaviour either, unless it happens to be directly aimed at that individual.
Perhaps in 100 years we as a society will TRULY be able to say that every person within that society is equal. But today we live in a world where everything must be politically correct. We walk on eggshells making sure we don’t make any reference to the fact that people are different from each other. But that is a fact is it not? Why is it that when someone throws on a red wig and pretends to be Geelong’s Cameron Ling, it is hilarious, yet when Newman painted his face black many years ago whilst imitating then-St. Kilda star Nicky Winmar, he is the biggest racist on television? Nicky Winmar has dark skin and Cameron Ling has red hair. It is the same as asking why imitating a German accent is funny, yet we cringe awkwardly at hearing someone pretending to be Chinese.
Why is that?
Well, it just is. And until we are able to allow our past indiscretions as a society to heal, it always will be. In my eyes, AFL football is a world where women are not discriminated against to the level they are in general society. Sure there still remain some macho attitudes and ignorant ways of thinking in regards to women within the game, but people like Caroline Wilson and Samantha Lane have proven that there is definitely a place for females in football, and it doesn’t have to be beneath any male. Wilson, amongst other things, is the chief footy writer for The Age and is regarded as one of the best minds in the game. Samantha Lane, amongst other things, appears on Before the Game and is deservedly given the role as the only genuine journalist amongst her co-panel of males, who are mostly part-time football fanciers. Furthermore, numerous AFL club boards employ women in some of their top positions. This is without even mentioning that almost half of the games supporters and viewers are women.
Therefore, by certain female footballing personalities, as well as some of their male counterparts, complaining to the extent in which they have about the Caroline Wilson ‘issue’, there are merely destroying the foundations women like Wilson have worked hard to build in creating genuine credibility for females in the game. Over two weeks ago, Caroline had publicly dealt with the issue and wished to move on from it. The fact that it is being sustained as an issue by certain people is insinuating that women deserve special treatment and exemptions from this sort of treatment, that they are too weak to handle such treatment. Yet ask Caroline Wilson what she would have wanted from day one in her journey to become a top footballing journalist, and she would have replied: ‘To be treated equally.” The truth is that Sam Newman treats everybody equally. Sure he offends nearly everyone he interacts with, yet the point remains that it is done indiscriminately.
When a man like Sam Newman can openly poke fun at any person based on his or her character, and not be branded a racist, a chauvinist, a bigot, or any other term you can think of, we will know we are truly living in an equal society.
Cyril Rioli has been named the NAB rising star nomination for round 6 after another exhilarating performance against the Tigers at the MCG. About time right! Right? Does young Rioli deserve his nomination? Of course he does. And if he didn’t receive it this week, I fear there would have been a march on AFL headquarters demanding answers. What an outrage! Still, better late than never right?
It is clear that in Victoria there is a very centralized view of our great national game. Obviously what happens in Melbourne is foremost in terms of interest, and barring a Ben Cousins bender or a left-hook from Barry Hall, the old adage of ‘nearest is dearest’ rings true. So with that in mind, is it possible we have pumped up young Cyril without giving the same respect to many of the other young stars applying their trade outside of Victoria? Let’s look at the last three nominations from rounds 3, 4, and 5, and rate their worthiness
[ Click here to read more ]
AFL players are certainly aware that this is indeed the year 2008. That footy is a generator of hundred of millions of dollars and therefore the relating facilities, stadiums, and equipment are all up to the highest of standards. That today we live in the information age, and that we demand our information instantly. They know that a single glance up to one of the giant electronic scoreboards in the stadium will in an instant give them, and the crowd, every desired detail, from a player’s height to how many clangers they have made that day. Every single thing a player does on the ground is recorded, from how far he runs to how many tackles he makes. But as they say, no matter how many marks you take or hard ball gets you have earned, the most important stat at the end of the day is the one which tells us who has won and who has lost
[ Click here to read more ]
In Tuesdays Herald Sun, (April 15, 2008) Garry Lyon suggested that Hawthorn is on the verge of dethroning Geelong as the best team in the land. The young Hawk’s are certainly one of the most exciting sides the AFL has seen in recent years, and how good a team they can be is anybody’s guess, however if there is one lesson that footy will teach you time and time again, it is not to count your chickens before they’ve hatched.
To illustrate just how close he thought the young Hawks are to being as good a side, or better, than the current reigning premiers, Lyon rated the key players of both teams side by side with a mark out of ten, in what eventuated as being an extremely close evaluation when all marks had been added up. The only problem is, just how spot on are Lyon’s judgments
[ Click here to read more ]
|
|
|
Add Comments
Comments (4)
Read More
Comment by David Clarke
on The Footy Show: More Cringe Worthy than an Episode of Seinfeld
Talk Footy