Besotted with history, passionate about travelling- and addicted to sport. To all those other Australian sports addicts looking for a regular fix, you've come to the right place.
Rugby fans: imagine, if you will, the following scenario.
With the Tri Nations delicately poised, and with the Bledisloe Cup on the line, the Australian Rugby Union decides to take a gamble, dumping Robbie Deans and replacing him with Tim Horan for the upcoming test match against New Zealand.
Absurd though this hypothetical scenario is, it is worth considering why it is so absurd. Yes, it would be illogical to rush in a new coach on the eve of such a crucial match. But the greater illogic would lie in awarding- at any time- such an important post to a rookie, whose only merits would be that he was once a star and that he currently works as a commentator. Everybody knows that experienced players generally perform better in big games than inexperienced players. Well, the same applies for coaches. When the Wallabies take to the field for their most important challenge since last years World Cup quarter final, their supporters can be content in the knowledge that they are being guided not by a famous novice, but by a wizened tactician, who has spent many years learning, honing and practicing his craft. That counts for something.
Brisbane Lions fans: imagine, if you will, the following scenario.
With your club missing out on the finals for the fourth consecutive year, and with your list featuring a number of impressive youngsters who seem to have the ability to lead you forward, management decides to take a gamble, replacing your vastly experienced coach with a television commentator.
It may seem harsh to describe Michael Voss as a commentator, but that is what he is. He is no longer a player. And, notwithstanding a brief stint as the boss of the AISs under-17 team, he has never been a coach. He is simply a commentator. When reduced to such terms, it seems extraordinary that the Lions should have been in such a rush to hire him. Was Bruce McAvaney unavailable?
Sport: The Australian Diseasemade similar comments several months ago, when it appeared likely that Voss would agree terms with the Gold Coast franchise. Yet despite criticising the irrationality of his mooted appointment, Gold Coasts behaviour was far more rational than is Brisbanes. The new organisation offered him a three year deal: for the first two, he would have been coaching his team in the state league, before drawing on that experience when taking charge of the Coasts inaugural AFL season in 2011. Brisbane, however, sees no merit even in such a limited apprenticeship; instead, the board is bestowing its most important position on somebody without the qualifications and experience to fill it.
Unlikely though it sounds, chairman Tony Kelly insisted that the entire board was fine with the appointment of a novice coach. True, Kelly acknowledged, Voss hasnt coached at the AFL senior level, but then again, everyone has to start somewhere. While the new man may make mistakes, he and the others were determined to back him all the way. And thus the board handed Voss the keys to its Ferrari, simply requesting that he learn how to drive whilst speeding down the highway.
Given such irresponsibility, it seems appropriate to subject the board to some scrutiny. One might assume that it was filled by diehard fans or oft-concussed ex-players, who were so keen on the idea of their beloved Vossy returning to the club that they naively allowed his aura to affect their judgement. A quick examination of the Brisbane website, however, shows otherwise. Tony Kelly, the chairman, is also deputy chairman of the Brisbane Markets and a director of the Gladstone Ports Corporation. Angus Johnson, his deputy, serves as a managing director for Citimark Properties. As for the directors, Linda Nash is a senior member of the Queensland Treasury Corporations Major Projects Team, David Liddy is chief executive of the Bank of Queensland, and Paul Williams is a consultant who recently served as the CEO of Eastern Corporation. The final director, Laurie Serafini, is the only one of them to have played the game at the top level- yet even he holds a senior corporate position, acting as the head of sport: sales and marketing for the Slade Group.
How could such clever people have made such a manifestly illogical decision? The only explanation is that they, too, must have fallen under a spell- of Vossy in particular, and footy in general. If Liddy was looking to fill an upper-level vacancy at BQ, it is inconceivable that he would consider candidates who lacked a relevant degree and banking experience. That, after all, would be illogical. Yet in sport, different rules are allowed to apply. Business, with its sales volumes and balance sheets, must be rooted in logic, otherwise jobs are lost and companies ruined. However, sport, with its heroic competitors and screaming fans, is driven by emotion.
If Kelly et al owe their positions on Brisbanes board to their corporate experience, then surely it is incumbent on them to apply the lessons they have learned in the corporate world when managing the clubs affairs? They could never have risen so high unless they possessed considerable intelligence and strong analytical skills. These intellectual gifts should have been exercised when it came time to selecting Leigh Matthewss successor. For any old fool can make decisions based on passion- few, though, are as well placed as them to make decisions based on reason.
And that is the crux of the matter. Voss has become the new Lions coach not because he is qualified or experienced or the most accomplished, but simply because it warms the hearts of a few influential people. He is nothing more than a commentator with an aura. Granted, Michael Voss was a champion player. But as for Michael Voss the coach, it doesnt take a Bruce McAvaney to realise that hes nothing special.
During the time of Stalin, it was the fate of many senior Bolsheviks to fall foul of the Great Father of the Soviet Union. Typically, these ex-leaders would not merely be tortured and executed, but also deleted from the historical record, as if they had never existed. Their images would be airbrushed from photographs, their portraits would be removed from government buildings, their deeds would be edited out of encyclopaedias, their names would be taken out of textbooks. They would become unpersons.
Tony Zappia, the chief executive of the Cronulla Sharks, seems to be a student of history, because Greg Bird has just begun to disappear from his clubs historical record. Although he has yet to be airbrushed from the team photo, and although he is still on the contract list, he is no longer to be found amongst the player profiles.
Why has Greg Bird become an unperson? Well, you wont find the answer in Cronullas news section, whose journalists are apparently unaware that the clubs star five-eighth has lately gotten himself into a spot of bother. You will, however, find the answer many times over by paying attention to the rest of the nations media, which seems determined to keep Birds memory alive.
So why is the media so keen on Bird? The answer to that question- just like the answer to so many others- is money. Who wouldnt want to buy a newspaper or flick on the news to learn the latest lurid details of his alleged offence? And how lurid those details are. According to the allegations, the former Kangaroo glassed his girlfriend, Katie Milligan, before pinning the blame on his friend, Brent Watson. How do you feel about that? Bird is said to have asked Watson.
Presumably, Watson didnt feel all that good about it. Nor did Zappia, which is why he placed Bird on indefinite suspension, and had his profile removed from the clubs website. At the same time, he staked a bold- if muddled- claim to the moral high ground. Obviously, at the moment, hes under police investigation Weve got sponsors to think about and were ensuring the integrity of the brand.
Greg Bird, how do you feel about your suspension?
However principled he tried to sound, Zappia could not hide the fact that the Sharks- just like the sharks in the media- were in it for the money. For it shouldnt be forgotten that this was just the latest in a long line of scandals that Bird has gotten himself- and thus his employer- into. On previous occasions, although the Sharks talked tough, they failed to take any meaningful action against their star, understanding that for all the embarrassment he had caused them, they were more likely to be successful with him than without him.
Had these latest allegations not been so serious, it would not have been surprising if Bird had not received the latest in a long line of slaps on the wrist. But while all manner of loutish misdeeds can be covered up or hosed down, neither the public nor the sponsors would have accepted anything less than an indefinite suspension for Milligans horrific injuries. If self-interest had formerly compelled Cronulla to support Bird, this time it was clearly in the clubs interest to dump him.
Different though they were, the Bird scandal has a lot in common with the previous example of footballers behaving badly- that is, the incident involving Alan Didak and Heath Shaw. Just like Cronulla, Collingwood felt compelled to come down hard on two important players, whose misbehaviour, it could be argued, may never had occurred had those repeat offenders not been indulged in the past.
When, in the not too distant future, a footballer is discovered to have assaulted something he oughtnt have assaulted, crashed something he oughtnt have crashed, or (yawn) bonked something he oughtnt have bonked- as he inevitably will- the reaction of his club will be enlightening. A ruthless, narrowly-focussed outfit will attempt to make light of the scandal. A more contemplative and courageous organisation will try to nip the ill-discipline in the bud. Or, there will be the third scenario, in which a formerly indulgent club is left with no option but to furiously slam the stable door shut, long after its [errant] horse has bolted.
If the comparison between the NRL and AFL clubs is valid, then it is worth considering the noises that have lately begun to come out of Collingwood. Having initially let it be known that Shaw and Didak would not merely be suspended for the rest of the season, but also booted out once it had concluded, the Magpies have started dropping subtle hints that either or both of them might somehow prove that they deserved to be retained.
Like the Magpies, the Sharks have unofficially declared that Bird will never wear their colours again. And, if the allegations turn out to be true, that is certain to be the case. However, should the star manage to find a way out of this mess, it would not be surprising if he was able to prove to Cronulla that he had learned his lesson and deserved another chance. True, his arguments might not make sense to the punters, but it wont be their heads clouded by money.
But how different the circumstances. The Olyroos played meekly and unimaginatively, so that not only did they get what they deserved, they deprived themselves of any meaningful opportunity to progress to the knockout rounds. The Boomers, by contrast, played with spirit and thought, understanding that not only was it better to go down fighting, but that in fighting they were less likely to go down.
Not coincidentally, the difference in the way the two teams played reflected a difference in the way the two teams were coached. Graham Arnold instructed his footballers to be negative; Brian Goorjian instructed his basketballers to be positive. Playing conservatively does not suit the Australian mentality, or at least the Australian sporting mentality. Having a crack, though, does, which goes a long way to explaining the discrepancy in performances. How ironic that Goorjian, a native American, should have understood that better than Arnold, the man whose passion is so routinely praised, and whose heart is said to pump green and gold blood.
The Boomers were substandard in their opening fixtures against Croatia and Argentina. Although not conservative, the most telling aspect of their basketball was its tentativeness, which may be attributed to nerves. Their passing was hesitant; their shooting uncertain; their decision making muddled. In being tentative, they were committing one of the most deadly of the sporting sins, because it is astonishing how rapidly this sense of doubt can spread amongst a team, and how thoroughly it can permeate every aspect of its play. When you are tentative, you are neither one thing nor the other. At least the Olyroos knew what they were supposed to do- congregate in their own half and boot the ball away as soon as they got it. The Boomers, however, were schizophrenic; they didnt know whether to play slow or fast, whether to act deliberately or impetuously, or whether to move the ball inside or outside.
But in the third game against Iran, something changed. Presumably, now that the Australians realised they were up against an inferior outfit, their confidence returned, so that their tentativeness vanished. The passing became crisp, the shooting confident and the decision making sharp, resulting in a 106-68 thrashing of the groups whipping boys. That authoritativeness was then carried into the subsequent fixtures against Russia and Lithuania, which yielded stirring victories of a combined 46 points.
The way in which the Boomers challenged those two European powers, compared with the manner in which the Olyroos took on the footballing aristocrats of Argentina, is significant. Arnold was focussed on trying to limit the damage; Goorjian, however, was hellbent on winning. While Arnold was determined to lose as respectably as possible, Goorjian had a crack, appreciating that although it might result in a bigger defeat, it would at least provide a realistic chance of victory. Goorjian knew that to instruct his men to play conservatively would be to make them tentative, and that to make them tentative could only produce one result.
Goorjian took the traditional Aussie approach, and his charges responded. The Europeans found themselves assailed by aggressive drives to the basket, hard running, confident ball movement and relentless defending, of the kind that could never have been produced by the conservative safety first tactics that Arnold had employed. For all their talent, the Russians and Lithuanians were unable to resist the onslaught. The Boomers earned the plaudits for their heart, but it was Goorjians brain that had been the key.
Deservedly, where Arnolds team had departed at the group stage, Goorjians progressed to the knockout rounds. It is a measure of the respect the Australians had garnered that although their American opponents were heavily favoured to win, people spoke seriously of the possibility of an upset. And it is a measure of Goorjians mettle that the gameplan he devised was based not around limiting the damage, but overcoming the odds and pulling off a famous victory. To his credit- and to his players credit- the Boomers refused to cower before their mighty rivals. They attacked the Americans in the same way that they had harried the Europeans, even in the final minute, when the contest had long ago been decided. The Dream Team was forced to play hard for the entire 40 minutes in order to secure its 116-85 triumph.
To watch the Olyroos and Boomers get knocked out of the Olympics was to experience very different emotions. Graham Arnolds team was eliminated because it was outthought, outplayed and outclassed. Brian Goorjians team, on the other hand, was merely outclassed. Where one left the fans with a feeling of frustration, the other made their supporters glow with pride. Australians dont like to see their athletes vanquished, but if it is their fate to lose, let them at least lose like Aussies.
And so, the Olyroos have fallen at the first hurdle.
Sometimes, the losing side can display so much skill that it does not deserve to be beaten- like Australia during its World Cup playoff defeat by Iran in 1997. Sometimes, the losing side can display so much gallantry that it does not deserve to be beaten- like Australia during its World Cup playoff defeat by Argentina in 1993. Sadly, though, this Australian side was neither skilful enough nor gallant enough to deserve anything other than its early elimination from the Olympics
Death, taxes, and footballers behaving badly- these are the human races only guarantees.
The wonderful thing about the scandals in which footballers seem to find themselves perennially immersed is their mind-boggling diversity. Whether they are texting things they oughtnt text, exposing things they oughtnt expose, snorting things they oughtnt snort, bashing things they oughtnt bash, bonking things they oughtnt bonk, urinating places they oughtnt urinate, or even shitting in shoes they oughtnt shit in, these supposedly witless athletes possess an enduring capacity to fascinate
Its an extraordinary coincidence: whenever sportsmen are mistreated and forced out of their clubs, it is always to more successful, or more prestigious, or more generous rivals that they are driven. None of these people ever seem to wind up at weaker clubs, or with lesser deals.
So it is with Sonny Bill Williams. Having been mistreated by Canterbury, he has now been forced to explore his options in Frances domestic rugby competition. He will not be unaware that thanks to the combination of ambitious owners and a non-existent salary cap, teams in the Top 14 have never been paying higher salaries. According to reports, a young star like Williams, who is said to be on $450,000 a year with the Bulldogs, could earn more than triple that amount. Of course, no amount of money could ever make up for the suffering he has undoubtedly been subjected to by the Bulldogs- but hopefully all those Euros will go some way to easing the pain
Given the highly politicised nature of its board, not to mention its well-deserved reputation for infirmity, few should have been surprised by the International Cricket Councils decision to retain Pakistan as host of Septembers Champions Trophy.
While the boards of Australia, England and New Zealand, as well as the players association of South Africa, expressed reluctance about playing in the strife-torn nation, they lacked the numbers to overrule the Asian bloc (India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh), which received predictable support from Zimbabwe, the West Indies and Cricket South Africa
So, think you know your Twenty20? Think you know your Twenty20 Cup from your Twenty-20 Cup? Think you know your Indian Premier League from your Indian Cricket League? Think you know your Cape Cobras from your Delhi Daredevils? If so, youre a better- or perhaps battier- man than most.
Recently, Twenty20 tournaments have been sprouting like weeds. In October, the inaugural Champions Twenty20 will take place in India. The following month will see the first Stanford 20/20 for 20 [million dollars], an annual event in which a West Indian XI will play England for truckloads of cash ($20 bills, presumably). And in four weeks time, Canada- yes, Canada- will host a quadrangular competition that also includes Bangladesh, Pakistan and the West Indies
It is true that football does not involve life and death, unlike the analogies I raised (surgery and a plane flight). However, those analogies are still valid, because they get to the heart of the matter- namely, that those who are experienced generally do better than those who are inexperienced. Even though failure in sport carries different consequences from failure in those analogies I raised, what is identical in both instances is that those who are experienced generally do better than those who are inexperienced.
Although you acknowledge that appointing Voss is a riskier proposition than appointing an experienced coach, you then seem to contradict your admission by talking up Vosss alleged qualifications. Yes, Voss spent many years observing Leigh Matthews- but there is no shortage of ex-players who have spent time around successful coaches and gained coaching experience (such as John Longmire).
I would also dispute your assertion that Vosss passion is significant. Firstly, passion is the antithesis of reason, and we should be encouraging our coaches (just like our surgeons and pilots) to be as educated and rational as possible. Secondly, do you think that the coaches he will be up against- and all those prospective coaches who might have taken on the Brisbane job- are devoid of passion? If Voss turns out to be a success, it wont be because he screams at his players and shows them reruns of Braveheart (like Tommy Raudonikis), but because he knows how to read a game, devise strategies, plan training, manage men, and innumerable other things involving the brain. Coaches succeed because they are smart, not because they are passionate. And the best way to boost ones intellect is to acquire qualifications and experience.
Thus, I must return to my original point. Voss may very well succeed, but he is more likely to fail, and he is more likely than many of his peers to fail. And thus he should never have been appointed.
I must also disagree with you, or at least part of your comment.
Yes, there are examples of inexperienced ex-players succeeding, but that is not the point. The point is that somebody with qualifications and experience is more likely to succeed than somebody without. Nothing is certain in life- just as an experienced coach is not guaranteed to succeed, an inexperienced coach is not guaranteed to fail- but some things are more likely to occur than others. And one of those things is that an experienced coach is more likely to succeed than an inexperienced one.
To draw an analogy: if you went to hospital for an operation, would you prefer to be operated on by an unqualified and inexperienced surgeon, or a qualified and experienced surgeon? If you flew overseas, would you prefer the plane to be flown by an unqualified and inexperienced pilot, or a qualified and experienced pilot?
While I agree that the only fair judge of Voss's appointment will be time, the odds suggest that he is more likely to fail than succeed.
Alan- interesting article. Many people no doubt thought that the bad behaviour was behind him, but I bet that those running Cronulla didn't. As I argue in my own article on the subject, clubs frequently indulge wayward stars in the pursuit of success, only to find that their misbehaviour only gets worse. The Sharks probably thought that they could keep it under some sort of control, but obviously they couldn't. Having indulged Bird's misbehaviour, they have washed their hands of him now that he has become too much of a liability.
Buck, I agree with everything you've said, but for one point: sadly, I don't think SBW "will find it hard to get a long term contract from anyone now." Elite sport is such a competitive environment that I think there will still be plenty of people wanting to sign SBW, despite his duplicity. If he has, indeed, signed with Toulon, it will go to show that there is no shortage of clubs willing to put success ahead of principles.
Fed up Fan, I understand what you are saying, but I think it slightly misses the point. While the veneration of Andrew Johns might be misguided, I think it's going too far to suggest that SBW is "a stand up kid who walks away from bullying and grandstanding." I don't believe that someone who chose, of his own free will, to accept a particular agreement (which involved him doing certain duties and accepting certain responsibilities in return for lots of money), only to renege on it when it was no longer convenient, can be called "a stand up kid". Nor do I think it's correct to suggest that he was getting "walked all over". When he signed the five year deal, he'd already been with the Bulldogs for three years- so if they'd been treating him so horribly, why did he resign?
Buck, I desperately hope that you're wrong. Test cricket, in my opinion, is the true form of the game, and far superior to the shorter versions. Thus, it would sadden me if it was to be reduced to the second rate fare that you talk about.
Listening to today's players, it is difficult to know what the future holds. On the one hand, practically all of them agree that test cricket is 'real' cricket. On the other, a majority of them say how wonderful all the money that T20 is bringing into the sport is, and how they would be prepared to shorten their test careers in order to get their hands on more of this money.
Perhaps, as you suggest, we will see a changing of the guard in a decade or two. While today's players, who were raised on test cricket, regard it as the superior form, maybe tomorrow's players will be raised on the glitz and money of T20, and thus come to see that as the superior form. And if that's the case, test cricket's future looks bleak...
Julian, I think you have written an interesting and insightful article. While there are, as you suggest, some redeeming features to T20, in the end it is best described as an "impoverished version of cricket".
For that reason, although I have been watching the IPL, I have been doing so sceptically. I don't wish it too much success, because I fear that it will undermine the unique charms of test cricket.
By the way...you can find my own IPL article here: Really Long Link
Many weddings, in my opinion, are exorbitant, egocentric extravaganzas, which completely miss the point. A wedding should be about the union of two soulmates, rather than crass self-promotion.
If you're desperate to be the centre of attention, why not throw a big party? That way, you can enjoy the spotlight, without turning something so sacred into something so demeaning.
Comments (4)
Add Comments
Read More
Comment by Nick Bendel
on Meet the new Lion King
Sport: The Australian Disease
It is true that football does not involve life and death, unlike the analogies I raised (surgery and a plane flight). However, those analogies are still valid, because they get to the heart of the matter- namely, that those who are experienced generally do better than those who are inexperienced. Even though failure in sport carries different consequences from failure in those analogies I raised, what is identical in both instances is that those who are experienced generally do better than those who are inexperienced.
Although you acknowledge that appointing Voss is a riskier proposition than appointing an experienced coach, you then seem to contradict your admission by talking up Vosss alleged qualifications. Yes, Voss spent many years observing Leigh Matthews- but there is no shortage of ex-players who have spent time around successful coaches and gained coaching experience (such as John Longmire).
I would also dispute your assertion that Vosss passion is significant. Firstly, passion is the antithesis of reason, and we should be encouraging our coaches (just like our surgeons and pilots) to be as educated and rational as possible. Secondly, do you think that the coaches he will be up against- and all those prospective coaches who might have taken on the Brisbane job- are devoid of passion? If Voss turns out to be a success, it wont be because he screams at his players and shows them reruns of Braveheart (like Tommy Raudonikis), but because he knows how to read a game, devise strategies, plan training, manage men, and innumerable other things involving the brain. Coaches succeed because they are smart, not because they are passionate. And the best way to boost ones intellect is to acquire qualifications and experience.
Thus, I must return to my original point. Voss may very well succeed, but he is more likely to fail, and he is more likely than many of his peers to fail. And thus he should never have been appointed.